Single-case comparative studies could help identify efficient instructional procedures for individuals with disabilities. However, previous literature reported inconsistent efficiency results if multiple comparisons were conducted, indicating that within-participant replication was uncommon. In this review, we examined single-case comparative studies with multiple within-participant comparisons and identified the arrangements that may be related to within-participant replication. We performed a multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression analysis to assess the association between different arrangements and consistent efficiency results between the comparisons. We found that some arrangements, such as random assignment of targets and a combination of random assignment and equating procedure, appear more predictive of within-participant replication.
AkaikeH. (1974). A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 19(6), 716–723. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAC.1974.1100705
2.
BartonE. E.Meadan-KaplanskyH.LedfordJ. R. (2018). Independent variables, fidelity, and social validity. In GastD. L.LedfordJ. R. (Eds.), Single case research methodology: Applications in special education and behavioral sciences (3rd ed., pp. 133–156). Routledge.
3.
BatesD.MächlerM.BolkerB.WalkerS. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
4.
BurnsM. K.VanDerHeydenA. M.JibanC. L. (2006). Assessing the instructional level for mathematics: A comparison of methods. School Psychology Review, 35(3), 401–418. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2006.12087975
5.
CariveauT.BatchelderS.BallS.La Cruz MontillaA. (2021). Review of methods to equate target sets in the adapted alternating treatments design. Behavior Modification, 45(5), 695–714. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445520903049
6.
CariveauT.HelveyC. I.MoseleyT. K.HesterJ. (2022). Equating and assigning targets in the adapted alternating treatments design: Review of special education journals. Remedial and Special Education, 43(1), 58–71. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932521996071
7.
CarrollR. A.JoachimB. T.St PeterC. C.RobinsonN. (2015). A comparison of error-correction procedures on skill acquisition during discrete-trial instruction. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 48(2), 257–273. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.205
8.
CarrollR. A.OwsianyJ.CheathamJ. M. (2018). Using an abbreviated assessment to identify effective error-correction procedures for individual learners during discrete-trial instruction. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 51(3), 482–501. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.460
9.
ChowJ. C.HamptonL. H. (2022). A systematic review of sequential multiple-assignment randomized trials in educational research. Educational Psychology Review, 34, 1343–1369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-022-09660-x
10.
FabrigarL. R.WegenerD. T.PettyR. E. (2020). A validity-based framework for understanding replication in psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 24(4), 316–344. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868320931366
11.
FullerJ. L.FienupD. M. (2018). A preliminary analysis of mastery criterion level: Effects on response maintenance. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 11(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-017-0201-0
12.
GastD. L.WoleryM. (1988). Parallel treatments design: A nested single subject design for comparing instructional procedures. Education and Treatment of Children, 11(3), 270–285.
13.
HolcombeA.WoleryM.GastD. L. (1994). Comparative single-subject research: Description of designs and discussion of problems. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 14(1), 119–145. https://doi.org/10.1177/027112149401400111
14.
JohnstonJ. M. (1988). Strategic and tactical limits of comparison studies. The Behavior Analyst, 11(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03392448
15.
JonesK. M.WickstromK. F.NoltemeyerA. L.BrownS. M.SchukaJ. R.TherrienW. J. (2009). An experimental analysis of reading fluency. Journal of Behavioral Education, 18(1), 35–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-009-9082-9
16.
KasariC.ShireS.ShihW.AlmirallD. (2021). Getting SMART about social skills interventions for students with ASD in inclusive classrooms. Exceptional Children, 88(1), 26–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029211007148
17.
KazdinA. E. (2011). Single-case research designs: Methods for clinical and applied settings (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
18.
KirbyM. S.SpencerT. D.FerronJ. (2021). How to be RAD: Repeated acquisition design features that enhance internal and external validity. Perspectives on Behavior Science, 44(2–3), 389–416. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-021-00301-2
19.
KodakT.HalburM. (2021). A tutorial for the design and use of assessment-based instruction in practice. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 14(1), 166–180. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-020-00497-w
20.
LedfordJ. R. (2018). No randomization? No problem: Experimental control and random assignment in single case research. American Journal of Evaluation, 39(1), 71–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214017723110
21.
LedfordJ. R.ChazinK. T.GagnonK. L.LordA. K.TurnerV. R.ZimmermanK. N. (2021). A systematic review of instructional comparisons in single-case research. Remedial and Special Education, 42(3), 155–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932519855059
22.
LedfordJ. R.GastD. L. (2018). Single case research methodology: Applications in special education and behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Routledge.
23.
LedfordJ. R.WoleryM. (2013). Peer modeling of academic and social behaviors during small-group direct instruction. Exceptional Children, 79(4), 439–458. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291307900404
24.
McComasJ. J.BurnsM. K. (2009). Brief experimental analyses of academic performance: Introduction to the special series. Journal of Behavioral Education, 18(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-009-9078-5
25.
McGhanA. C.LermanD. C. (2013). An assessment of error-correction procedures for learners with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 46(3), 626–639. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.65
26.
MoherD.LiberatiA.TetzlaffJ.AltmanD. G. & The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLOS Medicine, 6(7), Article e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
27.
NakagawaS.SchielzethH. (2013). A general and simple method for obtaining R2 from generalized linear mixed-effects models. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 4(2), 133–142. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-210x.2012.00261.x
28.
ReichowB.BartonE. E.MagginD. M. (2018). Development and applications of the single-case design risk of bias tool for evaluating single-case design research study reports. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 79, 53–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2018.05.008
29.
RumbergerR. W. (1995). Dropping out of middle school: A multilevel analysis of students and schools. American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 583–625. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312032003583
30.
ShabaniD. B.LamW. Y. (2013). A review of comparison studies in applied behavior analysis. Behavioral Interventions, 28(2), 158–183. https://doi.org/10.1002/bin.1361
31.
ShadishW. R.ZelinskyN. A. M.VeveaJ. L.KratochwillT. R. (2016). A survey of publication practices of single-case design researchers when treatments have small or large effects. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 49(3), 656–673. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.308
32.
SindelarP. T.RosenbergM. S.WilsonR. J. (1985). An adapted alternating treatments design for instructional research. Education and Treatment of Children, 8(1), 67–76. https://doi.org/10.1002/bin.1865
SzumilasM. (2010). Explaining odds ratios. Journal of the Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 19(3), 227–229.
35.
VanDerHeydenA. M.BurnsM. K. (2009). Performance indicators in math: Implications for brief experimental analysis of academic performance. Journal of Behavioral Education, 18(1), 71–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-009-9081-x
36.
WoleryM.DoyleP. M.AultM. J.GastD. L.MeyerS.StinsonD. (1991). Effects of presenting incidental information in consequent events on future learning. Journal of Behavioral Education, 1(1), 79–104. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00956755
37.
WoleryM.GastD. L.LedfordJ. R. (2018). Comparison designs. In GastD. L.LedfordJ. R. (Eds.), Single case research methodology: Applications in special education and behavioral sciences (3rd ed., pp. 283–334). Routledge.
38.
WongK. K.FienupD. M.RichlingS. M.KeenA.MackayK. (2022). Systematic review of acquisition mastery criteria and statistical analysis of associations with response maintenance and generalization. Behavioral Interventions, 37(4), 993–1012. https://doi.org/10.1002/bin.1885
39.
WuS.CrespiC. M.WongW. K. (2012). Comparison of methods for estimating the intraclass correlation coefficient for binary responses in cancer prevention cluster randomized trials. Contemporary Clinical Trials, 33(5), 869–880. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cct.2012.05.004
40.
YuanC.ZhuJ. (2020). An evaluation of prompting procedures in error correction for children with autism. Behavioral Interventions, 35(4), 581–594. https://doi.org/10.1002/bin.1733
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
