Abstract Few contemporary single-case experimental design (SCED) studies are purely inductive; inductive studies seek to explore and discover new environment-behavior relations. Rather, most contemporary SCED studies are more deductive as they evaluate and confirm whether standardized intervention approaches, based on established principles of behavior, improve socially significant responses. Recognition of an inductive-deductive research continuum in SCED discloses potential researcher biases, supports transparent research and reporting practices, and prevents questionable research practices. SCED researchers have historically eschewed hypothesis testing. As a result, contemporary SCED researchers may not disclose explicit research questions, including questions that indicate a study’s predicted direction of behavior change. However, research questions for more inductive and exploratory studies are best framed as open-ended (i.e., what are the effects of X on Y?), whereas research questions for more deductive and confirmatory studies are best framed directionally (e.g., will X improve Y?). If researchers have a hypothesis or prediction about the nature of results, they should explicitly state this prior to the study.
Matt Tincani (Wed,) studied this question.