2007
DOI: 10.1002/pits.20237
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Experimental control and threats to internal validity of concurrent and nonconcurrent multiple baseline designs

Abstract: Single-case research designs are often applied within school psychology. This article provides a critical review of the scientific merit of both concurrent and nonconcurrent multiple baseline (MB) designs, relative to their capacity to assess threats of internal validity and establish experimental control. Distinctions are established between AB replications and nonconcurrent multiple baseline designed studies using the initial conception proposed by P.J. Watson and E.A. Workman (1981). Despite some previously… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
103
0
15

Year Published

2009
2009
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 130 publications
(119 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
1
103
0
15
Order By: Relevance
“…A nonconcurrent multiple baseline design (Watson & Workman, 1981) was employed that allowed participating children to begin the study immediately after they were assessed. Although slightly less robust than a concurrent baseline, the establishment of all baseline durations before the beginning of data collection combined with a random assignment of participants strengthens the potential to demonstrate experimental control (Christ, 2007).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…A nonconcurrent multiple baseline design (Watson & Workman, 1981) was employed that allowed participating children to begin the study immediately after they were assessed. Although slightly less robust than a concurrent baseline, the establishment of all baseline durations before the beginning of data collection combined with a random assignment of participants strengthens the potential to demonstrate experimental control (Christ, 2007).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…External event effects are common in SSEDs because single-case researchers often implement these kinds of designs in everyday scenarios where they cannot control for outside factors (Christ, 2007;Kratochwill et al, 2010;Shadish et al, 2002). External events are not always anticipated by researchers, and thus, they may not be measured during the conduct of the study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These external event effects are common in SSEDs, because practitioners often implement these designs in their everyday setting (for example, in the home, school, etc. ), where they cannot control for outside experimental factors (Christ, 2007;Kratochwill et al, 2010;Shadish, Cook, & Campbell, 2002). If we do not model these external events, the results might be biased.…”
Section: Correcting Effect Sizes For External Eventsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Watson and Workman (1981) and Christ (2007) recommend the use of randomly preassigned baseline durations to improve the internal validity of nonconcurrent multiple-baseline designs; a potential drawback of this method is that responding may not be stable on a given baseline prior to the predetermined introduction of an intervention.…”
Section: Experimental Designmentioning
confidence: 99%