Purpose: The purpose of the study was to examine the use of a combined written naming + repetition (WN + REP) approach and an REP-only approach to treat naming deficits in a group of individuals with aphasia. Method: Six individuals participated in the study. A multiple-baseline design across behaviors was used. A WN + REP approach, an REP approach, and an untreated condition were presented. Three 10-item treatment lists and one 10-item untreated list were created. Each 10-item treatment list was evenly divided so that 5 items were treated using the WN + REP approach and 5 items were treated using the REP approach. Results: Visual analyses of treatment data revealed improvements in 4 of the 6 participants. Meaningful treatment effect sizes were obtained for 5 of the 6 participants in at least 1 of the approaches across the treatment lists. Slightly more participants obtained meaningful effect sizes in the WN + REP approach than in the REP approach. Use of writing as a strategy to help with naming the pictures verbally increased over the duration of treatment in 5 of the 6 participants. Conclusions: The findings revealed that both approaches improved spoken naming accuracy in aphasia. Although the WN + REP approach resulted in more meaningful effect sizes than the REP approach, there was no overwhelming advantage in using 1 or the other approach. However, the WN + REP approach promoted writing as a functional strategy that could be used when naming the picture verbally was not successful.