Evaluating preschool children's preferences for motivational systems during instruction.
Preschoolers pick edibles over fancy materials during instruction, yet free-play still wins—so plan powerful reinforcers if you need kids to stay at the table.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team watched preschoolers pick their favorite way to learn. Kids tried three setups: edible treats given one at a time, fancy toys mixed into the lesson, or plain free-play with no work.
Each child got to choose which table to sit at during the school morning. The researchers counted how long kids stayed, how much work they did, and any problem behavior.
What they found
When kids had to work, they picked the edible table most often. Still, free-play won every time it was an option.
Academic answers stayed the same across all setups. Problem behavior only popped up in the setup kids liked least.
How this fits with other research
Butler et al. (2021) tracked kids for a full year and found edible choices stayed on top month after month. That backs up the preschool result: food keeps its power.
Matson et al. (1999) showed food still wins even right after lunch. Together these studies tell us edible preference is strong and stubborn.
Smith et al. (1997) looks like a clash at first—they found many kids picked variety over one great item. The difference is choice format: G gave kids a rotating mix, while A let kids pick only one table at a time. When the menu is single-item, edibles rule; when variety is built in, some kids switch.
Why it matters
If you need a child to stay at the table, lead with a bite-sized reinforcer delivered right after each response. Keep free-play away from the work area so it does not compete. Rotate in a new edible flavor every few days instead of adding toys—you will keep the power of food without boring the learner.
Get CEUs on This Topic — Free
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ on-demand CEUs including ethics, supervision, and clinical topics like this one. Plus a new live CEU every Wednesday.
Put a single mini-marshmallow in a clear jar and give one immediately after each correct response—skip the toy pile for now.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Preschool teachers rely on several strategies for motivating children to participate in learning activities. In the current study, we evaluated the effectiveness of and preference for three teaching contexts in which embedded, sequential, or no programmed reinforcement was arranged. The embedded context included highly preferred teaching materials, the sequential context included highly preferred edible items for correct responding, and a control context included neither. In addition, an exclusively play-oriented activity was included as a fourth option to determine if one of the direct teaching contexts could compete with a relatively unstructured and exclusively child-led activity. All participants preferred the sequential context (use of high-quality consequences) over the embedded context (use of high-quality teaching materials), 2 of the 4 participants preferred some motivational system to none at all, and the play area was selected over all variants of the instructional contexts during the majority of trials. We found either no or small differences in correct responding in the different instructional contexts; however, rates of undesirable behavior were highest in the least preferred interaction area for 3 of the 4 participants. Implications for the design of effective and preferred teaching environments for young children are discussed.
Journal of applied behavior analysis, 2007 · doi:10.1901/jaba.2007.59-05