Single-case design effect-size distributions: Association with procedural parameters.

School psychology (Washington, D.C.) Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-23 DOI:10.1037/spq0000636
Jennifer R Ledford, Paige B Eyler, Sienna A Windsor, Jason C Chow
{"title":"Single-case design effect-size distributions: Association with procedural parameters.","authors":"Jennifer R Ledford, Paige B Eyler, Sienna A Windsor, Jason C Chow","doi":"10.1037/spq0000636","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Visual analysis is historically and conventionally used to draw conclusions about outcomes in single-case studies, but researchers are increasingly using effect sizes to supplement conclusions drawn about functional relations with additional information about magnitude of behavior change. However, there is limited information about the extent to which methodological choices (i.e., design type, measurement system) may impact the magnitude of behavior change. We conducted a systematic review of interventions conducted in elementary school classrooms to characterize effect sizes for engagement behaviors and challenging behaviors in those studies. We found that researchers most often used A-B-A-B and multiple baseline across-participants designs, that a variety of measurement systems were used for engagement but not challenging behavior, and that some variability in effect-size distributions can be explained by dependent variable type, design type, and measurement system. The empirically derived distributions from this study may be helpful for single-case researchers to contextualize past, ongoing, and future work related to engagement and challenging behavior. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":74763,"journal":{"name":"School psychology (Washington, D.C.)","volume":" ","pages":"589-600"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"School psychology (Washington, D.C.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000636","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Visual analysis is historically and conventionally used to draw conclusions about outcomes in single-case studies, but researchers are increasingly using effect sizes to supplement conclusions drawn about functional relations with additional information about magnitude of behavior change. However, there is limited information about the extent to which methodological choices (i.e., design type, measurement system) may impact the magnitude of behavior change. We conducted a systematic review of interventions conducted in elementary school classrooms to characterize effect sizes for engagement behaviors and challenging behaviors in those studies. We found that researchers most often used A-B-A-B and multiple baseline across-participants designs, that a variety of measurement systems were used for engagement but not challenging behavior, and that some variability in effect-size distributions can be explained by dependent variable type, design type, and measurement system. The empirically derived distributions from this study may be helpful for single-case researchers to contextualize past, ongoing, and future work related to engagement and challenging behavior. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

单例设计效应大小分布:与程序参数的关系
直观分析历来被用于得出单例研究结果的结论,但研究人员越来越多地使用效应大小来补充功能关系的结论,并提供有关行为变化程度的额外信息。然而,关于方法选择(即设计类型、测量系统)可能会在多大程度上影响行为改变幅度的信息却很有限。我们对在小学课堂上进行的干预进行了系统回顾,以确定这些研究中参与行为和挑战行为的效果大小。我们发现,研究人员最常使用的是 A-B-A-B 和跨参与者的多基线设计,对参与行为使用了多种测量系统,但对挑战行为却没有使用,而且因变量类型、设计类型和测量系统可以解释效应大小分布的一些差异。本研究中根据经验得出的分布情况可能有助于单例研究人员对过去、现在和将来与参与和挑战行为相关的工作进行背景分析。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA,保留所有权利)。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信