SynthesisJournal of applied behavior analysis2020
Competing stimulus assessments: A systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of applied behavior analysis, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- Treatment of Challenging Behavior During Physical Transitions: A Case Study.Behavior analysis in practice · 2026Article
- A Retrospective Consecutive Controlled Case Series Analysis of the Assessment and Treatment of Elopement in Children with Autism in an Inpatient Setting.Behavior analysis in practice · 2025Article
- Generalized target behavior reductions and maintenance of effects following an augmented competing stimulus assessment sequence.Journal of applied behavior analysis · 2025Article
- Pre-Treatment Assessments to Identify Treatment Components for an Adolescent with Subtype-3 Self-Injurious Behavior.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Using Functional Communication and Competing Stimuli to Gradually Increase the Distance of Transitions in the Treatment of Tangibly Maintained Elopement.Behavior analysis in practice · 2024Article
- Toward Maximizing Assessment Efficiency: A Synthesized Trial-Based Functional Analysis and Competing Stimulus Assessment.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Stimulus Avoidance Assessment: A Systematic Literature Review.Perspectives on behavior science · 2024Review
- Updated Recommendations for Reinforcement Schedule Thinning following Functional Communication Training.Behavior analysis in practice · 2024Review
- Approaches for Treating Multiply Controlled Problem Behavior.Behavior analysis in practice · 2024Review
- Treatment of Self-Injury in Bainbridge-Ropers Syndrome: Replication and Extensions of Behavioral Assessments.Behavior analysis in practice · 2023Article
- Efficacy of competing stimulus assessments: A summary of 35 consecutively encountered cases.Journal of applied behavior analysis · 2023Article
- Decreasing motor stereotypy with competing stimuli and tasks: Analysis of prompted engagement and response blocking.Behavioral interventions : theory & practice in residential & community-based clinical programs · 2021Article
- Initial outcomes of an augmented competing stimulus assessment.Journal of applied behavior analysis · 2020Article
- A clinical evaluation and validation of a competing stimulus assessment targeting excessive functional communication responses.Journal of applied behavior analysisArticle
- Recent developments and future directions for competing stimulus assessments.Journal of applied behavior analysisReview
- A replication and extension of the augmented competing stimulus assessment.Journal of applied behavior analysisArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The current review summarizes the literature on competing stimulus assessments (CSAs). CSAs are pretreatment assessments designed to systematically identify stimuli that reduce problem behavior (PB), ostensibly through reinforcer competition or substitution. We report on the participant characteristics, outcomes, and predictive validity of published CSAs that included (a) no-stimulus control trial(s), (b) test trials during which each stimulus was available singly and noncontingently, and (c) measurement of PB and stimulus engagement or contact. Results showed that CSAs have broad utility across a variety of topographies and functions of PB. In the majority of CSA applications for which extended analyses, or validations, were performed, stimuli shown to reduce PB during the CSA produced similar reductions during extended analysis. This was the case regardless of topography or function of PB, or whether the stimuli were assumed to be "matched" to the stimulation thought to be produced by PB. Implications for future research are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.