A Comparison of Latency‐ and Rate‐Based CSAs in the Treatment of Automatically Maintained Self‐Injury

ABSTRACT Competing stimulus assessments (CSAs) are used to identify high‐competition stimuli that effectively reduce challenging behavior. Despite their efficacy, CSAs can be time consuming to complete. Recently, Imler and Weyman examined the efficacy of a latency‐based CSA (LBCSA) to improve assessment efficiency. Although results suggested that there may be some utility to the LBCSA, it was not compared to a traditional rate‐based CSA. The current study's purpose was to replicate and extend the work of Imler and Weyman by conducting an LBCSA followed by a rate‐based CSA to examine the correspondence among outcomes for two individuals with automatically maintained self‐injury. Results indicated that the CSA outcomes were similar. During the extended treatment evaluation, high‐competition stimuli reduced self‐injury. However, when stimuli were associated with mixed outcomes across CSAs, the results of the traditional CSA were more accurate. Avenues for future research on LBCSAs are discussed.