The relationship between stereotyped movements and self-injurious behavior in children with developmental or sensory disabilities.
Reach for diagnosis-specific stereotypy checklists—autism, ID, and sensory disabilities each wave their own red flags.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Gal et al. (2009) asked parents to describe their children’s repetitive and self-harming movements.
The team compared kids with autism, intellectual disability, vision loss, and hearing loss to see if each group moved in its own way.
They used a checklist made for each diagnosis instead of one generic form.
What they found
Children with autism showed a unique mix of hand flaps, finger wiggles, and head hits that did not match the other groups.
Kids with vision loss rocked their bodies, while those with hearing loss tapped their ears.
The pattern was clear enough that the checklist could flag which diagnosis a child likely had.
How this fits with other research
Leaf et al. (2012) later saw that toddlers with autism moved more often than peers with similar mental ages, but the lists still overlapped. Their work backs the need for autism-only items on the form.
Petrovic et al. (2016) added a twist: children who hit themselves also showed more pain cues during daily tasks. This means the same movements Eynat labeled "autism-specific" might sometimes signal pain, not just stereotypy.
Fucà et al. (2025) found that kids with Down syndrome plus autism rocked and flapped more than kids with Down syndrome alone. They borrowed Eynat’s idea of diagnosis-only checklists to spot the added autism.
Why it matters
You can borrow these short, diagnosis-tuned checklists during intake. Circle the moves that match autism, vision, or hearing profiles. If a child with autism also shows new self-hits, pause and rule out pain first, just as Petrovic et al. (2016) suggest. The tool gives you a quick map of what the body is saying before you write your behavior plan.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Print the autism-only item list from Eynat et al. and tick the moves you see today—note any new self-hits and screen for pain before treating the behavior as stereotypy.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
We assessed whether the stereotyped movements (SM) that are a defining characteristic of autism are discriminable from those observed in other disorders, and whether stereotyped self-injurious movements, which are excluded as exemplars of SM in DSM-IV, differ from other SM in severity or in kind. We used the Stereotyped and Self-Injurious Movement Interview to assess self-injurious and other SM in children with autism (n=56), intellectual disability (n=29), vision impairment (n=50), or hearing impairment (n=51) and in typical children (n=30). Cross-tabulation of scores indicated that self-injurious behavior is rarely performed in the absence of other SM. Reliability analyses indicated that patterns of covariation among SM items differ across groups so that different item sets are necessary to reliably measure SM in each group. Analyses of variance indicated the autism group exceeded one or more other groups in the frequency of 15 SM, the vision impaired group exceeded others on 5 SM, and the hearing impaired group exceeded others on 1 SM. Discriminant function analysis of SM items indicated that although only 66% of participants were accurately classified, it was rare for a child with a different disorder to be misclassified as having autism or visual impairment. We concluded that self-injurious behavior is a more severe form of SM, and there is a distinctive pattern of SM, including self-injurious behavior, that characterizes children with autism.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2009 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2008.06.003