Computing tools for implementing standards for single-case designs.
Your favorite single-case calculator is probably accurate, but you still need a plan for missing data.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team tested every free calculator that claims to follow the What Works Clearinghouse rules for single-case designs.
They fed each tool the same sets of pretend data. Some sets had gaps to see how the tool would react.
They checked if the answers matched the gold-standard hand calculations.
What they found
Every calculator got the math right when the data were complete.
When data points were missing, most tools either gave an error message or just skipped the missing spot. None tried to fill in the gap.
How this fits with other research
Jones et al. (1992), Lincoln et al. (1988), and Rao et al. (2017) all used single-case designs that these same calculators could analyze. The new study shows the tools are safe to use on their data.
Perez et al. (2015) surveyed BCBAs about assessment tools the same year. While M et al. asked "Do you use functional analysis?", Li-Ting et al. asked "Do these calculators work?" Both papers reveal gaps between what practitioners need and what tools provide.
Musyoka et al. (2023) looked at GRE versus WAIS tests for deaf applicants. Like Li-Ting et al., they found that available tools have limits you must plan around.
Why it matters
You can keep using any WWC-aligned calculator you already like. Just know you will need your own plan for missing data—maybe simple mean imputation or visual inspection—because the software will not do it for you.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Open your last graph, delete one data point, and see how your calculator reacts—then decide how you will handle real gaps.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
In the single-case design (SCD) literature, five sets of standards have been formulated and distinguished: design standards, assessment standards, analysis standards, reporting standards, and research synthesis standards. This article reviews computing tools that can assist researchers and practitioners in meeting the analysis standards recommended by the What Works Clearinghouse: Procedures and Standards Handbook-the WWC standards. These tools consist of specialized web-based calculators or downloadable software for SCD data, and algorithms or programs written in Excel, SAS procedures, SPSS commands/Macros, or the R programming language. We aligned these tools with the WWC standards and evaluated them for accuracy and treatment of missing data, using two published data sets. All tools were tested to be accurate. When missing data were present, most tools either gave an error message or conducted analysis based on the available data. Only one program used a single imputation method. This article concludes with suggestions for an inclusive computing tool or environment, additional research on the treatment of missing data, and reasonable and flexible interpretations of the WWC standards.
Behavior modification, 2015 · doi:10.1177/0145445515603706