The purpose of this review was to identify and compare methodological components of preference displacement research and outcomes. We coded, categorized, and defined patterns of preference displacement for a total of 133 participants across 10 studies. We found that patterns of displacement differed within and across studies, and over 46% of participants did not engage in patterns of displacement. Therefore, the commonly held notion that edible stimuli are more likely to displace tangible stimuli is not as ubiquitous as once thought. However, due to considerable variation in methodology and reporting across reviewed studies, it is difficult to determine what variables may be responsible for obtained study outcomes. We conclude that future researchers consider the importance of each methodological variable coded in our review, and make methodological decisions in the context of the research question they are looking to answer. We also provide additional suggestions for future research and clinical practice.

中文翻译：

---

偏好置换研究的方法论综述

这篇综述的目的是确定和比较偏好置换研究和结果的方法学组成部分。我们对10项研究中的133名参与者进行了编码，分类和定义的偏好置换模式。我们发现研究中和研究之间的置换模式不同，并且超过46％的参与者没有参与置换模式。因此，普遍认为可食刺激物更可能取代有形刺激物的观念并不像曾经想像的那样普遍存在。但是，由于所审查研究的方法和报告存在很大差异，因此很难确定哪些变量可能导致获得的研究结果。我们得出的结论是，未来的研究人员会考虑我们的评论中编码的每个方法变量的重要性，并根据他们要回答的研究问题做出方法上的决策。我们还为将来的研究和临床实践提供其他建议。