The Relationship Between Visual Depictions of Rate of Improvement and Quantitative Effect Sizes in Academic Single-Case Experimental Design Studies.
Saved in:
| Title: | The Relationship Between Visual Depictions of Rate of Improvement and Quantitative Effect Sizes in Academic Single-Case Experimental Design Studies. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Van Norman, Ethan R. (AUTHOR), Boorse, Jaclin (AUTHOR), Klingbeil, David A. (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Journal of Behavioral Education. Sep2024, Vol. 33 Issue 3, p667-688. 22p. |
| Subjects: | Oral reading, Least squares, Experimental design, Mathematics, Ceilings |
| Abstract: | Despite the increased number of quantitative effect sizes developed for single-case experimental designs (SCEDs), visual analysis remains the gold standard for evaluating methodological rigor of SCEDs and determining whether a functional relation between the treatment and the outcome exists. The physical length and range of values plotted on x and y-axes can influence the visual display of data and subsequent interpretations of treatment effects. We explored the extent to which geometric slope (the angle of inclination) of treatment phase data corresponded to three within-case effect sizes (percent exceeding baseline trend, Tau-U, and generalized least squares) in a dataset of published multiple-baseline designs that targeted fluency in academic outcomes (oral reading fluency, written production, and math computation). A secondary purpose of the study was to explore the distributional properties of said effect sizes across a specific class of outcomes. Results suggest that there is very little correspondence between visual depictions of treatment trend and the effect sizes. Noticeable ceiling effects were observed for overlap-based effect sizes and extremely broad ranges were observed for the regression-based effect sizes. The need to standardize graphing procedures for SCEDs using ordinal axes is offered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Journal of Behavioral Education is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Despite the increased number of quantitative effect sizes developed for single-case experimental designs (SCEDs), visual analysis remains the gold standard for evaluating methodological rigor of SCEDs and determining whether a functional relation between the treatment and the outcome exists. The physical length and range of values plotted on x and y-axes can influence the visual display of data and subsequent interpretations of treatment effects. We explored the extent to which geometric slope (the angle of inclination) of treatment phase data corresponded to three within-case effect sizes (percent exceeding baseline trend, Tau-U, and generalized least squares) in a dataset of published multiple-baseline designs that targeted fluency in academic outcomes (oral reading fluency, written production, and math computation). A secondary purpose of the study was to explore the distributional properties of said effect sizes across a specific class of outcomes. Results suggest that there is very little correspondence between visual depictions of treatment trend and the effect sizes. Noticeable ceiling effects were observed for overlap-based effect sizes and extremely broad ranges were observed for the regression-based effect sizes. The need to standardize graphing procedures for SCEDs using ordinal axes is offered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 10530819 |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s10864-022-09500-6 |
