Comparing interspersed requests and social comments as antecedents for increasing student compliance.

The researchers wanted to know what works better: giving a few easy requests first, or saying something friendly right before the hard request. They used an alternating-treatments design. Students got both kinds of warm-ups on different days.

Both tricks raised compliance. Quick social comments worked just as well as the high-p sequence, but only if the comment came right before the target request. Timing mattered more than the type of warm-up.

Bullock et al. (2006) later repeated the same design and also saw both antecedents help. They swapped social comments for free toys given on a fixed schedule and still got gains, showing the effect is robust across different set-ups.

Lipschultz et al. (2017) ran a similar contrast but found nothing worked except good old contingent reinforcement. The clash is explained by sample and setting: the 1995 kids were older and in class, while the 2017 preschoolers were younger and more defiant.

Fullana et al. (2007) add another caution: only one of their three preschoolers responded to high-p sequences; the other two needed extinction. Again, age and severity explain why the shiny antecedent fix can flop.

You now have two fast, low-prep tools: three easy requests or a friendly sentence. Use either, just keep the gap under a few seconds. If you work with tough-to-teach preschoolers, watch the data closely—be ready to add extinction or contingent praise if the warm-up fizzles. For older students in class, either tactic still saves time and keeps the flow.