Diseño y Análisis de Datos de Diseños Experimentales de Caso Único
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5944/ap.22.1.42833Palabras clave:
diseños experimentales de caso único; recomendaciones metodológicas; análisis de datos; softwareResumen
Los diseños experimentales de caso único implican el estudio intensivo de una o pocas unidades (e.g., personas) en diferentes condiciones manipuladas por los investigadores. Algunos diseños conllevan una replicación intrasujeto (diseño ABAB, diseño de cambio de criterio y diseño de tratamientos alternantes), mientras que el diseño de línea base múltiple suele incluir replicación entre-sujetos. En ambos casos se dispone de varias oportunidades para demostrar el efecto de la intervención (introduciendo o retirándola) en diferentes momentos del tiempo. Asimismo, es imprescindible la replicación de los resultados en diferentes estudios para poder establecer la generalidad de las conclusiones. En cuanto al análisis de datos, actualmente se dispone de múltiples propuestas sin un consenso sobre cuáles son las opciones más apropiadas. Para favorecer la necesaria justificación de cualquier elección, se ofrece una serie de criterios organizativos que señalan en qué situaciones es más útil cada una de las propuestas comentadas. Asimismo, para acercar a los investigadores aplicados a las opciones analíticas, se comentan las páginas web gratuitas que las implementan. Finalmente, debido a que no es posible discutir con detalle todos los pormenores metodológicos, ni tampoco revisar todas las alternativas analíticas, el lector interesado es dirigido mediante múltiples referencias a las fuentes primarias.
Descargas
Citas
Barlow, D. H. y Hayes S. C. (1979). Alternating treatments design: One strategy for comparing the effects of two treatments in a single subject. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 12(2), 199–210. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1979.12-199
Bono, R. y Arnau, J. (2014). Diseños experimentales de caso único en ciencias sociales y de la salud [Single-case Experimental Designs in Social and health sciences]. Síntesis.
Busk, P. L. y Serlin, R. C. (1992). Meta-analysis for single-case research. En T. R. Kratochwill y J. R. Levin (Eds.), Single-case Research Designs and Analysis: New Directions for Psychology and Education (pp. 187−212). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Byun, T. M., Hitchcock, E. R. y Ferron, J. (2017). Masked visual analysis: Minimizing Type I error in visually guided single-case design for communication disorders. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 60(6), 1455−1466. https://doi.org/10.1044/2017_JSLHR-S-16-0344
Center, B. A., Skiba, R. J. y Casey, A. (1985). A Methodology for the Quantitative Synthesis of intra-Subject Design Research. The Journal of Special Education, 19(4), 387−400. https://doi.org/10.1177/002246698501900404
Christ, T. J. (2007). Experimental Control and Threats to Internal Validity of Concurrent and Nonconcurrent Multiple Baseline Designs. Psychology in the Schools, 44(5), 451–459. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20237
Dart, E. H. y Radley, K. C. (2018). Toward a standard assembly of linear graphs. School Psychology Quarterly, 33(3), 350−355. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000269
Declercq, L., Cools, W., Beretvas, S. N., Moeyaert, M., Ferron, J. M. y Van den Noortgate, W. (2020). MultiSCED: A Tool for (Meta-)Analyzing Single-Case Experimental Data with Multilevel Modeling. Behavior Research Methods, 52(1), 177–192. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-019-01216-2
Declercq, L., Jamshidi, L., Fernández Castilla, B., Moeyaert, M., Beretvas, S. N., Ferron, J. M. y Van den Noortgate, W. (2022). Multilevel Meta-Analysis of Individual Participant Data of Single-Case Experimental Designs: One-stage versus Two-Stage Methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 57(2–3), 298–317. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2020.1822148
Eilers, H. J. y Hayes, S. C. (2015). Exposure and Response Prevention Therapy with Cognitive Defusion Exercises to Reduce Repetitive and Restrictive Behaviors Displayed by Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 19, 18–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2014.12.014
Estrada, E., Ferrer, E. y Pardo, A. (2019). Statistics for Evaluating Pre-Post Change: Relation between Change in the Distribution Center and Change in the Individual Scores. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Artículo 2696. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02696
Facon, B., Sahiri, S. y Riviere, V. (2008). A Controlled Single-Case Treatment of Severe Long-Term Selective Mutism in a Child with Mental Retardation. Behavior Therapy, 39(4), 313–321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2007.09.004
Feeney, T. y Ylvisaker, M. (2006). Context-Sensitive Cognitive-Behavioural Supports for Young Children with TBI: A Replication Study. Brain Injury, 20(6), 629–645. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699050600744194
Ferron, J. M., Bell, B. A., Hess, M. R., Rendina-Gobioff, G. y Hibbard, S. T. (2009). Making Treatment Effect Inferences from Multiple-Baseline Data: The Utility of Multilevel Modeling Approaches. Behavior Research Methods, 41(2), 372–384. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.2.372
Ferron, J. M., Farmer, J. L. y Owens, C. M. (2010). Estimating Individual Treatment Effects from Multiple-Baseline Data: A Monte Carlo study for multilevel-modeling approaches. Behavior Research Methods, 42(4), 930–943. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.4.930
Ferron, J. M., Goldstein, H., Olszewski, A. y Rohrer, L. (2020). Indexing Effects in Single-Case Experimental Designs by Estimating the Percent of Goal Obtained. Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention, 14(1–2), 6–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/17489539.2020.1732024
Ferron, J. M., Moeyaert, M., Van den Noortgate, W. y Beretvas, S. N. (2014). Estimating Causal Effects from Multiple-Baseline Studies: Implications for Design and Analysis. Psychological Methods, 19(4), 493–510. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037038
Fisher, W. W., Kelley, M. E. y Lomas, J. E. (2003). Visual Aids and Structured Criteria for Improving Visual Inspection and Interpretation of single-Case Designs. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 36(3), 387–406. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2003.36-387
Hartmann, D. P. y Hall, R. V. (1976). The Changing Criterion Design. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 9(4), 527–532. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1976.9-527
Heyvaert, M. y Onghena, P. (2014). Analysis of Single-Case Data: Randomisation Tests for Measures of Effect Size. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 24(3–4), 507–527. https://doi.org/10.1080/09602011.2013.818564
Horner, R. H., Carr, E. G., Halle, J., McGee, G., Odom, S. y Wolery, M. (2005). The Use of Single-Subject Research to Identify Evidence-Based Practice in Special Education. Exceptional Children, 71(2), 165−179. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290507100203
Jacobs, K. W. (2019). Replicability and Randomization Test Logic in Behavior Analysis. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 111(2), 329–341. https://doi.org/10.1002/jeab.501
Kratochwill, T. R., Horner, R. H., Levin, J. R., Machalicek, W., Ferron, J. y Johnson, A. (2021). Single-case Design Standards: An Update and Proposed Upgrades. Journal of School Psychology, 89, 91–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2021.10.006
Klein, L. A., Houlihan, D., Vincent, J. L. y Panahon, C. J. (2017). Best Practices in Utilizing the Changing Criterion Design. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 10(1), 52–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-014-0036-x
Lane, J. D. y Gast, D. L. (2014). Visual Analysis in Single Case Experimental Design Studies: Brief Review and Guidelines. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 24(3–4), 445–463. https://doi.org/10.1080/09602011.2013.815636
Ledford, J. R., Barton, E. E., Severini, K. E. y Zimmerman, K. N. (2019). A Primer on Single-Case Research Designs: Contemporary Use and Analysis. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 124(1), 35–56. https://doi.org/10.1352/1944-7558-124.1.35
Levin, J. R., Ferron, J. M. y Gafurov, B. S. (2018). Comparison of Randomization-Test Procedures for Single-Case Multiple-Baseline Designs. Developmental Neurorehabilitation, 21(5), 290–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/17518423.2016.1197708
Ma, H. H. (2006). An Alternative Method for Quantitative Synthesis of Single-Subject Research: Percentage of Data Points Exceeding the Median. Behavior Modification, 30(5), 598–617. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445504272974
Maggin, D. M., Cook, B. G. y Cook, L. (2018). Using Single‐Case Research Designs to Examine the Effects of Interventions in Special Education. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 33(4), 182–191. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12184
Maggin, D. M., Cook, B. G. y Cook, L. (2019). Making Sense of Single‐Case Design Effect Sizes. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 34(3), 124–132. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12204
Manolov, R., Moeyaert, M. y Fingerhut, J. (2022). A Priori Justification for Effect Measures in Single-Case Experimental Designs. Perspectives on Behavior Science, 45(1), 156–189. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-021-00282-2
Manolov, R. y Onghena, P. (2018). Analyzing Data from Single-Case Alternating Treatments Designs. Psychological Methods, 23(3), 480–504. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000133
Manolov, R. y Onghena, P. (2022). Defining and Assessing Immediacy in Single Case Experimental Designs. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 118(3), 462−492. https://doi.org/10.1002/JEAB.799
Manolov, R. y Tanious, R. (2022). Assessing Consistency in Single-Case Data Features using Modified Brinley Plots. Behavior Modification, 46(3), 581–627. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445520982969
Manolov, R., Tanious, R. y Fernández-Castilla, B. (2022). A Proposal for the Assessment of Replication of Effects in Single-Case Experimental Designs. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 55(3), 997–1024. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.923
McDougale, C. B., Richling, S. M., Longino, E. B. y O’Rourke, S. A. (2020). Mastery Criteria and Maintenance: A Descriptive Analysis of Applied Research Procedures. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 13(2), 402–410. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-019-00365-2
McDougall, D. (2005). The Range-Bound Changing Criterion Design. Behavioral Interventions, 20(2), 129–137. https://doi.org/10.1002/bin.189
Moeyaert, M., Ugille, M., Ferron, J., Beretvas, S. N. y Van den Noortgate, W. (2014). The Influence of the Design Matrix on Treatment Effect Estimates in the Quantitative Analyses of Single-Case Experimental Designs Research. Behavior Modification, 38(5), 665–704. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445514535243
Natesan, P. y Hedges, L. V. (2017). Bayesian Unknown Change-Point Models to Investigate Immediacy in Single Case Designs. Psychological Methods, 22(4), 743–759. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000134
Onghena, P. (1992). Randomization Tests for Extensions and Variations of ABAB single-Case Experimental Designs: A Rejoinder. Behavioral Assessment, 14(2), 153–171.
Onghena, P. y Edgington, E. S. (1994). Randomization Tests for Restricted Alternating Treatments Designs. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 32(7), 783–786. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7967(94)90036-1
Onghena, P., Tanious, R., De, T. K. y Michiels, B. (2019). Randomization Tests for Changing Criterion Designs. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 117(6), 18–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2019.01.005
Parker, R. I. y Vannest, K. J. (2009). An Improved Effect Size for Single-Case Research: Nonoverlap of all Pairs. Behavior Therapy, 40(4), 357−367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2008.10.006
Parker, R. I., Vannest, K. J. y Davis, J. L. (2011). Effect Size in Single-Case Research: A Review of Nine Nonoverlap Techniques. Behavior Modification, 35(4), 303–322. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445511399147
Parker, R. I., Vannest, K. J., Davis, J. L. y Sauber, S. B. (2011). Combining Nonoverlap and Trend for Single-Case Research: Tau-U. Behavior Therapy, 42(2), 284−299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2010.08.006
Perdices, M., Tate, R. L. y Rosenkoetter, U. (2023). An Algorithm to Evaluate Methodological Rigor and Risk of Bias in Single-Case Studies. Behavior Modification, 47(6), 1482–1509. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445519863035
Pustejovsky, J. E. (2018). Using Response Ratios for Meta-Analyzing Single-Case Designs with Behavioral Outcomes. Journal of School Psychology, 68(6), 99−112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2018.02.003
Pustejovsky, J. E., Hedges, L. V. y Shadish, W. R. (2014). Design-Comparable Effect Sizes in Multiple Baseline Designs: A General Modeling Framework. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 39(5), 368–393. https://doi.org/10.3102/1076998614547577
Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A. y Casto, G. (1987). The Quantitative Synthesis of Single-Subject Research: Methodology and Validation. Remedial and Special Education, 8(2), 24–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193258700800206
Shadish, W. R., Hedges, L. V. y Pustejovsky, J. E. (2014). Analysis and Meta-Analysis of Single-Case Designs with a standardized Mean Difference Statistic: A Primer and Applications. Journal of School Psychology, 52(2), 123–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2013.11.005
Slocum, T. A., Pinkelman, S. E., Joslyn, P. R. y Nichols, B. (2022). Threats to Internal Validity in Multiple-baseline Design Variations. Perspectives on Behavior Science, 45(3), 619−638. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-022-00326-1
Snodgrass, M., Cook, B. G. y Cook, L. (2023). Considering Social Validity in Special Education Research. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 38(4), 311–319. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12326
Swaminathan, H., Rogers, H. J., Horner, R., Sugai, G. y Smolkowski, K. (2014). Regression Models for the Analysis of Single Case Designs. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 24(3–4), 554−571. https://doi.org/10.1080/09602011.2014.887586
Tanious, R. y Onghena, P. (2021). A Systematic Review of Applied Single-Case Research Published between 2016 and 2018: Study Designs, Randomization, Data Aspects, and Data Analysis. Behavior Research Methods, 53(4), 1371–1384. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-020-01502-4
Tate, R. L. y Perdices, M. (2019). Single-case Experimental Designs for Clinical Research and Neurorehabilitation Settings: Planning, Conduct, Analysis, and Reporting. Routledge.
Tate, R. L., Perdices, M., Rosenkoetter, U., McDonald, S., Togher, L., Shadish, W., Horner, R., Kratochwill, T., Barlow, D. H., Kazdin, A. E., Sampson, M., Shamseer, L. y Vohra, S. (2016). The Single-Case Reporting Guideline in Behavioural Interventions (SCRIBE) 2016: Explanation and elaboration. Archives of Scientific Psychology, 4(1), 10–31. https://doi.org/10.1037/arc0000027
Vannest, K. J. y Sallese, M. R. (2021). Benchmarking Effect Sizes in Single-Case Experimental Designs. Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention, 15(3), 142–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/17489539.2021.1886412
What Works Clearinghouse. (2022). Procedures and Standards Handbook, Version 5.0. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved from https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/referenceresources/Final_WWC-HandbookVer5.0-0-508.pdf
Wine, B., Freeman, T. R. y King, A. (2015). Withdrawal versus Reversal: A Necessary Distinction? Behavioral Interventions, 30(1), 87–93. https://doi.org/10.1002/bin.1399
Wolfe, K., Barton, E. E. y Meadan, H. (2019). Systematic Protocols for the Visual Analysis of Single-Case Research Data. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 12(2), 491–502. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-019-00336-7
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2025 Facultad de Psicología
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial 4.0.
La revista Acción Psicológica se publica bajo licencia Creative Commons Reconocimiento – NoComercial (CC BY-NC). Las opiniones y contenidos de los artículos publicados en Acción Psicológica son de responsabilidad exclusiva de los autores y no comprometen la opinión y política científica de la revista. También serán responsables de proporcionar copias de los datos en bruto, puntuaciones, y, en general, material experimental relevante a los lectores interesados.
Copyright Note
Acción Psicológica is published under Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial (CC BY-NC). The opinions and contents of the articles published in Acción Psicológica are responsibility of the authors and do not compromise the scientific and political opinion of the journal. Authors are also responsible for providing copies of the raw data, ratings, and, in general, relevant experimental material to interested readers.
