Yes, view the full list of research conducted on Collaborative Problem Solving^® (CPS).

You can also request a personal copy of several of our studies by completing the form below.

Research Paper Request

Yes, Collaborative Problem Solving is an evidence-based practice listed on the Blue Menu of Evidence-Based Psychosocial Interventions for Youth from the PracticeWise Evidence-Based Services Database and the California Evidence-Based Clearinghouse for Child Welfare.

Yes, the first RCT on Collaborative Problem Solving compared Collaborative Problem Solving to a common parenting approach called Parent Management Training (PMT). Children from families who learned CPS had significant improvements in many areas of functioning at the end of treatment and four months later. These improvements were equal to, or better than, the improvements for children whose families received PMT. Learn more in the study “Effectiveness of Collaborative Problem Solving in Affectively Dysregulated Children with Oppositional-Defiant Disorder: Initial Findings.”

Research tells us that the benefits of CPS depend on who is receiving CPS and in what context.

• In school settings, benefits have included improved child behavior, reductions in teacher stress, and decreases in restrictive disciplinary practices.
• In clinical settings benefits have included reductions in restraint/seclusion and self-inflicted injuries, as well as improvements in children’s emotional distress.
• In homes, family benefits have included improved parent-child relationships, reductions in parent stress, and improvements in children’s executive functioning skills.

You can find more information on these and other published findings in our complete list of published research on Collaborative Problem Solving.

• An association between Collaborative Problem Solving and lower rates of restrictive discipline and teachers’ stress was found in the study “Reducing Teacher Stress by Implementing Collaborative Problem Solving in a School Setting.”
• Associations between Collaborative Problem Solving and improved student behavior, as well as improvements in thinking skills, were found in the study “Collaborative Problem Solving in Schools: Results of a Year-Long Consultation Project.”
• Teachers’ beliefs regarding students’ thinking skills may affect how they respond to classroom misbehavior, which was found in the study “Teacher Beliefs and Responses Toward Student Misbehavior: Influence of Cognitive Skill Deficits” and more recently in "Understanding Teachers' Attributions and Responses to Student Misbehavior: The Roles of Explanatory Rationale and Personal Beliefs."

Many studies on Collaborative Problem Solving have been conducted in outpatient settings, including studies on the impact of CPS in outpatient therapy for Oppositional Defiant Disorder, ADHD, and a range of other related conditions.

• A study compared Collaborative Problem Solving to a common parenting approach when treating children with Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD). Children from families who learned CPS had significant improvements in many areas of functioning at the end of treatment and four months later. These improvements were equal to, or better than, the improvements for children from families who received the other parenting approach. Learn more in the study “Effectiveness of Collaborative Problem Solving in Affectively Dysregulated Children with Oppositional-Defiant Disorder: Initial Findings.”
• A study found that after families completed training in Collaborative Problem Solving, it significantly reduced their child’s ODD, ADHD, and mood symptoms. Learn more in the study “Attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder with oppositional defiant disorder in Swedish children–an open study of Collaborative Problem Solving.”
• A study found that using Collaborative Problem Solving in community-based, outpatient family treatment is effective for helping children who exhibit a range of clinical symptoms. Parents reported a significant change in their understanding of challenging behavior and prediction of children’s behavioral symptoms three months into treatment. Their parents’ increased understanding predicted children’s improvement that cognitive skill deficits are responsible for challenging behavior. Learn more in the study “An open trial of Collaborative Problem Solving in a naturalistic outpatient setting.”

Many studies on Collaborative Problem Solving have been conducted in residential and inpatient settings, including studies on restraints and seclusions in inpatient psychiatry and residential and day treatment programs; how CPS was used to eliminate point-and-level systems in residential treatment and other concerns related to implementation in residential programs.

• A study found that Collaborative Problem Solving is a promising approach to reducing seclusion and restraint in a child psychiatric inpatient setting. After the implementation of Collaborative Problem Solving, there was a dramatic reduction in the number and duration of restraints and seclusions. Learn more in the study “Reduction of Restraint and Seclusion Through Collaborative Problem Solving: A Five-Year Prospective Inpatient Study.”
• A case study of one agency showed that after adopting the Collaborative Problem Solving approach, the agency reduced seclusion and restraint in its youth residential and day treatment programs. Learn more about the details of their implementation strategy in the study “Minimizing Seclusion and Restraint in Youth Residential and Day Treatment Through Site-Wide Implementation of Collaborative Problem Solving.”
• A case study describes how The Village Network de-implemented its universal point-and-level system across three residential campuses, replacing it with the Neurosequential Model of Therapeutics (NMT) and Collaborative Problem Solving. An analysis of administrative data before and after removing the point-and-level system suggests no evidence of increased safety risk for youth or staff. Learn more in the study “De-Implementing a Point and Level System in Youth Residential Care without Increased Safety Risk: A Case Study.”
• Some argue that the assumptions upon which point and level systems are based do not hold up to empirical scrutiny or theoretical validity and that point and level systems are actually counterproductive with some children and, at times, can precipitate dangerous clinical situations, such as seclusion and restraint. This may be common sense now, but fifteen years ago, it was a new idea. Read an early paper on this topic in “Beyond Point and Level Systems: Moving Toward Child-Centered Programming.”

There have been several studies focused on the use of Collaborative Problem Solving by families who are receiving services in their homes.

• This study shows that parents who learned the Collaborative Problem Solving approach reported significant improvements in their child's learning targets and conflict, and changes were sustained six months later. Children’s behavior improved significantly in the treatment group by the six-month follow-up. These findings support CPS parent groups as an economical and effective approach for parents of children with behavioral difficulties. Learn more in the study “Effects of a Collaborative Problem Solving Parent Group on Parent and Child Outcomes.”
• This study evaluated the effectiveness of the Collaborative Problem Solving (CPS) approach in home‐based family therapy. There were significant reductions in children's behavioral difficulties and parenting stress, and significant improvements in children's executive functioning and parents’ empathy. These improvements were greatest for parents who had the greatest fidelity to CPS. These results provide evidence that home‐based family treatment with CPS may achieve positive child and family outcomes by building children's executive function skills and improving parents’ empathy. Learn more in the study “Collaborative Problem Solving Reduces Children's Emotional and Behavioral Difficulties and Parenting Stress: Two Key Mechanisms.”

Yes, Collaborative Problem Solving can reduce restraints and seclusion. There have been several studies on the reduction of restraint and seclusion in organizations using CPS in inpatient units in the United States and New Zealand, as well as in residential and day treatment programs.

• After adopting CPS, a US inpatient program saw a reduction in the frequency and duration of restraints and seclusion. Most notable was this facility’s 37-fold reduction in the rate of restraint. Learn more about this study, “Reduction of Restraint and Seclusion Through Collaborative Problem Solving: A Five-Year Prospective Inpatient Study.”
• After implementing CPS, an inpatient program in New Zealand reported a significant decrease in the number of partial and full restraints and the frequency of seclusion, while the length of treatment and clinician-rated outcomes remained consistent and patient- and parent-rated outcomes improved. More information can be found in the study, “Reducing Seclusion and Restraint in a Child and Adolescent Inpatient Area: Implementation of a Collaborative Problem-Solving Approach.”
• A multiservice agency reduced seclusion and restraint rates in youth residential and day treatment programs after adopting CPS. They calculated the administrative cost savings that came from needing fewer staff available for restraints and also discussed their implementation process and the barriers they faced. Learn more in the study, “Minimizing Seclusion and Restraint in Youth Residential and Day Treatment Through Site-Wide Implementation of Collaborative Problem Solving”

Yes, the Thinking Skills Inventory (TSI) has been validated against commonly used neuropsychological rating forms and has been found to be a valid and reliable way to identify variation in five areas of thinking skills relevant to a range of psychological difficulties. The TSI is also brief and free, so it may be useful to screen for cognitive skill deficits when engaging in treatment planning and making referrals for further evaluation. See more about this research in our paper, “Reliability and validity of the Thinking Skills Inventory, a Screening Tool for Cross-Diagnostic Skill Deficits Underlying Youth Behavioral Challenges.”

You may also access the Thinking Skills Inventory (TSI), Research Version this is a likert-scale version of the skills assessment used in clinical practice.

Yes the CPS-AIM has been evaluated. s of the CPS-AIM: one for Parents, Educators, and Clinical Staff. Each CPS-AIM measures factors believed to be directly impacted by receiving CPS training, including adherence to the philosophy that ‘skill not will’ is the root of challenging behavior. The “User’s Guide to the Collaborative Problem Solving Adherence & Impact Measures (CPS-AIMs)” describes the psychometric properties of these measures, including reliability and validity.

Yes, there are two tools that can be used to assess Collaborative Problem Solving integrity, otherwise known as fidelity. When conducting research, we recommend the validated and published audio coding system called the Collaborative Problem Solving Manualized Expert-Rated Integrity Coding System (CPS-MEtRICS). In service settings, we recommend using the shorter CPS-Practice Integrity Form (CPS-PIF), which you can read about in our article “Pragmatic Fidelity Measurement in Youth Service Settings.”

Think:Kids follows the latest research in implementation science to help inform and direct our work implementing Collaborative Problem Solving in schools, therapeutic, residential, and various other settings. For instance, our article “The Value of Implementation Frameworks” describes how we use Active Implementation Frameworks to help guide the implementation of Collaborative Problem Solving throughout an entire system.

Evaluating the impact of Collaborative Problem Solving in your organization:

As part of an organization-wide implementation of Collaborative Problem Solving, Think:Kids will fully support your organization in evaluating the impact of the approach. We will help you identify key areas of impact, select measures, plan data collection, and analyze results, providing annual reports to guide decision-making. For more information on organization-wide implementation, contact us.

If your organization is learning Collaborative Problem Solving but is not currently engaged with us in an organization-wide implementation plan, we recommend Chapter 8 of the book Collaborative Problem Solving, An Evidence-Based Approach to Implementation and Practice for planning your evaluation of impact.

Conducting academic research:

We sometimes collaborate with academics and service providers to answer important, generalizable questions about Collaborative Problem Solving. Contact the research team (ThinkKidsResearch@Partners.org) if you are a student, faculty, or service provider with a research idea or a desire to collaborate.