Provision of small “sensory” fidget toys during group activities is a low-effort intervention that may be used during group activities to encourage attendance and engagement by children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the noncontingent provision of fidget toys during a group activity. Research activities occurred at a summer camp designed to improve social skills for young children with ASD. The impact of fidgets was compared with a baseline condition and contingent provision of tokens using a single case alternating treatments design. Results suggest contra-therapeutic effects or decreased engagement over time for the fidget condition. Practitioners should consider using evidence-based alternatives to improve engagement or should engage in careful data-based decision-making when fidgets are used with the intent to improve engagement in group activities.
BarlowD. H.HayesS. C. (1979). Alternating treatments design: One strategy for comparing the effects of two treatments in a single subject. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 12, 199–210. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1979.12-199
2.
BartonE. E.Meadan-KaplanskyH.LedfordJ. R. (2018). Independent variables, fidelity, and social validity. In LedfordJ. R.GastD. L. (Eds.), Single case research methodology: Applications in special education and behavioral sciences (pp. 135–156). Routledge.
3.
BartonE. E.ReichowB.SchnitzA.SmithI. C.SherlockD. (2015). A systematic review of sensory-based treatments for children with disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 37, 64–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2014.11.006
4.
HagopianL. P.FisherW. W.LegacyS. M. (1994). Schedule effects of noncontingent reinforcement on attention-maintained destructive behavior in identical quadruplets. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 317–325. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1994.27-317
5.
KurthJ. A.BornK.LoveH. (2016). Ecobehavioral characteristics of self-contained high school classrooms for students with severe cognitive disability. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 41, 227–243. https://doi.org/10.1177/1540796916661492
6.
LedfordJ. R.GastD. L.LuscreD.AyresK. M. (2008). Observational and incidental learning by children with autism during small group instruction. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38, 86–103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-007-0363-7
7.
LedfordJ. R.LaneJ. D.GastD. L. (2018). Dependent variables, measurement, and reliability. In LedfordJ. R.GastD. L. (Eds.), Single case research methodology: Applications in special education and behavioral sciences (pp. 97–131). Routledge.
8.
MacSuga-GageA. S.GageN. A. (2015). Student-level effects of increased teacher-directed opportunities to respond. Journal of Behavioral Education, 24, 273–288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-015-9223-2
9.
RubleL. A.RobsonD. M. (2007). Individual and environmental determinants of engagement in autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 37, 1457–1468. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-006-0222-y
10.
SchecterR. A.ShahJ.FruitmanK.MilanaikR. L. (2017). Fidget spinners: Purported benefits, adverse effects and accepted alternatives. Current Opinion in Pediatrics, 29, 616–618. https://doi.org/10.1097/MOP.0000000000000523
11.
ScottT. M.AlternP. J.HirnR. G. (2011). An examination of typical classroom context and instruction for students with and without behavioral disorders. Education and Treatment of Children, 34, 619–641. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2011.0039
12.
SteinbrennerJ. R. D.WatsonL. R. (2015). Student engagement in the classroom: The impact of classroom, teacher, and student factors. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45, 2392–2410. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-015-2406-9
WoleryM.AultM. J.DoyleP. M. (1992). Teaching students with moderate and severe disabilities. Longman.
17.
WongC.OdomS. L.HumeK. A.CoxA. W.FettigA.KucharczykS.SchultzT. R. (2015). Evidence-based practices for children, youth, and young adults with autism spectrum disorder: A comprehensive review. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45, 1951–1966. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-014-2351-z
18.
ZaneT.DavisC.RosswurmM. (2008). The cost of fad treatments in autism. Journal of Early and Intensive Behavior Intervention, 5, 44–51. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0100418
