Welcome

In Episode 19, I walk us through Hagopian et al.’s foundational research on the Augmented Competing Stimulus Assessment (A-CSA), published in JABA. If you work with automatically maintained behaviors—especially severe self-injury—this episode is for you.

1. Episode Overview

• Why I chose Hagopian et al.’s A-CSA paper
• Limitations of traditional CSAs
• The A-CSA’s unique contributions
• Clinical takeaways

2. Automatically Maintained Behavior

Definition: Behavior maintained by sensory/automatic reinforcement, not social contingencies.

Examples: Hand-biting, stereotypy, hair pulling.

Challenge: Highly resistant to change with traditional methods.

3. Traditional CSA Procedures

1. Free-operant baseline
2. Stimuli tested in isolation
3. Behavior measured across conditions

Limitations: Passive stimulus delivery, low engagement, no skill acquisition.

4. Introducing the Augmented CSA (A-CSA)

Reference: Hagopian et al. (2015), JABA, 48(1), 1–24.

Phases:

1. Free Access (Baseline)
2. Prompted Engagement
3. Prompted Engagement + Blocking/Redirection
4. Free Access (Probe)

5. A-CSA Procedures

Phase 1: Free Access

• One stimulus per session
• No prompts or praise
• Measure SIB rate and engagement

Phase 2: Prompted Engagement

• Prompt every 10 seconds
• Re-present stimulus if disengaged

Phase 3: Prompted Engagement + Blocking

• Add response blocking or redirection

Phase 4: Free Access Probe

• No prompts or blocking
• Compare behavior to Phase 1

6. Subtypes of Automatic Behavior

• Subtype 1: Sensory-seeking
• Subtype 2: Repetitive, low variability
• Subtype 3: Undifferentiated across FA conditions

7. Key Findings

• Many “ineffective” stimuli in Phase 1 became effective post-teaching
• Effective = ≥80% engagement + SIB reduction
• Teaching engagement can unlock new reinforcers

8. Clinical Extensions

• Prompt fading
• Longer sessions (up to 30 mins)
• Home and community generalization
• Combine A-CSA with FCT

9. Implementation Tips

• Run a solid preference assessment first
• Start with 2–5 min sessions
• Use real-time data for SIB and engagement
• Train prompt and blocking fidelity

10. Troubleshooting Q&A

Q: Engagement fails in Phase 2?

A: Adjust prompts—try physical modeling or simplified steps.

Q: Blocking vs. redirection?

A: Use blocking for contact behaviors; redirection for others.

Q: Combine stimuli?

A: Start with single-stimulus sessions; combine later once effective items are identified.

11. Meta Takeaways

• Assessment can be treatment
• Teaching during CSA reveals new opportunities
• Track both reduction and replacement behavior

12. Additional Reading

• Hagopian et al. (2015) – A-CSA
• Hanley et al. (2001) – Schedule thinning in FCT
• Iwata et al. (1982/1994) – Functional analysis foundations
• Piazza et al. (1998) – Play-based SIB treatments
• Roscoe et al. (1999) – Competing with automatic reinforcement

13. How I Use A-CSA

• Start post-FA when automatic function is found
• Train engagement with ineffective stimuli
• Fade blocking and prompts over time
• Combine with FCT and reinforcement thinning

14. Final Reflections

The A-CSA shows that assessments can teach. By prompting engagement early, we unlock potential competing reinforcers and reduce SIB in even the toughest cases. Add this to your ABA toolkit—you’ll be glad you did.

If this episode was helpful, share it with colleagues and leave a review. Thanks for listening!