Preference and reinforcer efficacy of high‐ and low‐tech items: A comparison of item type and duration of access

Researchers compared high-tech items like tablets with low-tech toys like blocks. They asked which type kids liked more and which kept them working harder.

First they ran a paired-choice test to see what each child picked most. Then they let kids work for that item either 30 seconds or 10 minutes to see how long access changed its power.

When kids could keep the iPad for 10 minutes, they worked a lot harder for it. When they only got 30 seconds of iPad, they did not try much.

The opposite happened with low-tech toys. Kids worked hardest for bubbles or blocks when they only got 30 seconds. Give them 10 minutes of bubbles and their effort dropped.

Kohlenberg (1973) saw the same collapse with brief stimuli. That study showed that short signals kill observing even if the reward stays big. Hoffmann now shows the same rule works for reinforcers themselves.

Fisher et al. (2003) found that longer wheel runs made rats pause longer after each reward. Hoffmann echoes this: long access to high-tech items keeps their value high, while long access to low-tech items seems to satiate kids faster.

Au-Yeung et al. (2015) showed tokens beat food for resisting distraction. Hoffmann adds a timing twist: high-tech items act like tokens and need longer access to lock in their strength.

Next time you run a preference assessment, schedule the access time to match the item. Give tablets or video clips for big chunks of time, but keep bubbles, stickers, or small toys as quick 30-second treats. This simple switch can double the reinforcer power without buying new materials.