The value of choice as a reinforcer for typically developing children.

Researchers asked the kids to pick between two picture cards. One card gave a choice of which sticker to take. The other card gave the same sticker with no choice.

Each child first tried both cards when stickers were equal. Then the team made one card pay off better. They tracked how often kids still picked the choice card.

At first, every child picked the choice card more. Choice itself worked like candy; kids wanted it.

When the no-choice card later gave a cooler sticker, most kids switched. The power of choice faded fast and did not come back even when payoffs were made equal again.

Roche et al. (1997) saw the same pattern in pigeons. Birds pecked the key that had given higher grain rates, even when current rates were equal. The 2015 study shows kids follow the same rule.

Bassett-Gunter et al. (2017) extends the idea to adults with disabilities. More self-reported choice predicted real paid jobs. Together the papers say: choice feels good, but its value still follows the money.

Lazar (1977) used a single-case lab set-up like this one. He proved that special feedback lights can become reinforcers. Our study swaps lights for the act of choosing, yet the method stays the same.

If you want choice to keep working as a reinforcer, guard the payoff. Let the client pick the game, but make sure both options give equal fun. The moment one side pays better, the child will drop the choice privilege and chase the richer prize.