Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Believability When N = 1

  • Published:
The Psychological Record Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Despite an increasing interest in single-subject studies, stigmatic implications cloud the believability of ideographic (N=1) research. By comparing the assumptions of both nomothetic (large N) and ideographic research designs, a rationale for the acceptance of the results of single-subject research is proposed. The logic of experimentation, generation of the data, controls for internal and external validity, and the aspects of statistical manipulation are factors that affect all research. Believable answers to meaningful experimental questions may be generated when N=1, and it is the logic which underlies the experimental question which most clearly differentiates single-subject from group research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • ALLPORT, G. W. 1937. Pattern and growth in personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • BACHRACH, A. J. 1962. Psychological research. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • BAER, D. M., WOLF, M. M., & RISLEY, T. R. 1968. Some current dimensions of applied behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 91–97.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • BAKAN, D. 1966. The test of significance in psychological research. Psychological Bulletin, 66, 423–437.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • BENJAMIN, L. S. 1965. A special Latin square for the use of each subject “as his own control.” Psychometrika, 30, 499–513. Cited by R. M. Browning, 1967. A same-subject design for simultaneous comparison of three reinforcement contingencies. Behaviour Research & Therapy, 5, 237–243.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • BROWNING, R. M. 1967. A same-subject design for simultaneous comparison of three reinforcement contingencies. Behaviour Research & Therapy, 5, 237–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CAMPBELL, D. T., & STANLEY, J. C. 1963. Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • CHASSAN, J. B. 1961. Stochastic models of the single case as the basis of clinical research design. Behavioral Science, 6, 42–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • CHASSAN, J. B. 1967. Research design in clinical psychology and psychiatry. New York; Appleton-Century-Crofts.

    Google Scholar 

  • DUKES, W. F. 1965. N=1 Psychological Bulletin, 64, 74–79.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • EDGINGTON, E. S. 1966. Statistical inference and nonrandom samples. Psychological Bulletin, 66, 485–487.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • EDGINGTON, E. S. 1967. Statistical inference from N=1 experiments. The Journal of Psychology, 65, 195–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ESTES, W. K. 1956. The problem of inference from curves based on group data. Psychological Bulletin, 53, 134–140.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • GARRETT, H. E. 1958. Statistics in psychology and education. New York: Longmans, Green.

    Google Scholar 

  • GEPHART, W. J., & BARTOS, B. B. 1969. Profiling instructional package, #7 Occasional Paper, Phi Delta Kappa, Research Service Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • GENTILE, J. R., RODEN, A. H., & KLEIN, R. D. 1972. An analysis-of-variance model for the intrasubject replication design. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 5, 193–198.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • GURALNICK, M. J. 1973. A research-service model for support of handicapped children. Exceptional Children, 39, 277–282.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • HALL, R. V., CRISTLER, C, CRANSTON, S. S., & TUCKER, B. 1970. Teachers and parents as researchers using multiple baseline designs. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 3, 247–255.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • HARING, N. G., & PHILLIPS, E. L. 1962. Educating emotionally disturbed children. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • HYMAN, R. 1964. The nature of psychological inquiry. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • KERLINGER, F. N. 1964. Foundations of behavioral research. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • KOENIG, C. H. 1972. Charting the future course of behavior. Kansas City, Kan.: Precession Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • KRANTZ, D. L. 1971. The separate worlds of operant and non-operant psychology. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 4, 61–70.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • LYKKEN, D. T. 1968. Statistical significance in psychological research. Psychological Bulletin, 70, 151–157.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • MEEHL, P. E. 1954. Clinical versus statistical prediction. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • NUNNALLY, J. 1960. The place of statistics in psychology. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 641–650.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NUNNALLY, J. 1967. Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • ORNE, M. T. 1962. On the social psychology of the psychological experiment: With particular reference to demand characteristics and their implications. American Psychologist, 17, 776–783.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • PAUL, G. L. 1969. Behavior modification research: Design and tactics. In C. M. Franks (Ed.), Behavior therapy: Appraisal and status. New York: Mc-Graw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • PLATT, J. R. 1964. Strong inference. Science, 146, 347–353.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • REVUSKY, S. H. 1967. Some statistical treatments compatible with individual organism methodology. Journal of Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 10, 319–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ROSENTHAL, R. 1964. Experimenter outcome—orientation and the results of the psychological experiment. Psychological Bulletin, 51, 405–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ROSENTHAL, R. 1965. The volunteer subject. Human Relations, 18, 389–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ROZEBOOM, W. W. 1960. The fallacy of the null-hypothesis significance test. Psychological Bulletin, 57, 416–428.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • SHAPIRO, M. B. 1966. The single case in clinical-psychological research. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 74, 3–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SHINE, L. C., II, & BOWER, S. M. 1971. A one-way analysis of variance for single-subject designs. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 31, 105–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SIDMAN, M. 1952. A note on functional relations obtained from group data. Psychological Bulletin, 49, 263–269.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • SIDMAN, M. 1960. Tactics of scientific research. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • SIEGEL, S. 1956. Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • SKINNER, B. F. 1966. Operant behavior. In W. K. Honig (Ed.), Operant behavior: Areas of research and application. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

    Google Scholar 

  • TUKEY, J. W. 1960. Conclusions vs. decisions. Technometrics, 2, 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WHITE, O. R. 1971. Glossary of behavioral terminology. (2nd ed.) Champaign, Ill.: Research Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • WHITE, O. R. 1972. A manual for the calculation and use of the median slope— a technique of progress estimation and prediction in the single case. University of Oregon, Regional Resource Center for Handicapped Children, Working Paper No. 16, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • YATES, A. J. 1970. Behavior therapy. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Washington, 101 Miller Hall, DQ-12, Seattle, Washington, 98195, USA

    Eugene Edgar & Felix Billingsley

Authors
  1. Eugene Edgar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Felix Billingsley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Edgar, E., Billingsley, F. Believability When N = 1. Psychol Rec 24, 147–160 (1974). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03394229

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03394229

Search

Navigation