ArticlePerspectives on behavior science2020
How Many Tiers Do We Need? Type I Errors and Power in Multiple Baseline Designs.
Article in Perspectives on behavior science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adapting NDBIs for Autistic Children Who Use Echolalia: A Cascading Coaching Approach to Supporting Communication and Language Development.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A Preliminary Analysis of Joint Control Procedures to Teach Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder to Report Missing Items.Behavior analysis in practice · 2026Article
- Using a Video-Enhanced Intervention Package to Teach Science Practices and Extended Oral Scientific Skills to Students With Neurodevelopmental Disorders.Canadian journal of school psychology · 2026Article
- Article
- Design and analysis of individually randomized multiple baseline factorial trials.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- Treatment of Anxiety in Athletes Using Cognitive Behavioral Therapy: A Single-Case Experimental Design with Multiple Baselines.Journal for person-oriented research · 2026Article
- Multimodal Communication Outcomes for Hispanic Autistic Preschoolers Following Coached Student Clinician and Caregiver-Led NDBIs.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Coaching Bilingual Speech-Language Student Clinicians and Spanish-Speaking Caregivers to Use Culturally Adapted NDBI Techniques with Autistic Preschoolers.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Creating Plots for Single-Subject Research Designs in R.Behavior analysis in practice · 2025Article
- Defining and assessing immediacy in single-case experimental designs.Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior · 2022Review
- Effects of adding video feedback to emotionally focused therapy supervision: A concurrent multiple-baseline across subjects design.Journal of marital and family therapy · 2022Article
- Threats to Internal Validity in Multiple-Baseline Design Variations.Perspectives on behavior science · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Design quality guidelines typically recommend that multiple baseline designs include at least three demonstrations of effects. Despite its widespread adoption, this recommendation does not appear grounded in empirical evidence. The main purpose of our study was to address this issue by assessing Type I error rate and power in multiple baseline designs. First, we generated 10,000 multiple baseline graphs, applied the dual-criteria method to each tier, and computed Type I error rate and power for different number of tiers showing a clear change. Second, two raters categorized the tiers for 300 multiple baseline graphs to replicate our analyses using visual inspection. When multiple baseline designs had at least three tiers and two or more of these tiers showed a clear change, the Type I error rate remained adequate (< .05) while power also reached acceptable levels (> .80). In contrast, requiring all tiers to show a clear change resulted in overly stringent conclusions (i.e., unacceptably low power). Therefore, our results suggest that researchers and practitioners should carefully consider limitations in power when requiring all tiers of a multiple baseline design to show a clear change in their analyses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.