Single-case experimental designs: a systematic review of published research and current standards.
Single-case experimental designs: a systematic review of published research and current standards.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1037/a0029312
复制
发表时间：
2012-12
影响因子：
7
通讯作者：
Smith, Justin D.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Smith, Justin D.
本文系统回顾了2000年至2010年间发表在同行评议期刊上的单例实验设计（SCED）研究的研究设计和方法特点。SCEDs为研究人员提供了灵活可行的大样本量组设计替代方案。然而，方法上的挑战阻碍了经济及经济发展会议作为主要小组设计的可行补充方法的广泛实施和接受。本文包括对研究设计、测量和分析领域的描述，这些领域与SCED不同；在该领域当代标准和准则的框架内讨论结果；和介绍主要特征的最新基准（例如基线抽样、分析方法），总的来说，它为研究人员和审稿人提供了进行和评估经济及经济发展局研究的资源。对409项研究的系统评价结果表明，最近发表的SCED研究在很大程度上符合当代实验质量标准。分析方法作为一个不和谐的领域出现了。将这项检讨的结果与历史上使用统计分析的估计数字进行比较，显示出上升的趋势，但视觉分析仍然是最常用的分析方法，并在提供经济及经济发展局标准的机构中获得最多的支持。尽管在单例研究设计的关键维度上存在共识，研究人员似乎在这些参数范围内进行实践，但仍需要进一步评估评估和抽样技术以及数据分析方法。
This article systematically reviews the research design and methodological characteristics of single-case experimental design (SCED) research published in peer-reviewed journals between 2000 and 2010. SCEDs provide researchers with a flexible and viable alternative to group designs with large sample sizes. However, methodological challenges have precluded widespread implementation and acceptance of the SCED as a viable complementary methodology to the predominant group design. This article includes a description of the research design, measurement, and analysis domains distinctive to the SCED; a discussion of the results within the framework of contemporary standards and guidelines in the field; and a presentation of updated benchmarks for key characteristics (e.g., baseline sampling, method of analysis), and overall, it provides researchers and reviewers with a resource for conducting and evaluating SCED research. The results of the systematic review of 409 studies suggest that recently published SCED research is largely in accordance with contemporary criteria for experimental quality. Analytic method emerged as an area of discord. Comparison of the findings of this review with historical estimates of the use of statistical analysis indicates an upward trend, but visual analysis remains the most common analytic method and also garners the most support amongst those entities providing SCED standards. Although consensus exists along key dimensions of single-case research design and researchers appear to be practicing within these parameters, there remains a need for further evaluation of assessment and sampling techniques and data analytic methods.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
2
作者：
Amato-Zech, NA;Hoff, KE;Doepke, KJ
通讯作者：
Doepke, KJ
影响因子：
2.9
作者：
Anglesea, Melissa M.;Hoch, Hannah;Taylor, Bridget A.
通讯作者：
Taylor, Bridget A.
影响因子：
2.2
作者：
Auslander, GK;Buchs, A
通讯作者：
Buchs, A
影响因子：
2.3
作者：
Arco, Lucius;Du Toit, Elaine
通讯作者：
Du Toit, Elaine
影响因子：
4.1
作者：
ALLISON, DB;GORMAN, BS
通讯作者：
GORMAN, BS