Between-case standardized effect size analysis of single case designs: Examination of the two methods. (August 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Odom, Samuel L.; Barton, Erin E.; Reichow, Brian; Swaminathan, Hariharan; Pustejovsky, James E.
• Is Part Of: Research in developmental disabilities. Volume 79(2018)
• Page Start: 88
• Page End: 96
• Publication Date: 2018-08
• Subjects: Single case research -- meta-analysis -- single case effect sizes; Developmental disabilities -- Periodicals; Developmentally disabled -- Research -- United States -- Periodicals; Developmentally disabled children -- Education -- Research -- United States -- Periodicals; Developmental Disabilities -- Periodicals; Disabled -- Periodicals; Mental Retardation -- rehabilitation -- Periodicals; Personnes atteintes de troubles du développement -- Recherche -- États-Unis -- Périodiques; Enfants atteints de troubles du développement -- Éducation -- Recherche -- États-Unis -- Périodiques; Développement, Troubles du -- Recherche -- États-Unis -- Périodiques; 616.858800
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ridd.2018.05.009
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0891-4222

Abstract

Highlights: The between case analyses found effect sizes which were consistent with the previous authors overall conclusions. The magnitude of the effect sizes for the object play and sensory reviews were consistent with their respective systematic reviews. We provide support for feasible approaches for generating effect size data for SCD research. Abstract: An increasing movement in single case research is to employ statistical analyses as one form of data analysis. Researchers have proposed different statistical approaches. The purpose of this paper is to examine the utility and discriminant validity of two novel types of between-case standardized effect size analyses with two existing systematic reviews. The between-case analyses found greater effect sizes for the studies in the object play review and smaller effect sizes for studies of sensory intervention, which were consistent with the overall conclusions reached in the original systematic reviews. These findings provide evidence of discriminant validity, although concerns remain around the methods' utility across different single case research designs. Future directions for research and development also are provided.