Although visual analysis has been the primary method of analysis in single-case designs (SCD), numerous statistical analyses have been developed to quantify SCD intervention effects and enable SCDs to be included in evidence-based practice reviews. This study investigated the correspondence between expert visual analysis and three effect sizes for SCDs. Editorial board members (n=52) of journals that primarily publish SCDs judged whether 31 published, multiple baseline design graphs depicted a functional relation. The percentage of experts declaring that a functional relation was present was compared to two non-overlap statistics and a standardized effect size. While positive associations between measures were found, dichotomous classification of functional relation presence revealed differences between analytic methods, which warrants further investigation of data patterns producing disagreement.