Effect size estimation for combined single-case experimental designs

Mariola Moeyaert, Diana Akhmedjanova, J. Ferron, S. N. Beretvas, W. Noortgate
{"title":"Effect size estimation for combined single-case experimental designs","authors":"Mariola Moeyaert, Diana Akhmedjanova, J. Ferron, S. N. Beretvas, W. Noortgate","doi":"10.1080/17489539.2020.1747146","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The methodology of single-case experimental designs (SCED) has been expanding its efforts toward rigorous design tactics to address a variety of research questions related to intervention effectiveness. Effect size indicators appropriate to quantify the magnitude and the direction of interventions have been recommended and intensively studied for the major SCED design tactics, such as reversal designs, multiple-baseline designs across participants, and alternating treatment designs. In order to address complex and more sophisticated research questions, two or more different single-case design tactics can be merged (i.e., “combined SCEDs”). The two most common combined SCEDs are (a) a combination of a multiple-baseline design across participants with an embedded ABAB reversal design, and (b) a combination of a multiple-baseline design across participants with an embedded alternating treatment design. While these combined designs have the potential to address complex research questions and demonstrate functional relations, the development and use of proper effect size indicators lag behind and remain unexplored. Therefore, this study probes into the quantitative analysis of combined SCEDs using regression-based effect size estimates and two-level hierarchical linear modeling. This study is the first demonstration of effect size estimation for combined designs.","PeriodicalId":39977,"journal":{"name":"Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention","volume":"26 25","pages":"28 - 51"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17489539.2020.1747146","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17489539.2020.1747146","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Abstract The methodology of single-case experimental designs (SCED) has been expanding its efforts toward rigorous design tactics to address a variety of research questions related to intervention effectiveness. Effect size indicators appropriate to quantify the magnitude and the direction of interventions have been recommended and intensively studied for the major SCED design tactics, such as reversal designs, multiple-baseline designs across participants, and alternating treatment designs. In order to address complex and more sophisticated research questions, two or more different single-case design tactics can be merged (i.e., “combined SCEDs”). The two most common combined SCEDs are (a) a combination of a multiple-baseline design across participants with an embedded ABAB reversal design, and (b) a combination of a multiple-baseline design across participants with an embedded alternating treatment design. While these combined designs have the potential to address complex research questions and demonstrate functional relations, the development and use of proper effect size indicators lag behind and remain unexplored. Therefore, this study probes into the quantitative analysis of combined SCEDs using regression-based effect size estimates and two-level hierarchical linear modeling. This study is the first demonstration of effect size estimation for combined designs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
组合单例实验设计的效应量估计
单例实验设计(SCED)的方法论一直在向严格的设计策略扩展,以解决与干预有效性相关的各种研究问题。对于主要的SCED设计策略,如逆转设计、跨参与者的多基线设计和交替治疗设计,已经推荐并深入研究了适用于量化干预措施的幅度和方向的效应大小指标。为了解决更复杂的研究问题,可以合并两个或多个不同的单案例设计策略(即“组合sced”)。两种最常见的联合sced是(a)跨参与者的多基线设计与嵌入式ABAB逆转设计的组合,以及(b)跨参与者的多基线设计与嵌入式交替治疗设计的组合。虽然这些组合设计有可能解决复杂的研究问题并展示功能关系,但适当的效应大小指标的开发和使用滞后且尚未探索。因此,本研究利用基于回归的效应量估计和两级层次线性模型对联合sced进行定量分析。本研究首次证明了组合设计的效应量估计。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention
Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention Social Sciences-Linguistics and Language
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention (EBCAI) brings together professionals who work in clinical and educational practice as well as researchers from all disciplines to promote evidence-based practice (EBP) in serving individuals with communication impairments. The primary aims of EBCAI are to: Promote evidence-based practice (EBP) in communication assessment and intervention; Appraise the latest and best communication assessment and intervention studies so as to facilitate the use of research findings in clinical and educational practice; Provide a forum for discussions that advance EBP; and Disseminate research on EBP. We target speech-language pathologists, special educators, regular educators, applied behavior analysts, clinical psychologists, physical therapists, and occupational therapists who serve children or adults with communication impairments.
期刊最新文献
Illusions of literacy in nonspeaking autistic people: a response to Jaswal, Lampi & Stockwell, 2024 Childhood-Onset Fluency Disorder with marked ingressive speech: a prospective case study Initial results of single-case design study indicate parent training on naturalistic behavioral intervention conducted via telehealth improves parent fidelity and collateral child mands, tacts and intraverbals Preliminary evidence a behavior chain interruption strategy is a promising approach for teaching functional mands to individuals with deaf-blindness and an intellectual disability Can message-passing anecdotes tell us anything about the validity of RPM and S2C?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1