Single-Case Designs.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Overview of Withdrawal Designs
Advertisements

Chapter 7 Flashcards. overall plan that describes all of the elements of a research or evaluation study, and ideally the plan allows the researcher or.
Validity (cont.)/Control RMS – October 7. Validity Experimental validity – the soundness of the experimental design – Not the same as measurement validity.
Defining Characteristics
GROUP-LEVEL DESIGNS Chapter 9.
Experimental Research Designs
Internal Threats to Validity
FUNDAMENTAL RESEARCH ISSUES © 2012 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
1 Procedural Analysis or structured approach. 2 Sometimes known as Analytic Induction Used more commonly in evaluation and policy studies. Uses a set.
Research Design and Validity Threats
Experimental Design.
How do you know it worked
RESEARCH DESIGN : 1. Kinds of support for making CAUSAL interpretations of observed relationships quality of theory research design used measurement procedures.
Studying Behavior. Midterm Review Session The TAs will conduct the review session on Wednesday, October 15 th. If you have questions, your TA and.
CASE-LEVEL DESIGN Chapter 8. CASE-LEVEL RESEARCH DESIGNS ‘Blueprints” for studying single cases –Individual, group, organization, or community Also called.
Single-Case Designs. AKA single-subject, within subject, intra-subject design Footnote on p. 163 Not because only one participant (although might sometimes)
Educational Research by John W. Creswell. Copyright © 2002 by Pearson Education. All rights reserved. Slide 1 Chapter 11 Experimental and Quasi-experimental.
L1 Chapter 11 Experimental and Quasi- experimental Designs Dr. Bill Bauer.
McGraw-Hill © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Correlational Research Chapter Fifteen.
Research Methods in Crime and Justice Chapter 5 Causality.
Chapter 8 Experimental Research
Experimental Design The Gold Standard?.
2.4. Design in quantitative research Karl Popper’s notion of falsification and science – If a theory is testable and incompatible with possible empirical.
Applying Science Towards Understanding Behavior in Organizations Chapters 2 & 3.
Research and Evaluation Center Jeffrey A. Butts John Jay College of Criminal Justice City University of New York August 7, 2012 How Researchers Generate.
EVAL 6970: Cost Analysis for Evaluation Dr. Chris L. S. Coryn Nick Saxton Fall 2014.
Chapter 11 Experimental Designs
Power Point Slides by Ronald J. Shope in collaboration with John W. Creswell Chapter 11 Experimental Designs.
Experimental Research Validity and Confounds. What is it? Systematic inquiry that is characterized by: Systematic inquiry that is characterized by: An.
SINGLE - CASE, QUASI-EXPERIMENT, AND DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH © 2012 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Chapter Four Experimental & Quasi-experimental Designs.
INTERNAL VALIDITY AND BASIC RESEARCH DESIGN. Internal Validity  the approximate truth about inferences regarding cause-effect or causal relationships.
Independent vs Dependent Variables PRESUMED CAUSE REFERRED TO AS INDEPENDENT VARIABLE (SMOKING). PRESUMED EFFECT IS DEPENDENT VARIABLE (LUNG CANCER). SEEK.
Single-Subject Experimental Research
STUDYING BEHAVIOR © 2009 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
1 Copyright © 2011 by Saunders, an imprint of Elsevier Inc. Chapter 8 Clarifying Quantitative Research Designs.
 Descriptive Methods ◦ Observation ◦ Survey Research  Experimental Methods ◦ Independent Groups Designs ◦ Repeated Measures Designs ◦ Complex Designs.
METHODS IN BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH NINTH EDITION PAUL C. COZBY Copyright © 2007 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Quasi Experimental and single case experimental designs
PowerPoint presentation to accompany Research Design Explained 6th edition ; ©2007 Mark Mitchell & Janina Jolley Chapter 14 Single-n Designs and Quasi-Experiments.
Slides to accompany Weathington, Cunningham & Pittenger (2010), Chapter 15: Single-Participant Experiments, Longitudinal Studies, and Quasi-Experimental.
Single-Subject and Correlational Research Bring Schraw et al.
Experimental and Ex Post Facto Designs
Quantitative and Mixed Research Designs V. Darleen Opfer.
Basic Concepts of Outcome-Informed Practice (OIP).
Can you hear me now? Keeping threats to validity from muffling assessment messages Maureen Donohue-Smith, Ph.D., RN Elmira College.
Research designs Research designs Quantitative Research Designs.
Educational Research Experimental Research Chapter 9 (8 th Edition) Chapter 13 (7 th Edition) Gay and Airasian.
Methods of Presenting and Interpreting Information Class 9.
Chapter 6 Selecting a Design. Research Design The overall approach to the study that details all the major components describing how the research will.
William M. Trochim James P. Donnelly Kanika Arora 8 Introduction to Design.
CHOOSING A RESEARCH DESIGN
Approaches to social research Lerum
RESEARCH DESIGN Experimental Designs  
Chapter 11: Quasi-Experimental and Single Case Experimental Designs
Chapter 12 Single-Case Evaluation Designs
Review of Research Types
Making Causal Inferences and Ruling out Rival Explanations
Introduction to Design
Chapter 6 Research Validity.
Quasi-Experimental Design
Visually Interpreting Your Client’s Progress
External Validity.
Single Subject design.
Experimental Research
Group Experimental Design
Inferential Statistics
Experimental Research
Monitoring and Evaluating FGM/C abandonment programs
Presentation transcript:

Single-Case Designs

Evaluation/Research Design Overall plan that describes all of the elements of a research or evaluation study, and ideally the plan allows the researcher or evaluator to reach valid conclusions

Single-Case Design Family of designs characterized by the: Systematic repeated measurement of a client’s outcome(s) at regular, frequent, pre-designated intervals under different conditions (baseline and intervention) Evaluation of outcomes over time and under different conditions in order to monitor client progress, identify intervention effects and, more generally, learn when, why, how, and the extent to which client change occurs

A-B Design Two-phase single-case design consisting of a pre-intervention baseline phase (A) followed by an intervention phase (B)

Figure 7.1.

Strengths of the A-B Design Baseline can be used to: Confirm or disconfirm that the problem exists Establish the extent of the problem Develop and explore hypotheses useful for case conceptualization and intervention planning Determine whether the problem is getting better or worse and the pace of change Estimate what would happen to the client’s outcome without intervention

Strengths of the A-B Design (cont’d) In general, the A-B design can be used to: Determine whether your client is changing over time, whether changes are for the better or worse, whether the pace of change is satisfactory, and whether the amount of change is sufficient Determine the extent to which your intervention is related to client change

Potential Limitations of the A-B Design Can’t use it to determine the extent to which client change is lasting Can’t use it to determine whether your intervention will have the same effect with different clients, different problems, or under different circumstances Can’t use it to determine the extent to which your intervention causes client change

Cause and Effect Cause: Effect: A variable (e.g., intervention) that produces an effect or is responsible for events or results (e.g., outcome) Effect: Change in one variable (e.g., outcome) that occurred at least in part as the result of another variable (e.g., intervention)

Intervention Effect Portion of an outcome change that can be attributed uniquely to an intervention rather than to other influences Client Outcome Tx ?

Criteria for Causality Cause must precede the effect Cause must covary with the effect Knowledge must be available of what would have happened in the absence of the cause Alternative explanations must be ruled out

Figure 7.1.

Figure 7.2.

Figure 7.3.

Figure 7.4.

Alternative Explanations Plausible reasons for a relationship between an intervention and an outcome, other than that the intervention caused the outcome

Internal Validity Accuracy of conclusions based on evidence and reasoning about causal relationships between variables (e.g., extent to which an intervention, as opposed to other factors, caused a change in an outcome)

Threats to Internal Validity Reasons why it might be partly or completely wrong (i.e., invalid) to conclude that one variable (e.g., an intervention) caused another (e.g., an outcome) History effect Instrumentation effect Maturation effect Regression effect Testing effect (e.g., fatigue, practice) Ambiguous temporal precedence

History Effect Potential threat to internal validity in which change in an outcome could be misinterpreted as an intervention effect, when in fact it is caused by an external event that occurs at the same time as the intervention

Instrumentation Effect Potential threat to internal validity in which an apparent change in an outcome could be misinterpreted as an intervention effect, when in fact it is caused by a change in how the outcome is measured

Maturation Effect Potential threat to internal validity in which change in an outcome could be misinterpreted as an intervention effect, when in fact it is caused by naturally occurring changes in clients over time

Testing Effect Potential threat to internal validity in which change in an outcome could be misinterpreted as an intervention effect, when in fact it is caused by repeated measurement of the outcome Fatigue effect: Deterioration in an outcome caused by fatigue associated with repeated measurement of the outcome Practice effect: Improvement in an outcome caused by repeated measurement of the outcome

Regression Effect Potential threat to internal validity in which change in an outcome could be misinterpreted as an intervention effect, when in fact it is caused by the tendency of an individual with unusually high or low scores on a measure to subsequently have scores closer to the mean

Ambiguous Temporal Precedence Potential threat to internal validity in which it is not clear whether one variable (e.g., intervention) occurred before or after another (e.g., outcome), making it difficult to distinguish the cause from the effect

A-B-A Design Three-phase single-case design consisting of: a pre-intervention baseline phase (A1); an intervention phase (B); and a second baseline phase (A2) in which the intervention is withdrawn to determine if the outcome “reverses” to the initial baseline pattern

Figure 7.5.

Figure 7.6.

Figure 7.7.

A-B-A-B Design Four-phase single-case design consisting of: a pre-intervention baseline phase (A1); an intervention phase (B1); a second baseline phase (A2) in which the intervention is withdrawn to determine if the outcome “reverses” to the initial baseline pattern; and a reintroduction of the intervention (B2) to see whether the initial intervention effects are replicated

Figure 7.8.

Multiple Baseline Designs Multiple baseline across settings Multiple baseline across subjects (clients) Multiple baseline across behaviors (problems)

Multiple Baseline Across Settings Design Single-case design that begins with a baseline during which the same problem is measured for a single client in two or more settings at the same time. Baseline is followed by the application of the intervention in one setting while baseline conditions remain in effect for other settings, then the intervention is applied sequentially across the remaining settings to see whether intervention effects are replicated across different settings.

Multiple Baseline Across Subjects (Clients) Design Single-case design that begins with a baseline during which the same problem is measured for two or more clients at the same time in a particular setting. Baseline is followed by the application of the intervention to one client, while baseline conditions remain in effect for other clients, then the intervention is applied sequentially to remaining clients to see whether intervention effects are replicated across different clients

Multiple Baseline Across Behaviors (Problems) Design Single-case design that begins with a baseline during which two or more problems are measured at the same time for a single client in a particular setting. Baseline is followed by the application of the intervention to one problem with baseline conditions remaining in effect for other problems, then the intervention is applied sequentially to the remaining problems to see whether intervention effects are replicated across different problems

Going from A to B Decisions based on baseline pattern

Figure 7.12.

Figure 7.13.

Where Do You Go After B? Decisions based on pattern during B

Figure 7.14.

A-B-C Design Three-phase single-case design consisting of: a pre-intervention baseline (A); an intervention phase (B); and a second intervention phase (C) in which a new intervention is introduced in response to the failure of the first intervention to produce sufficient improvement in the outcome

Figure 7.15.

A-B-BC Design Three-phase single-case design consisting of: a pre-intervention baseline (A); an intervention phase (B); and a second intervention phase in which a new intervention (C) is added to the first intervention in response to the failure of the first intervention to produce sufficient improvement in the outcome

Figure 7.16.

Follow-up Phase Period of time after an intervention has ended during which outcome data are collected to determine the extent to which a client’s progress has been maintained Also known as a “maintenance phase”

Figure 7.17.