Preference for and reinforcing efficacy of different types of attention in preschool children
Conversation and touch beat praise for preschoolers, yet even the best attention fades if you space it too thin.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Harper et al. (2021) asked which kind of teacher attention preschoolers like best.
They ran a paired-choice game where kids picked between conversation, touch, praise, or just being near.
Next they checked if the top choices really kept kids working as the task got harder.
What they found
Chat and high-fives won almost every time.
Those same two kept children responding even when praise had to be given less often.
Still, all attention types stopped working once rewards became too far apart.
How this fits with other research
Johnson et al. (1994) saw a token economy fail for kids with ADHD plus intellectual disability.
Harper’s study shows attention can work, but only for neurotypical preschoolers and only under thick schedules.
Jowett Hirst et al. (2016) also let kids choose, then tested the choice in class; their older group kept working with either tokens or response cost.
Kemp et al. (2024) add that edibles appear in fewer than one-third of today’s ABA studies, giving you room to favor social reinforcers when parents worry about candy.
Why it matters
If you teach typical preschoolers, start with genuine conversation or quick physical play before handing out stickers.
Watch the schedule: when praise moves past every minute or two, plan to thicken it again or swap in a stronger reward.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →During circle time, trade five-second chats or shoulder squeezes for sitting; drop back to every 30 seconds if hands start rising.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
It is unknown whether and to what extent common types of attention delivered in early childhood environments are preferred by and function as reinforcers for young children. We assessed children's preference for commonly delivered types of attention across 31 preschool-aged participants (Experiment 1). Next, we conducted a reinforcer assessment (Experiment 2) and a progressive-ratio assessment (Experiment 3) to (a) validate the results of the preference assessment and (b) determine the relative reinforcing efficacy of each type of attention. Results of Experiment 1 showed that most participants preferred conversation or physical interaction. Results of Experiment 2 validated the results of Experiment 1 showing preferred types of attention were more likely to function as reinforcers. Finally, although some types of attention functioned as reinforcers, results of Experiment 3 indicated these reinforcers only maintained responding under relatively dense schedules of reinforcement. Clinical implications and directions for future research are discussed.
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 2021 · doi:10.1002/jaba.814