ArticlePerspectives on behavior science2022
Cochran's Q Test of Stimulus Overselectivity within the Verbal Repertoire of Children with Autism.
Article in Perspectives on behavior science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring the shared genetic architecture between periodontitis and cardiovascular disease.BDJ open · 2026Article
- The Shape of Relations to Come: Multidimensional Analyses of Complex Human Behavior.The Psychological record · 2024Article
- Assessing the Verbal Behavior of a Linguistically Diverse Speaker with Autism.The Analysis of verbal behavior · 2024Article
- Analyzing the Functional Interdependence of Verbal Behavior with Multiaxial Radar Charts.Perspectives on behavior science · 2024Article
- Associations of inflammatory cytokines with palmoplantar pustulosis: a bidirectional Mendelian randomization study.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Culturally Responsive Language Assessment Through a Verbal Operant Experimental Analysis.Behavior analysis (Washington, D.C.) · 2023Article
- Advancing the Application and Use of Single-Case Research Designs: Reflections on Articles from the Special Issue.Perspectives on behavior science · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Stimulus overselectivity remains an ill-defined concept within behavior analysis, because it can be difficult to distinguish truly restrictive stimulus control from random variation. Quantitative models of bias are useful, though perhaps limited in application. Over the last 50 years, research on stimulus overselectivity has developed a pattern of assessment and intervention repeatedly marred by methodological flaws. Here we argue that a molecular view of overselectivity, under which restricted stimulus control has heretofore been examined, is fundamentally insufficient for analyzing this phenomenon. Instead, we propose the use of the term "overselectivity" to define temporally extended patterns of restrictive stimulus control that have resulted in disproportionate populations of responding that cannot be attributed to chance alone, and highlight examples of overselectivity within the verbal behavior of children with autism spectrum disorder. Viewed as such, stimulus overselectivity lends itself to direct observation and measurement through the statistical analysis of single-subject data. In particular, we demonstrate the use of the Cochran
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.