The purpose of this study was to examine utility of a brief experimental analysis (BEA) in determining effective sight word interventions for a student with a history of difficulty with acquiring sight word recognition. Ten interventions were compared in a BEA. Following the BEA, an extended analysis was conducted that compared the two most effective interventions (from the BEA) with a control condition. Even though the BEA found two interventions to be relatively equal, one of the two interventions resulted in acquisition in half the sessions as the other intervention and this was replicated in a second extended analysis. Implications for BEA and recommendations for future research are discussed.
Belfiore, P.J., Grskovic, J.A., Murphy, A.M., & Zentall, S.S. ( 1996). The effects of antecedent color on reading for students with learning disabilities and co-occurring attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29, 432-438.
2.
Browder, D.M., & Xin, Y.P. ( 1998). A meta-analysis and review of sight word research and its implications for teaching functional reading to individuals with moderate and severe disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 32, 130-153.
3.
Burns, M.K., Ganuza, Z.M., & London, R.M. ( 2009). Brief experimental analysis of written letter formation: Single-case demonstration. Journal of Behavioral Education , 18, 20-34.
4.
Burns, M.K., & Wagner, D. ( 2008). Determining an effective intervention within a brief experimental analysis for reading: A meta-analytic review. School Psychology Review, 37, 126-136.
5.
Codding, R.S., Baglici, S., Gottesman, D., Johnson, M., Kert, A.S., & Lebeouf, P. ( 2009). Selecting intervention strategies: Using brief experimental analysis for mathematics problems. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 25, 146-168.
6.
Collins, B.C., Evans, A., Creech-Galloway, C., Karl, J., & Miller, A. ( 2007). Comparison of the acquisition and maintenance of teaching functional and core content sight words in special and general education settings . Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 22, 220-233.
7.
Daly, E.J., III, Bonfiglio, C.M., Mattson, T., Persampieri, M., & Forman-Yates, K. (2006). Refining the experimental analysis of academic skill deficits: Part II. Use of brief experimental analysis to evaluate reading fluency treatments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 39, 323-331.
8.
Daly, E.J., III, Johnson, S., & LeClair, C. ( 2009). An experimental analysis of phoneme blending and segmenting skills. Journal of Behavioral Education, 18, 5-19.
9.
Daly, E.J., III, Lentz, F.E., & Boyer, J. ( 1996). The instructional hierarchy: A conceptual model for understanding the effective component of reading interventions. School Psychology Quarterly, 11, 369-386.
10.
Daly, E.J., III, Martens, B.K., Hamler, K.R., Dool, E.J., & Eckert, T.L. ( 1999). A brief experimental analysis for identifying instructional components needed to improve oral reading fluency. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 32, 83-94.
11.
Didden, R., de Graaff, S., Nelemans, M., Vooren, M., & Lancioni, G. ( 2006). Teaching sight words to children with moderate to mild mental retardation: Comparison between instructional procedures. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 111, 357-365.
12.
Eckert, T.L., Ardoin, S.P., Daisey, D.M., & Scarola, M.D. ( 2000). Empirically evaluating the effectiveness of reading interventions: The use of brief experimental analysis and single case designs. Psychology in the Schools, 37, 463-473.
13.
Ferkis, M.A., Belfiore, P.J., & Skinner, C.H. ( 1997). The effects of responses repetitions on sight word acquisition for students with mild disabilities. Journal of Behavioral Education, 7, 307-324.
14.
Fossett, B., & Mirenda, P. ( 2006). Sight word reading in children with developmental disabilities: A comparison of paired associate and picture-to-text matching instruction . Research in Developmental Disabilities, 27, 411-429.
15.
Gortmaker, V.J., Daly, E.J., III, McCurdy, M., Persampieri, M.J., & Hergenrader, M. (2007). Improving reading outcomes for children with learning disabilities: Using brief experimental analysis to develop parent-tutoring interventions. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 40, 203-221.
16.
Hayes, S.C., Barlow, D.H., & Nelson-Gray, R.O. (1999). The scientist practitioner: Research and accountability in the age of managed care (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
17.
Martens, B.K., Eckert, T.L., Bradley, T.A., & Ardoin, S.P. ( 1999). Identifying effective treatments from a brief experimental analysis: Using single-case design elements to aid decision making. School Psychology Quarterly, 14, 163-181.
18.
Martin, G., & Pear, J. ( 1996). Behavior modification: What is it and how to do it (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
19.
McComas, J.J., Wacker, D.P., Cooper, L.J., Asmus, J.M., Richman, D., & Stoner, B. ( 1996). Brief experimental analysis of stimulus prompts for academic tasks in an outpatient clinic. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29, 397-401.
20.
Shapiro, E.S. ( 2004). Academic skills problems: Workbook (rev. ed.). New York, NY: Guilford.
21.
Shinn, M.R. ( 2002). Best practices in using curriculum-based measurement in a problem-solving model. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (4th ed., pp. 671-698). Bethesda, MD: National Association for School Psychologists .
22.
VanAuken, T.L., Chafouleas, S.M., Bradley, T.A., & Martens, B.K. ( 2002). Using brief experimental analysis to selectoral reading interventions: An investigation of treatment utility. Journal of Behavioral Education, 11, 163-179.
23.
Welsch, R.G. ( 2007). Using experimental analysis to determine interventions for reading fluency and recalls of students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30, 115-129.
24.
Wilber, A., & Cushman, T. ( 2006). Selecting effective academic interventions: An example using brief experimental analysis for oral reading. Psychology in the Schools, 43, 79-84.
