The non-concurrent multiple baseline across-individuals design: An extension of the traditional multiple baseline design

Watson, P. J.; Workman, Edward A.

doi:10.1016/0005-7916(81)90055-0

Cited by 359 publications

(270 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

246

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A nonconcurrent multiple baseline design (Watson and Workman, 1981) across staff members was used to evaluate staff performance and acquisition. Each multiple baseline design consisted of three staff members from a given group (i.e., undergraduate or graduate student group).…”

Section: Experimental Design and Dependent Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing Procedures to Improve Therapist–Child Rapport in Early Intervention

Lugo

King

Lamphere

et al. 2017

Behav Analysis Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rapport is a primary component in the development of a therapeutic relationship between health-service professionals and clients. Presession pairing is a procedure often recommended in behavior analytic practice to build rapport with clients. However, many service providers may not exhibit presession pairing skills correctly or at a sufficient rate. The current study aimed to operationally define therapist behaviors that are indicative of presession pairing and to train direct care staff to implement said skills.

show abstract

Section: Experimental Design and Dependent Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing Procedures to Improve Therapist–Child Rapport in Early Intervention

Lugo

King

Lamphere

et al. 2017

Behav Analysis Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A nonconcurrent multiple-probe design (Watson and Workman 1981) was used to evaluate the effects of the independent variable on the onset of naming. Each participant was exposed to the following sequence of phases (see Table 3): (a) pretests for naming under a joint attention condition (JAC) and an incidental condition (IC) for set 1a and set 1b stimuli (see Table 1), (b) an assessment of relative preference for visual and auditory stimuli, (c) pairing of either visual or auditory stimuli with reinforcers if necessary (phase 1 of the intervention), (d) a repeated preference assessment, (e) pairing of visual and auditory stimuli (phase 2 of the intervention) immediately followed by probes for emergent tacts of the visual stimuli, (f) posttests for naming under JAC and IC for set 1a and set 1b stimuli, and (g) posttests for naming under JAC and IC with novel sets: set 2a and set 2b stimuli (see Table 1).…”

Section: Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is the Source of Reinforcement for Naming Multiple Conditioned Reinforcers for Observing Responses?

Longano

Greer

2014

Analysis Verbal Behav

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Naming refers to the incidental acquisition of word-object relations as listener and speaker without explicit reinforcement. To investigate possible sources of reinforcement for naming, we examined the effects of a procedure for conditioning reinforcement for observing responses on the emergence of naming in children who previously lacked it. The participants were three 5-to 7-year-old children with and without diagnoses of autism spectrum disorder. During the intervention, either visual or auditory stimuli were first conditioned as reinforcers for observing responses. Then, neutral visual or auditory stimuli were paired with the conditioned visual or auditory stimuli until both visual and auditory stimuli acquired reinforcing properties for observing. Following this intervention, the participants demonstrated naming of stimuli that had been used in pretests for naming, as well as on a novel set of stimuli. We observed increases in echoic responding in conjunction with the emergence of naming and conditioned reinforcement for both observing responses. We interpret the data as suggesting that listener and speaker repertoires are joined for naming only when both visual and auditory stimuli reinforce the observing responses of looking and listening simultaneously.

show abstract

“…Our initial study using LSVT LOUD with fi ve children (aged 5 -7) who had dysarthria secondary to spastic quadriplegia-type CP involved a multiple baseline, single-subject experimental design (Barlow & Hersen, 1984;Watson and Workman, 1981). The goal was to test the presence of a therapeutic effect immediately following and 6-weeks after LSVT LOUD (Fox & Boliek, 2012;Robey, 2004).…”

Section: Summary Of Current Data Of Lsvt Loud In Children With Cp Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

Individual and environmental contributions to treatment outcomes following a neuroplasticity-principled speech treatment (LSVT LOUD) in children with dysarthria secondary to cerebral palsy: A case study review

Boliek

Fox

2014

International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The non-concurrent multiple baseline across-individuals design: An extension of the traditional multiple baseline design

Cited by 359 publications

References 2 publications

Developing Procedures to Improve Therapist–Child Rapport in Early Intervention

Developing Procedures to Improve Therapist–Child Rapport in Early Intervention

Is the Source of Reinforcement for Naming Multiple Conditioned Reinforcers for Observing Responses?

Individual and environmental contributions to treatment outcomes following a neuroplasticity-principled speech treatment (LSVT LOUD) in children with dysarthria secondary to cerebral palsy: A case study review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About