Purpose: This study examined the benefits of a self-administered, clinician-guided, computer-based, cued naming therapy. Results of intense and nonintense treatment schedules were compared. Method: A single-participant design with multiple baselines across behaviors and varied treatment intensity for 2 trained lists was replicated over 4 participants. Two lists of words were treated sequentially. The same methods and equal numbers of treatment sessions were used, but the number of sessions per week differed across word lists: nonintense (2/week) or intense (5/week). Probes of performance on both word lists were carried out to examine acquisition, maintenance, and generalization. Results: There was strong evidence of improved naming (acquisition) of trained words in 3 of the 4 participants regardless of treatment intensity. There was strong evidence of maintenance for 1 participant and moderate evidence for the remaining 3 participants. Evidence of generalization to untrained words was weak. Conclusions: Results suggest that self-administered, computer-based, cued naming therapy using a common mixed-cue protocol may be beneficial to a wide range of persons with aphasia regardless of treatment schedule. If results are replicated with a larger sample, treatments such as this may be a low-cost supplement or extension to traditional aphasia therapy. (Contains 5 tables, 4 figures and 1 footnote.)