The effects of presenting delays before and after task completion on self-control responding in children with behavior disorders.

Three children with behavior disorders took part.

Each child worked on a computer task that gave two choices.

One choice gave a small prize right away.

The other choice gave a bigger prize after a wait.

The team tested two delay placements.

In one phase the child waited before starting the task.

In the other phase the child did the task first, then waited.

An ABAB reversal design showed each child both orders.

Waiting after the task boosted self-control every time.

All three kids picked the larger, later prize more often when the delay came after work.

When the delay came before work, they usually took the smaller, now prize.

The order of phases did not matter; post-task delay always won.

Porter et al. (2020) also added delay, but put it on both choices.

Their kids shifted to self-control too, showing the effect holds across setups.

Carlin et al. (2012) and Logan et al. (2000) used slowly longer delays.

They started with no wait and stretched it bit by bit.

Whitehouse et al. (2014) skips the fading and still wins, so you can get the gain faster.

Vessells et al. (2018) mixed signals with fading and quadrupled the time kids would wait.

That pair of studies looks like a contradiction: one says fade slowly, the other says just park the delay after the task.

The gap is in procedure: Vessells kept a distractor toy and stretched seconds; M et al. kept the wait short and fixed but moved it to the end.

Both work, so you can choose speed or comfort based on your client.

You can raise self-control tomorrow without long training.

Simply give the child the task first, then have a short wait for the big reinforcer.

No need for timers, toys, or weeks of fading.

Try it during seat-work, homework, or discrete-trial sessions.

One quick flip in timing can cut impulsive picks and build bigger payoffs for both of you.