|
| The Importance of Group Design Research in Applied Behavior Analysis |
| Saturday, May 24, 2025 |
| 4:00 PM–4:50 PM |
| Convention Center, Street Level, 154 AB |
| Area: PCH; Domain: Translational |
| Chair: Ben Pfingston (Catalight Foundation) |
| Abstract: The field of applied behavior analysis (ABA) has a rich research history, focusing on single-subject design studies. However, there is a great need for more group design research on behavior analytic interventions. In this series of talks, we will discuss the necessity of group design research and practical advice for conducting group studies. We will cover the strengths and weaknesses of single subject vs. group design research and the importance of generalizability in intervention research. Basic information on study design and null-hypothesis significance testing, the benefits of multi-site collaboration for conducting group design studies, and the importance of an adequate sample size will be discussed in the second talk. Referrals to free and paid resources for those interested in group design research will be provided. Lastly, we will cover outcomes, starting with the controversy surrounding what measures to use in autism research. We will offer a perspective focusing on the importance of evaluating private events, such as well wellbeing, and other measures of private events using standardized assessment as well as direct measures to evaluate outcomes of intervention. We will cover lessons from data collection at a large behavioral health nonprofit, including the importance of implementing regular psychometric assessments. By the end of this symposia, behavior analysts should understand the importance of group design research and have some next steps on where to begin. |
| Instruction Level: Intermediate |
| Keyword(s): research methods |
| |
| Strengths and Weaknesses of Single-Subject vs. Group Design Research |
| (Theory) |
| TRACY RAULSTON (Texas State University) |
| Abstract: Single-subject and group designs are both important research methodologies that offer different kinds of information. Single-subject designs excel at determining how changes to treatment are affecting a single individual. However, the results tend to vary from person to person, and the results tend to not be generalizable. Group designs excel at determining whether a treatment works for people overall, but the data cannot provide meaningful information about how individuals are affected. Both kinds of methodologies are important for understanding how a treatment works. However, in the field of ABA, there is a strong preference for single subject designs. While single subject designs have many benefits, including being able to manipulate the treatment plan according to the needs of the client, they are often used to make a case for the effectiveness of an intervention in the general population. In this panel, we will highlight the importance of group designs to make the case for the generalizability of ABA. We will discuss the strengths and weaknesses of both kinds of designs, the shortcomings of single-subject designs in promoting the generalizability of findings, and how increasing the number of group design studies in the field can help bridge this gap. |
| |
Practical Considerations for Group Design Research |
| (Theory) |
| BRIANNA FITCHETT (Catalight) |
| Abstract: While the previous panel established the need for group design research in the field of ABA, many BCBAs may not be sure where to begin. In this talk, we review practical considerations for those interested in conducting group design research. First, we will discuss the basics of group design research, including basic information on study design and the use of null-hypothesis significance testing. We will discuss important considerations for study design. The importance of an adequate sample size, and problems with having too small a sample, will be highlighted. We will also cover the utilization of data collected in clinical settings, as well as administering psychometric measures regularly. Finally, we will discuss the benefits of multi-site collaboration, including being able to collect data from more participants, increased generalizability of findings, and distributing work more evenly across the research team. We will end with a discussion of resources available, free and paid, for those interested in learning how to conduct group design research. |
| |
| Outcomes and Group Design Research |
| (Theory) |
| DOREEN ANN SAMELSON (Catalight Foundation) |
| Abstract: In this talk, additional practical advice will be given to BCBAs interested in conducting group design research, focusing on what outcomes to study. There is little agreement on the ideal outcome measures for ASD interventions because of the heterogeneous nature of autism, controversy surrounding remediation from autism, and state laws covering the treatment of ASD. We make an argument for focusing on wellbeing as a global outcome measure, and how outcomes utilized in group design research should focus on how they affect wellbeing. Candidate measures, such as measures of dangerous behavior, adaptive behavior, goal attainment, and more will be discussed. We will cover how certain outcomes, such as sleep, anxiety and mood are underrepresented in the literature, and the implications for how this influences our understanding of how ABA affects wellbeing. Finally, we will cover Catalight’s process for collecting outcome data, including implementation of assessment in routine care, and how other ABA agencies may learn from this process for their own research. |
|
| |