This article illustrates an innovative small-N research design that researchers and practitioners can use to investigate questions of interest in professional school counseling. The distributed criterion (DC) design integrates elements of three classic small-N research designs—the changing criterion, reversal, and multiple baseline. The DC design is well suited to situations in which students or school counselors must allocate, prioritize, and adjust time or effort to complete multiple tasks in response to changing situational demands. The article includes practical examples of how the DC design can be used by practitioners.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlbertoP. A., & TroutmanA. C. (1999). Applied behavior analysis for teachers (5th ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
2.
BaerD.M., WolfM.M., & RisleyT. (1968). Some current dimensions of applied behavior analysis.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 91–97.
3.
BarlowD. H., & HersenM. (1984). Single-case experimental design: Strategies for studying behavior change (2nd ed.). New York: Pergamon.
4.
BeckA. T. (1997). The past and future of cognitive therapy.Journal of Psychotherapy Practice and Research, 6, 276–284.
5.
CowanR. J., HennesseyM. L., VierstraC. V., & RumrillP. D. (2004). Small-N designs in rehabilitation research.Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 20, 203–211.
6.
DeJongW. (1999). Building the peace: The Resolving Conflict Creatively Program.Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
7.
FloodW. A., & WilderD. A. (2004). The use of differential reinforcement and fading to increase time away from a care-giver in child with separation anxiety disorder.Education and Treatment of Children, 27, 1–8.
8.
FosterL. H., WatsonT. S., MeeksC., & YoungJ. S. (2002). Single-subject research design for school counselors: Becoming an applied researcher.Professional School Counseling, 6, 146–154.
9.
FoxxR. M., & RubinoffA. (1979). Behavioral treatment of caffeinism: Reducing excessive coffee drinking.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 12, 335–344.
10.
GlynnE. J., ThomasJ. D., & SheeS. M. (1973). Behavioral self-control of on-task behavior in an elementary classroom.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 6, 105–113.
11.
GorskiJ. A. B., & WestbrookA. C. (2002). Use of differential reinforcement to treat medical non-compliance in a pediatric patient with leukocyte adhesion deficiency.Pediatric Rehabilitation, 5, 29–35.
12.
HallR. V. (1971). Managing behavior: Behavior modification, the measurement of behavior.Lawrence, KS: H & H Enterprises.
13.
HallR. V., & FoxxR. G. (1977). Changing criterion designs: An alternative applied behavior analysis procedure. In EtzelB. C., LeBlancJ. M., & BaerD. M. (Eds.), New developments in behavioral research: Theory, mind, and application (pp. 151–166). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
14.
HartmanD. P., & HallR.V. (1976). The changing criterion design.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 9, 527–532.
15.
JohnstonJ. M., & PennypackerH. S. (1993). Strategies and tactics of behavioral research (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
16.
KazdinA. E. (1982). Single-case research designs: Methods for clinical and applied settings.New York: Oxford University Press.
17.
KottlerJ. A. (2001). Making changes last.Philadelphia: Brunner-Routledge.
18.
KratochwillT. R. (1978). Single subject research.New York: Academic Press.
19.
LapanR.T. (2005). An editor's top ten wish list.Professional School Counseling, 8(5), ii–iv.
20.
McDougallD. (1998). Research on self-management techniques used by students with disabilities in general education settings: A descriptive review.Remedial and Special Education, 19, 310–320.
21.
McDougallD. (2005). The range-bound changing criterion design.Behavioral Interventions, 20, 129–137.
22.
McDougallD. (in press). The distributed criterion design.Journal of Behavioral Education.
23.
McDougallD., HawkinsJ., BradyM. P., & JenkinsA. (in press). Recent innovations in the changing criterion design: Implications for research and practice in special education.Journal of Special Education.
24.
McDougallD., SmithG., BlackR., & RumrillP. (2005). Recent innovations in small-N designs for rehabilitation research: An extension of Cowan, Hennessey, Vierstra, and Rumrill.Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 23, 197–205.
25.
PolingA., & FuquaR. W. (1986). Research methods in applied behavior analysis: Issues and advances.New York: Plenum.
26.
RimmD. C., & MastersJ. C. (1987). Behavior therapy: Techniques and empirical findings.New York: Academic Press.
27.
SaccoW. A., & BeckA. T. (1995). Cognitive theory and therapy. In BeckhamE. E., & LeberW. (Eds.), Handbook of depression (pp. 329–351). New York: Guilford.
28.
SidmanM. (1960). Tactics of scientific research.New York: Basic.
29.
SkinnerC. H., SkinnerA. L., & ArmstrongK. J. (2000). Analysis of a client-staff-developed shaping program designed to enhance reading persistence in an adult diagnosed with schizophrenia.Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 24, 52–57.
30.
TawneyJ., & GastD. (1984). Single subject research in special education.Columbus, OH: Merrill.
31.
WatsonD. L., & TharpR. G. (2002). Self-directed behavior: Self-modification for personal development.Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
32.
WeisL., & HallR. V. (1971). Modification of cigarette smoking through avoidance of punishment. In HallR. V. (Ed.), Managing behavior: Behavior modification applications in school and home (pp. 77–102). Lawrence, KS: H & H Enterprises.
