Take free RBT Assessment Quiz to challenge your knowledge of assessment procedures, data collection, and functional behavior analysis.
Use it to practice the skills you’ll need on the RBT exam and in the field. Take the quiz now and measure your readiness.
RBT Assessment Quiz
Congratulations - you have completed RBT Assessment Quiz.
You scored %%SCORE%% out of %%TOTAL%%.
Your performance has been rated as %%RATING%%
Your answers are highlighted below.
Question 1 |
You’re running a session using DTT. The client begins to cry during each ITI (inter-trial interval) but performs well when the SD is presented. Crying stops when the next trial starts. What is the likely function?
Sensory | |
Escape | |
Access | |
Attention |
Question 1 Explanation:
The crying occurs during the ITI, suggesting the learner may be using it to delay the next trial (escape-maintained). Even though it stops when the SD is presented, it may serve to disrupt trial pacing. This subtle manipulation often mimics attention-seeking or sensory, but timing is key.
Question 2 |
You’re asked to run a skill acquisition plan involving tacting using a stimulus array. The client consistently answers correctly only when items are arranged in a specific order. What might this indicate?
The client is using item location as a cue | |
The client has mastered the tact | |
Reinforcement is too dense | |
The SD is too generalized |
Question 2 Explanation:
If responses are only correct when stimulus location remains static, it shows stimulus control by position, not the SD (the item’s name). This reflects faulty discrimination. Items should be rotated in position during trials to test true tacting ability.
Question 3 |
While implementing a preference assessment, you notice your learner always picks the item on the right, regardless of what’s presented. What’s the best next step?
Continue and document the selections | |
Rotate item positions across trials | |
Add more items to reduce choices | |
End the session and retry later |
Question 3 Explanation:
Consistent side selections may indicate a positional bias. RBTs must rotate item positions between trials in paired-choice or multiple-stimulus assessments to reduce location effects. Without this, results are invalid. This must also be noted in session documentation.
Question 4 |
A new BCBA gives you a plan using a punishment-based response cost system. The plan instructs you to remove points for incorrect responses. However, the client's behavior worsens. What’s the first thing you should check?
If the client understands the token system | |
Whether reinforcement is strong enough | |
If the points are being removed too harshly | |
If the BCBA has run an FA |
Question 4 Explanation:
Response cost only works if the client values what’s being lost. If the token system or reinforcer isn’t meaningful to the learner, removal has no aversive effect and may increase frustration. Before assuming the plan is faulty, ensure the contingency is understood and tokens have value.
Question 5 |
You’re asked to collect continuous data, but the client has highly variable behavior. During a session, the client engages in two 3-second tantrums and one long 4-minute screaming episode. Which method would most accurately capture this?
Frequency recording | |
Momentary time sampling | |
Duration recording | |
Partial interval |
Question 5 Explanation:
Since behavior duration varies drastically, duration recording is best. It captures total time engaged, not just occurrence or count. Frequency would skew results (3 short behaviors vs. 1 long), and interval sampling would risk underestimation or overrepresentation depending on timing.
Question 6 |
Your client begins engaging in aggressive behavior whenever a peer in the clinic enters the room. No changes to reinforcement, SDs, or schedule occurred. What’s the most likely explanation?
The peer’s presence acts as an SD | |
Reinforcer is no longer effective | |
The client is overstimulated | |
The client is attempting to escape the peer |
Question 6 Explanation:
The peer may function as a discriminative stimulus (SD) if their presence historically signals less supervision, competition for reinforcement, or prior negative interaction. This subtle environmental shift can trigger behavior even if all programmed variables are unchanged.
Question 7 |
You are collecting data on self-injury. The BCBA asks for data that will show both when it happens and how intense it is. What combo do you use?
Frequency and latency | |
Duration and inter-response time | |
Frequency and intensity rating scale | |
Partial interval and ABC notes |
Question 7 Explanation:
To capture timing (when/how often) and severity, combine frequency data with a behavior intensity rating scale (often 1–3 or 1–5). This helps BCBAs track pattern and severity, especially when planning safety interventions or replacement behaviors.
Question 8 |
You’re collecting trial-by-trial data on listener responding. The client gets the first two trials wrong, then answers three correctly, then begins crying. What’s the BEST action?
Keep running trials and collect full data | |
Pause trials, document the behavior, and contact the BCBA | |
Switch to a mastered skill to rebuild rapport | |
End the session and mark data as incomplete |
Question 8 Explanation:
The emotional shift signals that something is wrong—could be frustration, fatigue, illness, or task aversion. Continuing trials risks invalid data and learner burnout. Pausing and informing the BCBA is ethical and ensures learner dignity is maintained.
Question 9 |
A parent rewards the client with candy when tantrums occur, saying, “He calms down after this.” You’re running extinction trials for the same behavior. What’s the result?
Extinction will still succeed if you stay consistent | |
Parent reinforcement will cancel out extinction effects | |
The client will become prompt dependent | |
Escape function will change to attention |
Question 9 Explanation:
If others reinforce the behavior, especially outside of session, extinction will likely fail. Reinforcement from the parent maintains the behavior even if you withhold it during therapy. You must inform the BCBA so parent training or environmental controls can be introduced.
Question 10 |
You’re running a behavior intervention with extinction for screaming. Mid-session, the client suddenly begins kicking the table instead. Screaming stops entirely for two full sessions. What is this an example of?
Stimulus fading | |
Response generalization | |
Spontaneous recovery | |
Differential reinforcement |
Question 10 Explanation:
The target behavior (screaming) ceased, but a new topography (kicking) emerged that likely serves the same function. This is response generalization — when the individual uses new behaviors to achieve the same outcome after the original one stops working. Extinction often triggers this. It’s not spontaneous recovery (that’s a reappearance of the same behavior after a pause).
Question 11 |
During a group setting, your client refuses to participate in circle time unless he sits directly next to his favorite peer. If he can’t, he immediately begins yelling and hiding under furniture. What should you track?
Frequency of peer interactions | |
Antecedent conditions tied to location | |
Response cost opportunities | |
Preference assessment accuracy |
Question 11 Explanation:
The behavior occurs only when a specific condition is unmet: not sitting next to a peer. This suggests conditional discrimination, requiring careful ABC data with emphasis on antecedent location triggers. The environment (proximity to a peer) sets the stage for the outburst. This must be documented for the BCBA to determine next steps (e.g., modifying group placement or fading proximity dependence).
Question 12 |
You are using a least-to-most prompting hierarchy for a fine motor task. During trials, the learner stops working whenever you reach for their hand to guide. They only resume when you retract. What behavior principle is likely being shaped?
Escape-maintained behavior | |
Positive reinforcement | |
Negative punishment | |
Overcorrection |
Question 12 Explanation:
The learner stops responding when prompted, then resumes when the prompt is removed. This is a form of escape-maintained behavior, where prompt removal reinforces noncompliance. Though subtle, the RBT’s hesitation (withdrawing the prompt) becomes a negative reinforcer — strengthening prompt avoidance. This could lead to prompt dependency, escape shaping, or faulty acquisition if not addressed.
Question 13 |
The BCBA instructs you to begin interspersing maintenance tasks during acquisition sessions. Your client becomes more resistant and starts crying when a previously mastered skill is presented. What is the most likely cause?
The client has task aversion | |
The mastered skill may not be truly mastered | |
The ratio of mastered to novel is too high | |
The reinforcer is no longer effective |
Question 13 Explanation:
If the learner cries at a maintenance task, that’s a major red flag. It likely means the BCBA overestimated mastery, or the context of mastery has shifted (new materials, different SD, altered prompts). It’s not necessarily about preference or motivation — it’s about whether the skill was ever solid in the first place.
Question 14 |
You're told to use whole interval recording to measure on-task behavior during a 15-minute academic session. The learner remains engaged for 25–40 seconds each minute. What’s the likely issue with this method?
It will overestimate engagement | |
It provides no usable data | |
It underestimates the behavior | |
It’s the wrong tool for duration |
Question 14 Explanation:
Whole interval recording only marks “yes” if the behavior occurs for the entire interval. If the client is engaged for most, but not all, of each interval, the method will underestimate true on-task behavior. This is why whole interval is often used to increase behavior, not measure established ones. The choice of data method should match the behavior's strength.
Question 15 |
You're running a behavior plan that includes differential reinforcement for manding. The client begins manding rapidly, saying “I want break, I want cookie, I want go home” in one breath. What’s the best response?
Reinforce all mands to encourage language | |
Only reinforce one clearly appropriate mand | |
Ignore all mands during this burst | |
Start a DRO for vocal behavior |
Question 15 Explanation:
This is mand flooding, often linked to automatic reinforcement or reinforcer control. Reinforcing all mands may accidentally increase non-functional language. You must identify which mand is appropriate, timely, and clear, and only reinforce that one. Others may be redirected, prompted, or differentially reinforced.
Question 16 |
You're using a variable ratio schedule (VR-4) to maintain correct responding. After 3 responses, you reinforce. Then again after 5. The learner stops after a non-reinforced trial. What does this suggest?
The learner is prompt dependent | |
Reinforcement is too infrequent | |
They don’t understand the schedule | |
Ratio strain is occurring |
Question 16 Explanation:
Ratio strain happens when the effort to reinforcement ratio becomes too high and the learner stops responding. Even though it’s a variable schedule, the learner is reacting to perceived “workload” without payoff. A good fix may involve reducing the VR temporarily or pairing with more powerful reinforcers.
Question 17 |
A client has a BIP using NCR (non-contingent reinforcement) to reduce disruptive calling out. However, calling out has increased. What might be wrong?
NCR is ineffective for this behavior | |
The schedule is too thin | |
The reinforcer matches the function | |
The delivery is accidentally contingent |
Question 17 Explanation:
If reinforcement is delivered after calling out — even if unintentionally — NCR becomes contingent again, accidentally reinforcing the behavior. The timing of NCR is critical. It should follow no behavior, not functionally mimic reinforcement patterns tied to the problem.
Question 18 |
You are using a token economy with a 3-token-for-reward rule. Your client engages in mild aggression when told they must earn another token. It only occurs at token 2. What is likely happening?
The client is satiated | |
They don’t understand the contingency | |
Token loss is acting as punishment | |
Task aversion increases before reinforcement |
Question 18 Explanation:
The aggression at token 2 may reflect a conditioned aversive reaction to delayed reinforcement — they know a demand is still coming, but the reward isn’t yet available. This often results in a pre-reinforcer extinction burst, where the final step before reinforcement becomes the trigger. Adjusting schedule or pairing token 2 with small conditioned reinforcers may help.
Question 19 |
You’re running a shaping program for vocal imitation. The learner correctly imitates “ba” after several trials, then regresses to “ah.” You praise the “ah” again. What’s the risk?
You’re reinforcing extinction | |
You’ve reset the shaping ladder | |
The learner has a speech delay | |
Prompt fading is happening too soon |
Question 19 Explanation:
If you reinforce lower approximations after a higher one was already achieved, you reset the shaping process. The learner no longer has motivation to push forward. This is one of the most common shaping errors. Only reinforce approximations that meet or exceed previous levels.
Once you are finished, click the button below. Any items you have not completed will be marked incorrect.
There are 19 questions to complete.
|
List |