The effects of modeling contingencies in the treatment of food selectivity in children with autism.

The team worked with two children with autism who only ate a few foods. They told each child the rule: "Take a bite of the new food and you get a toy." The adult then modeled the rule by taking a bite and showing the reward.

They used two simple plans. One plan was just the rule and model. The other added "we will not remove the spoon until you try." They watched how many bites the kids took.

Both children started eating the target foods after the adult stated and modeled the rule. The new foods went from zero bites to many bites across meals.

The plan worked with both the simple rule and the rule plus non-removal of spoon. Gains stayed when the team slowly removed the extra help.

Crowley et al. (2020) got the same result using choice instead of modeling. They let kids pick: eat the new food and get a treat, or eat the old food and get nothing. Both studies show that clear contingencies expand diets.

Pubylski-Yanofchick et al. (2022) later tested the same idea with an adult. Positive reinforcement for bites of fruit worked, proving the rule works past childhood.

Silbaugh et al. (2018) first tried praise and treats alone and saw no change. Only when they added gentle physical help did eating improve. That contrast shows modeling plus rules can be a lighter first step before guidance.

You can start food expansion with just words and a quick demo. State the rule, take a bite yourself, and hand over the reinforcer. This low-stress move often works for young kids with autism who refuse new foods. If it stalls, you still have heavier tools like physical guidance or asymmetrical choice in your pocket.