Decreasing motor stereotypy with competing stimuli and tasks: Analysis of prompted engagement and response blocking

The team ran a competing-stimulus assessment, or CSA. They gave kids short play periods with toys or simple jobs.

During each period they added two quick moves. They gently blocked every stereotypic hand or body motion. They also gave one verbal prompt to keep playing.

The goal was to see if these small add-ons would help the CSA pick items that really cut stereotypy.

Stereotypy dropped in most CSA rounds that used blocking plus prompting.

The same items kept working when the team used them in longer daily sessions.

In short, the brief add-ons made the CSA better at spotting what would work over time.

DeRosa et al. (2019) already showed that plain response blocking beats RIRD when you count the whole session. Schmidt adds prompting and folds blocking into CSA, giving you a cleaner way to find the best items up front.

Gould et al. (2019) used RIRD alone and saw good stimulus control. Schmidt keeps RIRD but layers on blocking and CSA, so you get the same suppression plus faster item selection.

Slaton et al. (2025) took the idea further. They built a full chained schedule that teaches communication, tolerance, and academics while stereotypy stays low. Their package grew right out of the simple CSA-plus-blocking step you see here.

You can upgrade your next CSA in five minutes. Add one prompt to play and block each stereotypic response. The assessment will tell you faster which toys or tasks really work, and those items are more likely to hold up in daily treatment. Less guessing, quicker planning, smoother sessions for you and your learner.