The ability of educators to identify consequences that act as reinforcers may predict the success of behavior change strategies predicated on the use of reinforcement. Supported for individuals with severe disabilities, research concerning the effectiveness of choice-stimulus assessment for students with emotional disturbance (ED) remains limited. The current study evaluated the effectiveness of brief multiple-stimulus without replacement (MSWO) procedures in identifying reinforcers for three elementary students with or at risk for ED. The study compared the effects of MSWO and vocal nomination of preferences on the use of cover, copy, and compare (CCC)--an evidence-based math facts acquisition strategy--using an alternating treatments design. Additional analyses concerned the correspondence between assessments. The stability of the MSWO and vocal nomination assessments was also assessed. Results indicated that the MSWO assessment identified effective reinforcers for students at risk for ED and generated more consistent findings than vocal nomination. In one of three cases, the reinforcers identified by the MSWO assessment resulted in more frequent use of CCC than nominated reinforcers. Directions for future research and implications follow a discussion of findings.