At a time when the emphasis on accountability has never been greater, single-case designs can provide invaluable assistance to those caring for the developmentally disabled. While there are many types of single-case designs that can be used to collect accurate information regarding the quality of services, the present article is restricted to a consideration of multiple-baseline and multiple-probe designs. Although certain assessment and evaluation conditions might make different single-case designs more appropriate, the inherent flexibility of multiple-baseline and multiple-probe designs gives them greater potential for educational and treatment settings. Both designs are described, illustrated, and discussed. Practical and statistical criteria for assessing the significance of changes in behavior are presented.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allen, G.Case Study: Implementation of behavior modification techniques in summer camp settings. Behavior Therapy, 1973 , 4, 570-575.
2.
Barton, E. S., Guess, D., Garcia, E., & Baer, D. M. Improvement of retardates' mealtime behaviors by timeout procedures using multiple baseline techniques. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1970, 3, 77-84.
3.
Campbell, D., & Stanley J.Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1970.
4.
Carroll, S., Sloop, E., Mutter, S., & Prince, P.The elimination of chronic clothes ripping in retarded people through a combination of procedures. Mental Retardation, 1978, 16, 246-249.
5.
Frisch, S. A., & Schumaker, J.B.Training generalized receptive prepositions in retarded children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis , 1974, 7, 611-621.
6.
Gruber, B., Reeser, R., & Reid, D.Providing a less restrictive environment for profoundly retarded persons by teaching independent walking skills. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1979, 12, 285-297.
7.
Hersen, M., & Barlow, D.Single case experimental designs: Strategies for studying behavior change . New York: Pergamon Press , 1976.
8.
Horner, R., & Baer, D.Multiple-probe technique: A variation of the multiple baseline. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1978, 11, 189-196.
9.
Horner, R. D., & Keilitz, I.Training mentally retarded adolescents to brush their teeth. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1975, 8, 301-309.
10.
Johnson, R., Gross, J., & Weatherman, R.The right to an education mandate. Minneapolis : University of Minnesota Press , 1974.
11.
Jones, R., Vaught, R., & Weinrott, M.Time series analysis in operant research. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1977, 10, 151-166.
12.
Kazdin, A.Statistical analysis for single-case experimental designs. In M. Hersen & D. Barlow (Eds.), Single case experimental designs: Strategies for studying behavior change. New York: Pergamon Press, 1976.
13.
Kazdin, A.Methodological and interpretive problems of single-case experimental designs . Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1978, 46, 629-642.
14.
Kazdin, A., & Kopel, S.On resolving ambiguities in the multiple baseline design: Problems and recommendations . Behavior Therapy, 1975 , 6, 601-608.
15.
Long, J. D., & Williams, R.L.The comparative effectiveness of group and individually contingent free time with inner-city junior high school students . Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1973 , 6, 465-474.
16.
Lutzker, J., & Sherman, J.Producing generative sentence usage by imitation and reinforcement procedures . Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1974 , 7, 447-460.
17.
Martin, R.Legal challenges to behavior modification. Champaign, Ill. : Research Press, 1975.
18.
Michael, J.Statistical inference for single organism research: Mixed blessing or curse ? Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1974 , 7, 647-653.
19.
Murphy, R., Doughty, N., & Nunes, D.Multielement designs: An alternative to reversal and multiple baseline evaluation strategies. Mental Retardation, 1979, 17, 23-27.
20.
Murphy, R., Nunes, D., & Hutchings-Ruprecht, M.Reduction of stereotyped behavior in profoundly retarded individuals. American Journal of Mental Deficiency , 1977, 82, 238-246.
21.
Nietzel, M., Winett, R., MacDonald, M., & Davidson, W.Behavioral approaches to community psychology. New York : Pergamon Press, 1977.
22.
Nunes, D., Murphy, R., & Ruprecht, M.Reducing self-injurious behavior of severely retarded individuals through withdrawal of reinforcement procedures. Behavior Modification , 1977, 1, 499-516.
23.
Panyon, M., Boozer, H., & Morris, N.Feedback to attendants as a reinforcer for applying operant techniques . Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1970 , 3, 1-4.
24.
Reid, D., & Hurlbut, B.Teaching non-vocal communication skills to multi-handicapped retarded adults . Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1977 , 10, 591-603.
25.
Revusky, S.Some statistical treatments compatible with individual organism methodology . Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 1967, 10, 319-330.
26.
Russo, D. C., & Koegel, R.L.A method for integrating an autistic child into a normal public-school classroom. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1977, 10, 579-590.
27.
Stokes, T., & Baer, D.An implicit technology of generalization. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1977, 10, 349- 367.
28.
Sulzer-Azaroff, B., & Mayer, G.Applying behavior analysis procedures with children and youth. New York: Holt, 1977 .
29.
Wolf, M., & Risley, T.Reinforcement: Applied research. In R. Glaser (Ed.), The nature of reinforcement. New York: Academic Press, 1971.
