Single‐case experimental designs: Characteristics, changes, and challenges

Abstract

Tactics of Scientific Research (Sidman, 1960) provides a visionary treatise on single‐case designs, their scientific underpinnings, and their critical role in understanding behavior. Since the foundational base was provided, single‐case designs have proliferated especially in areas of application where they have been used to evaluate interventions with an extraordinary range of clients, settings, and target foci. This article highlights core features of single‐case experimental designs, how key and ancillary features of the designs have evolved, the special strengths of the designs, and challenges that have impeded their integration in many areas where their contributions are sorely needed. The article ends by placing the methodological approach in the context of other research traditions. In this way, the discussion moves from the specific designs toward foundations and philosophy of science issues in keeping with the strengths of the person and book we are honoring.

Leveraging applied behavior analysis research and practice in the service of public health

“…Directly observing behavior across time also permits new research designs for public health research that might be useful at the formative and even the dissemination stages of intervention development. Single-case experimental designs (SCEDs), the hallmark of behavior analysis research, entail repeated measurement and systematic introduction and removal of interventions or intervention components (Johnston & Pennypacker, 2009;Kazdin, 2020;Sidman, 1960). Such designs have a number of advantages over group designs in many situations (Barlow & Nock, 2009;Hagopian, 2020;Morgan & Morgan, 2001;Normand, 2016).…”

“…This can be a boon in emergency situations, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, where functional relations need to be identified quickly. Moreover, the use of SCEDs permits an iterative research process whereby changes can be made as circumstances dictate (e.g., systematically altering a seemingly ineffective intervention) while preserving experimental control (Kazdin, 2020).…”

“…Note: Some authors use terms such as N = 1, N-of-1, intrasubject, single-subject, or within-subject designs in lieu of SCED(Kazdin, 2020). Popular usage varies by field.Matthew P.Normand et al …”

Some Characteristics and Arguments in Favor of a Science of Machine Behavior Analysis

“…Most machines that engage in relevant behavior probably have their own idiosyncratic responding because they may have different initial conditions (e.g., random number matrices to initiate model), different histories of contact with their environment, or both. Thus, single-case methodology may play a central role in the development of the science (Kazdin, 2021 ). Single-case designs may not only facilitate within- and between-subject replications, but they may also examine idiosyncratic responding across machine subjects.…”

Structured visual analysis of single‐case experimental design data: Developments and technological advancements

“…Beyond interpretations made during visual analysis of data, ambiguity can also exist in the reporting or evaluation of these outcomes. Since the inception of the field, applied behavior analysts have vouched for a purely technological approach when describing behavioral procedures to improve dissemination and replication of findings (Baer et al 1968); however, structured guidelines have only more recently been adopted (Kazdin, 2021). Using Delphi surveying, Tate et al (2016) employed a group decision‐making tool among experts who use SCEDs to develop a consensus among a list of formal guidelines.…”