Cited by 61Behavioral and Psychological StudiesObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersBehavioral Health and Interventions

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparing the effectiveness of similar and dissimilar competing responses in evaluating the habit reversal treatment for oral-digital habits in children

Woods, Douglas W., Murray, Laura K., Fuqua, R.Wayne, Seif, Tory A., Boyer, Lora J., Siah, Adelene·1999·Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry

Abstract

In the present study 26 children with chronic oral-digital habits were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 conditions. Group 1 received habit reversal using a similar competing response. Group 2 received habit reversal using a dissimilar competing response, and Group 3 served as a wait-list control group. Three videotaped observations were taken at pretreatment and again at posttreatment. In addition, social acceptability data were collected on the treatment groups at posttreatment. Results showed that the similar and dissimilar groups were engaging in significantly less oral-digital behavior at posttreatment when compared to the control group. However, the two treatment groups did not differ from each other in terms of treatment gains or acceptability. These results suggest that habit reversal is an effective treatment for oral digital habits in children. In addition, it appears that the competing response does not function as a physically incompatible behavior. Implications of the findings are discussed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0005-7916(99)00031-2

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. DeFrancesco, J. J., Zahner, C. E. P., & Pawelkiewicz, W. (1989). Childhood nailbiting. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 4, 157–161.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Woods, D. W., Murray, L. K., Fuqua, R. W., Seif, T. A., Boyer, L. J., & Siah, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee (US)
  • Western Michigan University (US)
Corresponding author
Woods, Douglas W.
Venue
Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1999-12
Volume
30
Issue
4
Pages
289-300
ISSN
0005-7916 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1964078366
Cited by
61
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 1
FWCI
2.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
Keywords
habit reversal, competing responses, children, treatment acceptability
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Behavior Therapy, Child, Child, Preschool, Cues, Female, Fingersucking, Habits, Humans, Male, Nail Biting, Reinforcement, Psychology, Treatment Outcome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review