Abstract
In this special section of Perspectives on Behavior Science, Slocum et al. (2022) provide a summary of the logic and protocol for the construction, implementation, and analysis of single-case multiple-baseline designs. A major contribution of this article is a reassessment of the nonconcurrent multiple baseline design as a credible approach to documenting experimental control. In this commentary we provide considerations for readers as they approach the Slocum et al. article and suggest that although the resurrection of nonconcurrent multiple-baseline designs to a higher status is warranted, researchers will find more control for threats to internal validity in concurrent multiple-baseline designs, and the concurrent format should remain the preferred option.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Levin, J. R., & Kratochwill, T. R. (2021). Randomized single-case intervention designs and analyses for health sciences researchers: A versatile clinical trials companion. Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science, 55(4), 755–764.
Slocum, T. A., Pinkelman, S. E., Joslyn, P. R., & Nichols, B. (2022). Threats to internal validity in multiple-baseline design variations. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-022-00326-1
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge and extend appreciation to Dr. Thomas R. Kratochwill for his comments on early drafts of this commentary.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
We have no known conflict of interest to disclose.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Horner, R.H., Machalicek, W. Honoring Uncontrolled Events: Commentary on Slocum et al.. Perspect Behav Sci 45, 639–645 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-022-00345-y
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-022-00345-y