An Exploratory Analysis of Quality Indicators in Adapted Alternating Treatments Designs

Abstract

The single-case adapted alternating treatments design allows for an experimental comparison between two independent variables applied across two equally difficult, yet functionally independent, dependent variables. The design has been used prominently within the special education and behavior analysis literature since its inception. Despite its history and continued use, there are currently no formalized quality standards specific to the adapted alternating treatments design. Given the rise of evidence-based practices and the increased number of organizations developing quality and rigor standards, a discussion and evaluation of quality indicators specific to adapted alternating treatments designs is warranted. We provide an overview of quality indicators and examine their prevalence over the years within a subset of studies commonly incorporating the adapted alternating treatments design. Implications for researchers who use the design and organizations that develop standards for single-case research are discussed. Copies of coding tables and syntax in Microsoft Excel and SPSS formats may be obtained via Open Science Framework at https://osf.io/guw6h/ .

Dialogic Reading for Comprehension: effects on children's story retelling - a case report

“…All subsequent analyses were done by the first author and reviewed by the second author. 28 ). In this way, each participant went through Baseline (BL) and three variations of DRC.…”

Estimating the Impact of Design Standards on the Rigor of a Subset of Single-Case Research

“…Regarding accessibility of data, Shepley and colleagues' data set is publicly available on Open Science Framework. Finally, the data set contains a relatively large number of studies with significant covariance present in the data, thus allowing for methods of analysis that better account for bias than the procedures used in previous studies examining rigor in single-case research (e.g., chi-square tests [Burns et al, 2012]; ordinary least squares [OLS] regression [Shepley et al, 2020]). To form variables for our analyses, we extracted relevant information from Shepley and colleagues' Microsoft Excel and SPSS tables.…”

“…As the complexity of SCDs increase, guidance is also needed to evaluate the rigor of complex and combination designs. Evaluations and comparisons of research-based practices are conducted in the context of complex SCDs such as adapted alternating treatments designs (Shepley et al, 2020). Comparing the efficiency of two effective interventions (e.g., Swain et al, 2015) allows for the refinement of research-based practices given the context, participants, and behaviors of interest.…”

“…Comparing the efficiency of two effective interventions (e.g., Swain et al, 2015) allows for the refinement of research-based practices given the context, participants, and behaviors of interest. However, standards for evaluating the rigor of comparison designs are consistently absent from quality frameworks (Shepley et al, 2020). Furthermore, standards are also absent for combination designs that may evaluate the effectiveness of interventions while simultaneously comparing their efficiency such as adapted alternating treatments designs embedded in multiple probe designs (Ledford et al, 2018).…”

“…Furthermore, given mandates within IDEA 2004 dictating that teachers use research-based practices, an increase in the rigor of single-case research would allow for improved confidence in outcomes by practitioners and administrators selecting practices for use in educational settings. Empirical research on trends in the rigor of single-case research have either focused on designs for which there are no established standards (adapted alternating treatments design; Shepley et al, 2020) or time periods that barely extend past the creation of WWC single-case standards (Burns et al, 2012). Therefore, the purpose of this study is to (a) examine the trend in the rigor of SCD studies over time and (b) analyze the impact of WWC SCD standards on the rigor of singlecase research.…”