Effects of social interaction on leisure item preference and reinforcer efficacy for children with autism

Kamlowsky et al. (2025) tested five autistic children. They wanted to see if social interaction changes how much kids like toys and how well those toys work as reinforcers.

Each child tried three quick tests. One test showed toys alone. One showed toys plus a playful adult. One mixed both types together. The team then checked which toys kept the kids working the hardest.

Social interaction boosted reinforcer power for every child. Toys plus an engaged adult kept kids working longer than the same toys alone.

The mixed test missed strong toys for three kids. Items that worked well in the social-only test looked weak when they showed up again in the mix, so staff might wrongly skip them.

The result lines up with Morris et al. (2019). Their SIPA already showed that social interactions alone can serve as reinforcers for autistic kids. Kamlowsky extends that idea by showing social contact also makes regular toys more powerful.

It also echoes Fournier et al. (2004). In that study, preferred items plus social interaction lifted happiness more than items alone. Both papers point to the same simple rule: add people to materials when you want stronger effects.

Chebli et al. (2016) found tablet videos work as reinforcers, but they tested videos in isolation. Kamlowsky warns that if you mix social and solo trials too quickly, you might label a good video as ineffective. Run separate social and solo probes first to avoid that mistake.

You can get more instructional mileage out of almost any toy just by bringing your own smile, comments, and turn-taking into the game. Before you write off an item, test it again while you play alongside the child. Keep social and solo trials in separate short blocks instead of one big mash-up so clear winners do not get buried.