Teaching children with autism when reward is delayed. The effects of two kinds of marking stimuli.

The team taught three boys with autism to name emotions from pictures.

Each correct answer earned a token, but the token arrived 5 seconds later.

Kids got one of three delay setups each session: no cue, a blinking card before the token, or the same card after the token.

An alternating-treatments design rotated the setups across days to see which one helped learning fastest.

Both blinking-card conditions beat the silent wait.

Kids reached mastery in fewer trials when any cue marked the delay.

Surprise: placing the card before or after the token made no real difference.

The cue itself, not its timing, protected learning during the 5-second gap.

Guest et al. (2013) showed brief delays can actually hike response rates in neurotypical adults on interval schedules. The 2005 study flips that idea into applied work: kids with autism need a cue so the same delay does not slow learning.

Collier et al. (1986) also used a 3–5 second pause, but they used the gap to prompt affectionate speech. Here, the pause is filled with a neutral visual mark instead of a prompt, yet both studies show the window can be productively bridged.

Knutson et al. (2019) and Bao et al. (2017) used the same alternating-treatments DTT format. They tweaked task order; this paper tweaks what happens during the delay. All three find small procedural changes that shave trials off mastery.

You probably insert short delays when you open the token box or praise. Slip in a quick visual or verbal marker—turn the card, say “nice”—while you reach for the reinforcer. This zero-cost habit can cut acquisition time for kids with autism without extra materials or training.