Characterizing Automatically Maintained Self-Injury With the Aberrant Behavior Checklist.

The team used the Aberrant Behavior Checklist (ABC) to look for patterns in self-injury.

They split automatically maintained SIB into finer subtypes instead of treating it as one block.

All participants had intellectual disability or developmental delay.

Overall ABC scores looked the same for social vs. automatic SIB.

When the automatic group was broken down, clear subscale differences popped out.

These patterns give a quick flag for which subtype might be in play.

Christopher et al. (1991) showed the ABC is reliable with this same population; MacFarland et al. (2025) now push the tool further by using it to screen for function.

Rooker et al. (2018) found that treatment works best after a competing-stimulus assessment; the new ABC signal can tell you which clients need that deeper step.

Christensen et al. (2024) describe high automatic SIB in SYNGAP1-ID; the ABC subscale shortcut could spot these cases without a full functional analysis.

Logan et al. (2000) proved you can test sensory reinforcers experimentally; the checklist offers a fast pre-test so you run those pricey analyses only when the pattern hints at automatic reinforcement.

You can open the last ABC on file, scan two subscales, and decide if automatic reinforcement is likely.

When the pattern fits, move straight to competing-stimulus or sensory assessment instead of spinning your wheels in standard social-condition FA sessions.

Less time in the clinic, faster relief for the client, and a clear data trail for the treatment plan.