Statistical Decision-Making Accuracies for Some Overlap- and Distance-based Measures for Single-Case Experimental Designs

Overview

Journal Perspect Behav Sci

Publisher Springer Nature

Specialty Psychiatry

Date 2022 Mar 28

PMID 35342864

Authors

Michael T Carlin

Mack S Costello

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40614-021-00317-8.

Citing Articles

How to personalise cognitive-behavioural therapy for chronic primary pain using network analysis: study protocol for a single-case experimental design with multiple baselines.

Hofmann V, Glombiewski J, Kininger F, Scholten S BMJ Open. 2024; 14(12):e089319.

PMID: 39627123 PMC: 11624839. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-089319.

Baseline Variability Affects N-of-1 Intervention Effect: Simulation and Field Studies.

Suzuki M, Tanaka S, Saito K, Cho K, Iso N, Okabe T J Pers Med. 2023; 13(5).

PMID: 37240890 PMC: 10219212. DOI: 10.3390/jpm13050720.

Does the choice of a linear trend-assessment technique matter in the context of single-case data?.

Manolov R Behav Res Methods. 2023; 55(8):4200-4221.

PMID: 36622560 DOI: 10.3758/s13428-022-02013-0.

References

Deprospero A, Cohen S . Inconsistent visual analyses of intrasubject data. J Appl Behav Anal. 1979; 12(4):573-9. PMC: 1311483. DOI: 10.1901/jaba.1979.12-573. View

Hahn U, Warren P . Perceptions of randomness: why three heads are better than four. Psychol Rev. 2009; 116(2):454-61. DOI: 10.1037/a0015241. View

Carter M . Reconsidering overlap-based measures for quantitative synthesis of single-subject data: what they tell us and what they don't. Behav Modif. 2013; 37(3):378-90. DOI: 10.1177/0145445513476609. View

Wolfe K, Seaman M, Drasgow E, Sherlock P . An evaluation of the agreement between the conservative dual-criterion method and expert visual analysis. J Appl Behav Anal. 2018; 51(2):345-351. DOI: 10.1002/jaba.453. View

Scruggs T, Mastropieri M . Summarizing single-subject research. Issues and applications. Behav Modif. 1998; 22(3):221-42. DOI: 10.1177/01454455980223001. View

Carlin M, Costello M . Development of a Distance-Based Effect Size Metric for Single-Case Research: Ratio of Distances. Behav Ther. 2018; 49(6):981-994. DOI: 10.1016/j.beth.2018.02.005. View

Manolov R, Solanas A . Comparing N = 1 effect size indices in presence of autocorrelation. Behav Modif. 2008; 32(6):860-75. DOI: 10.1177/0145445508318866. View

Pustejovsky J . Procedural sensitivities of effect sizes for single-case designs with directly observed behavioral outcome measures. Psychol Methods. 2018; 24(2):217-235. DOI: 10.1037/met0000179. View

Wolfe K, Seaman M, Drasgow E . Interrater Agreement on the Visual Analysis of Individual Tiers and Functional Relations in Multiple Baseline Designs. Behav Modif. 2016; 40(6):852-873. DOI: 10.1177/0145445516644699. View

10.

Lanovaz M, Giannakakos A, Destras O . Machine Learning to Analyze Single-Case Data: A Proof of Concept. Perspect Behav Sci. 2020; 43(1):21-38. PMC: 7198678. DOI: 10.1007/s40614-020-00244-0. View

11.

McKnight S, McKean J, Huitema B . A double bootstrap method to analyze linear models with autoregressive error terms. Psychol Methods. 2000; 5(1):87-101. DOI: 10.1037/1082-989x.5.1.87. View

12.

Branch M . Statistical inference in behavior analysis: Some things significance testing does and does not do. Behav Anal. 2012; 22(2):87-92. PMC: 2731351. DOI: 10.1007/BF03391984. View

13.

Ma H . An alternative method for quantitative synthesis of single-subject researches: percentage of data points exceeding the median. Behav Modif. 2006; 30(5):598-617. DOI: 10.1177/0145445504272974. View

14.

Allison D, Gorman B . Calculating effect sizes for meta-analysis: the case of the single case. Behav Res Ther. 1993; 31(6):621-31. DOI: 10.1016/0005-7967(93)90115-b. View

15.

Parker R, Vannest K, Davis J, Sauber S . Combining nonoverlap and trend for single-case research: Tau-U. Behav Ther. 2011; 42(2):284-99. DOI: 10.1016/j.beth.2010.08.006. View

16.

Fisher W, Kelley M, Lomas J . Visual aids and structured criteria for improving visual inspection and interpretation of single-case designs. J Appl Behav Anal. 2003; 36(3):387-406. PMC: 1284456. DOI: 10.1901/jaba.2003.36-387. View

17.

Ninci J, Vannest K, Willson V, Zhang N . Interrater agreement between visual analysts of single-case data: a meta-analysis. Behav Modif. 2015; 39(4):510-41. DOI: 10.1177/0145445515581327. View

18.

Voss J, Federmeier K, Paller K . The potato chip really does look like Elvis! Neural hallmarks of conceptual processing associated with finding novel shapes subjectively meaningful. Cereb Cortex. 2011; 22(10):2354-64. PMC: 3432238. DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhr315. View

19.

Nickerson R . The production and perception of randomness. Psychol Rev. 2002; 109(2):330-57. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295x.109.2.330. View

20.

Lakens D . Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: a practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Front Psychol. 2013; 4:863. PMC: 3840331. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863. View