Learner Preference Between Massed- and Alternating-Trial Sequencing when Teaching Stimulus Relations to Children with Autism
Kids with autism prefer mixed old-and-new trials over blocked massed drills during matching lessons.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team asked kids with autism which trial order they liked.
They compared two ways to run matching-to-sample lessons.
Massed means you do all new tasks first, then all old tasks.
Alternating means you mix new and old tasks back-to-back.
Each child tried both ways and picked a favorite.
What they found
Every child liked the alternating order better.
They stayed calmer and finished more trials.
No one chose the massed block.
How this fits with other research
Knutson et al. (2019) found the opposite for speed.
They showed that doing only new tasks (0:1 ratio) is fastest.
Guilhardi did not time mastery; they asked what kids liked.
So the papers disagree on efficiency but agree on comfort.
Austin et al. (2015) used the same matching-to-sample game.
They proved kids can learn new relations without direct teaching.
Guilhardi adds that mixing trials makes the game more fun.
Why it matters
If a child avoids massed blocks, switch to alternating trials.
You may lose a little speed, but you gain happy engagement.
Try asking your learner which order feels better today.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Run one session with alternating old/new trials and one with massed blocks, then let the child pick.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Two children with autism were assessed for preference between intersession distribution of mastered and unknown instructional trials on a computerized matching-to-sample task consisting of 12 total learning opportunities. Choice responses yielded presentation of either massed-trial sequencing (six unknown/six mastered stimuli relations or vice-versa) or alternating-trial sequencing delivery (alternation of unknown and mastered stimuli relations) followed by reinforcement for correct responses. An extinction condition served as an experimental control. Both children demonstrated a preference for the alternating-trial sequencing condition, and implications for instructional programming and possible effects to delays to higher rates of reinforcement are discussed.
Behavior Analysis in Practice, 2017 · doi:10.1007/s40617-016-0140-1