The stereotypy analysis: an instrument for examining environmental variables associated with differential rates of stereotypic behavior.
Run the Stereotypy Analysis first; it finds what keeps the stereotypy alive so you can pick the right treatment.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team built a one-page checklist called the Stereotypy Analysis.
Staff mark behavior and nearby events in 10-second windows.
They tried it with five children who had developmental delays.
What they found
The tool spotted clear triggers for three of the five kids.
After they knew the triggers, two children’s stereotypy dropped a lot.
How this fits with other research
Baranek et al. (2005) later summed up the field and listed this checklist as a go-to screen.
Staats et al. (2000) went one step further. They showed one movement can have two pay-offs, so you must match the fix to the pay-off.
Rutter et al. (1987) first proved stereotypy can work like a break from hard tasks. The 1997 paper turned that idea into a quick form anyone can use.
Why it matters
You can finish the Stereotypy Analysis in one short session. It tells you if the stereotypy is fed by escape, attention, or sensory input. Once you see the pattern, you pick the right fix instead of guessing.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Grab the 10-second partial-interval form, watch for five minutes, and mark what happens right before the stereotypy.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
The Stereotypy Analysis, a means of analyzing environmental variables associated with differential rates of stereotypic behavior, was conducted with five persons having moderate to profound developmental disabilities. The process involves partial-interval recording of the occurrence of targeted behaviors and the presence/absence of specific environmental events. The Stereotypy Analysis was able to detect environmental events associated with stereotypic responding for 3 of the 5 subjects. Based on the results of the Stereotypy Analysis, indicated and not-indicated interventions were implemented for two subjects. The data obtained using the Stereotypy Analysis were useful in determining effective interventions for those subjects. Providing activities and prompts every 15 s, later faded to every 30 s, reduced handmouthing from a mean of 40% of intervals to 13% for one subject. Providing prompts every 30 s to engage in an activity decreased body rocking from 60% to 15% for the other. Effects for both interventions were replicated using A-B-A-B designs. The not-indicated intervention was unsuccessful for one subject; it suggested multiple control of the behavior for the other. Implications for behavioral theory and practice are discussed.
Research in developmental disabilities, 1997 · doi:10.1016/s0891-4222(96)00034-0