The effects of a high-probability instruction sequence and response-independent reinforcer delivery on child compliance.

Bullock et al. (2006) compared two quick ways to get kids to listen. Two typically-developing children took part. The team used an alternating-treatments design. Each session switched between two setups.

One setup used a high-probability instruction sequence: three easy requests the kids usually followed, then the target request. The other setup gave snacks and praise on a fixed-time schedule, no matter what the child did. The goal was to see which method lifted compliance more.

Both methods worked. Compliance rose during the high-p sequence and during the fixed-time reinforcement. The gains were about the same size. Neither child needed the warm-up demands once the free reinforcers were flowing.

Lipschultz et al. (2017) looks like a direct contradiction. They tested the same pair of tactics and found neither helped; only contingent reinforcement mattered. The difference: their participants already faced mild extinction for non-compliance. That contingency shift may have wiped out the extra boost seen here.

Boudreau et al. (2015) extends the story. They showed high-p sequences only help when the easy responses earn real, liked reinforcement. Praise alone failed. Their data explain why fixed-time snacks in the 2006 study were enough: the edible items counted as high-quality reinforcers.

Lord et al. (1997) adds another layer. They proved that better reinforcers create stronger momentum. If you ever copy Chrystin's fixed-time method and see weak results, swap in a higher-value item before you abandon the tactic.

You can save instructional minutes by skipping the high-p warm-up when time is tight. Simply deliver a small, liked item every few minutes while you give instructions. If compliance fades, check two things: is the child actually hungry for the item, and is some accidental extinction going on? Tighten the contingency or upgrade the reinforcer, and you may bring the compliance right back.