{"title":"Concurrence on Nonconcurrence in Multiple-Baseline Designs: A Commentary on Slocum et al. (2022).","authors":"Jennifer R Ledford","doi":"10.1007/s40614-022-00342-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Slocum et al. (this issue) provide well-reasoned arguments for the use of nonconcurrent multiple baseline designs in behavior analytic work, despite historical preference for concurrent designs (i.e., simultaneous baseline initiation) and contemporary guidelines in related fields suggesting that nonconcurrent designs are insufficient for evaluating functional relations (What Works Clearinghouse, 2020). I provide a commentary, highlighting major contributions of this article and suggesting areas of further consideration. In sum, I agree with authors that researchers should avoid wholesale dismissal of nonconcurrent designs. I also agree that understanding how multiple-baseline designs control for and allow for detection of threats to internal validity is critical so that authors can apply the variation of the design that allows them to draw confident conclusions about relations between independent and dependent variables.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9458782/pdf/40614_2022_Article_342.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-022-00342-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/9/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Slocum et al. (this issue) provide well-reasoned arguments for the use of nonconcurrent multiple baseline designs in behavior analytic work, despite historical preference for concurrent designs (i.e., simultaneous baseline initiation) and contemporary guidelines in related fields suggesting that nonconcurrent designs are insufficient for evaluating functional relations (What Works Clearinghouse, 2020). I provide a commentary, highlighting major contributions of this article and suggesting areas of further consideration. In sum, I agree with authors that researchers should avoid wholesale dismissal of nonconcurrent designs. I also agree that understanding how multiple-baseline designs control for and allow for detection of threats to internal validity is critical so that authors can apply the variation of the design that allows them to draw confident conclusions about relations between independent and dependent variables.
Slocum 等人(本期)为在行为分析工作中使用非并发多基线设计提供了充分的论据,尽管历史上人们更倾向于并发设计(即同时启动基线),而且相关领域的当代指南也表明非并发设计不足以评估功能关系(What Works Clearinghouse, 2020)。我在评论中强调了本文的主要贡献,并提出了需要进一步考虑的领域。总之,我同意作者的观点,即研究人员应避免全盘否定非并发设计。我也同意,理解多基线设计如何控制和检测对内部效度的威胁至关重要,这样作者才能应用设计的变异,从而对自变量和因变量之间的关系得出有把握的结论。