Single Subject Research (Richards et al.

)
Chapter 10
 Alternating Treatments
with
No Baseline Design

Caldwell, M. L., Taylor, R. L., & Bloom, S. R. (1986). An

investigation of the use of high- and low-preference
food as a reinforcer for increased activity of
individuals with Prader-Willi syndrome. Journal of
Mental Deficiency Research, 9, 347-354.
Feature description
Type of Design Alternating treatments with no
baseline
Goal of study Determine effectiveness of using food
reinforcers to increase activity level
Subject Eleven adolescents and young adults
with Prader-Willi syndrome
Setting Residential summer program on
university campus
Dependent variable Activity units (20 min of exercise = one
activity unit)
Independent variable High- and low-preference foods
Results and outcomes High-preference foods were effective in
increasing activity in 5 of the 11
subjects; no or unclear effects were
found in 4 subjects; 2 subjects showed
increases under high- and low-
preference food conditions
 No Baseline Design
Why use an Alternating Treatments with no Baseline
design for this study?
There was a limited number of days to conduct this study
(It was a summer camp).
The clinical importance of having the subjects increase
their activity level was evident. So the design permits
researchers to begin their treatments immediately.
However, a no-treatment condition was included as one of
the alternating treatments to help determine the relative
efficacy of the two food reinforcement conditions, due to
conflicting reports about the food preferences in this
population.
Limitations of the Study
This study, using multiple subjects confounded the
overall results because there was not a consistent
pattern across all subjects (three of the subjects did
not respond to any of the three treatment conditions,
attributed to lower IQs and lack of discrimination
among treatments).
 Baseline Followed
by
Alternating Treatments Design

Weismer, S. E., Murray-Branch, J., & Miller, J. (1993).

Comparison of two methods for promoting
productive vocabulary in late talkers. Journal of
Speech and Hearing Research, 36, 1037-1050.
Feature description
Type of Design Baseline followed by alternating treatments
Goal of study Determine effectiveness of modeling
procedures to increase vocabulary in young
children
Subject Two boys and one girl ranging in age from 27
to 28 months who had very limited
expressive vocabularies
Setting Unspecified
Dependent variable I) Frequency of targeted words; (2) number
of different words produced; (3) number of
targeted words acquired
Independent variable Modeling alone and modeling plus evoked
production; a no-treatment condition was
also used
Results and outcomes Equivocal results, with each subject
responding differently
 Baseline Followed
by Alternating Treatments
 The three conditions (modeling, modeling plus evoked production, and
approximation) were presented in semi-random order, making sure that
no more than three sessions of any one type occurred consecutively.
 The initial order of treatments was also counterbalanced across
subjects.
 No baseline data were collected for the group instruction.
Why use a baseline followed by treatments design for this study?
 Although baseline data are not required in an alternating treatments
design, they collected them for the individual sessions to “further
document the lack of target vocabulary in the child’s repertoire before
teaching” (p. 1040).
 Withdrawal design hasn’t been used, because it s anticipated and
educationally desirable that the subjects retain the vocabulary words
once they learn them.
Limitations of the Study
The results were inconsistent with those in previous
research.
The researchers did not make specific
recommendations.
But the authors did provide cogent arguments for the
presence of specific subject characteristics, such as
learning style and personality factors, that might
differentially affect response to treatments.
 Baseline Followed by
Alternating Treatments and
a Final Treatment Phase Design

Singh, N., & Winton, A. (1985). Controlling pica by

components of an overcorrection procedure.
American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 90,40-45.
Feature description
Type of Design Baseline followed by alternating
treatments with a final treatment phase
Goal of study Determine if individual components of
a multi-component intervention
procedure would reduce the frequency
of pica
Subject Two adults with profound mental
retardation with a history of pica
Setting Three separate rooms in an institution
Dependent Variables Frequency of pica (# of incidents per
minute)
Independent Variables Three components of an overcorrection
procedure—tidying, oral hygiene,
personal hygiene
Results and outcomes oral hygiene was the most effective; its
use was effective across settings and
therapists
 Baseline-Alternating Treatments-
A Final Treatment Phase
 In the alternating treatments phase each of the three treatments was
randomly assigned to each setting on a daily basis.
 The final phase involved using only the most effective treatment but with
different therapists.
Why use a baseline followed by alternating treatments and a final
treatment phase design for this study?
 Baseline data were collected to strengthen the study by showing the
rates before treatment sessions began.
 The use of alternating treatments, particularly across the three settings,
allowed each component to be evaluated with a minimum of sequence
effects.
 The last two phases were included both to test for maintenance and
generalization and to leave the subjects with a reduced rate of pica.
 The single-component/most effective treatment phase also helped
demonstrate that the results were not affected by multiple treatment
interference.
Limitations of the Study
The design did not allow for the demonstration that
the subjects would return to baseline levels if the
treatments were withdrawn.
Suggestion:
No-treatment condition in the alternating treatments
phase would have addressed that concern.
However, it was more clinically appropriate to focus
on the actual treatment conditions.