Mutiple Baseline Across Behaviors

The case study I have chosen is Mrs. Davis, which used a multiple baseline across behavior design. Steve has a number of behavior issues that interfere with his and his classmates learning. One of the weaknesses in multiple baseline across behavior design is being able to attaining functional similarity and independence among the target behavior. Especially trying to establish functional similarity before intervention.

The problem I see with the design is the uncertainty of the intervention having a carryover effect from the first behavior change to the second and then to the third. Establishing functional similarity and independence among target behaviors may not be easy.

There are many variables that can impact internal validity some of those are history, maturation, testing effects, and instrumentation to name a few. The time to be concerned with internal validity is in the design phase when careful consideration needs to be used when which variable will be observed and recorded and this is the time to identify any rival behaviors because after he intervention is ran it is too late. Other behavior issues could surface with Steve and he may transfer his behavior to another setting that would affect external validity. Sometimes when increasing internal validity it may decrease external validity. Uncontrolled variability can be reduced only if you identify its sources. The first step in identifying these uncontrolled variables are to graph the data and look for uncontrolled variables in the baseline. These will be evident if the data points on the graph show moderate to high levels of instability across observation periods. If the observed variation is within acceptable limits then you accept the observed effects as reliable. To establish external validity intrasubject replication must occur. The threat to external validity might be different times of the day the behaviors occur (Bordens & Abbott, 2012).

The case with Steve, Mrs. Davis from what I read did not obtain consent for Steve parents or guardian nor did she discuss the intervention procedures with them. It states in our reading parents or guardians must commit to the behavior change. When reading this scenario I ask myself did the intervention result in an outcome that was meaningful to Steve’s life. If so what was the empirical validity. Measuring and charting of Steve’s behavior responses may lead to more questions like has there been educational change, or if any bad or good side effects have occurred, and weather the intervention was appropriate. These were a few of the ethical, legal, and sociocultural, violation that I noticed.

I would change the legal aspects of this intervention and ensure I had all the correct documentation I needed along with a written consent. I would talk with Steve’s parents and get permission before I talked with DR. Lester

What I might do to improve the intervention is use a delayed multiple baseline design. This would allow me to extend the study to include any new behaviors Steve might have. It states in our reading the “best use of delayed multiple baseline design may be to add tiers which enhances further the demonstration of a functional relationship established during the course of the study as originally planned”(Richards, Taylor, & Ramasamy, 2014, p. 217).

No I do not think this intervention could be adapted to a withdraw design. I know they said no children were harmed by Steve’s pinching but he may not of pinched a fragile child, and this would make a difference.

Mutiple Baseline Across Behaviors

References
Bordens, K. S., & Abbott, B. B. (2012). Research design and methods, A process Approach (8th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Richards, S. B., Taylor, R. L., & Ramasamy, R. (2014). Single subject research applications in educational and clinical settings (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.