University of Arizona, United States.
University of South Florida, United States.
J Sch Psychol. 2017 Aug;63:13-34. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2017.02.003. Epub 2017 Mar 9.
A number of randomization statistical procedures have been developed to analyze the results from single-case multiple-baseline intervention investigations. In a previous simulation study, comparisons of the various procedures revealed distinct differences among them in their ability to detect immediate abrupt intervention effects of moderate size, with some procedures (typically those with randomized intervention start points) exhibiting power that was both respectable and superior to other procedures (typically those with single fixed intervention start points). In Investigation 1 of the present follow-up simulation study, we found that when the same randomization-test procedures were applied to either delayed abrupt or immediate gradual intervention effects: (1) the powers of all of the procedures were severely diminished; and (2) in contrast to the previous study's results, the single fixed intervention start-point procedures generally outperformed those with randomized intervention start points. In Investigation 2 we additionally demonstrated that if researchers are able to successfully anticipate the specific alternative effect types, it is possible for them to formulate adjusted versions of the original randomization-test procedures that can recapture substantial proportions of the lost powers.
已经开发了许多随机统计程序来分析单病例多基线干预研究的结果。在之前的一项模拟研究中，对各种程序的比较表明，它们在检测中等大小的即时突然干预效果方面的能力存在明显差异，一些程序（通常是那些具有随机干预起始点的程序）表现出的效力既令人尊敬又优于其他程序（通常是那些具有单个固定干预起始点的程序）。在本后续模拟研究的调查 1 中，我们发现，当相同的随机检验程序应用于延迟的突然干预效果或即时的逐渐干预效果时：（1）所有程序的功效都严重降低；（2）与之前研究的结果相反，单一固定干预起始点程序通常优于具有随机干预起始点的程序。在调查 2 中，我们还证明，如果研究人员能够成功地预测具体的替代效应类型，他们就有可能制定出原始随机检验程序的调整版本，这些版本可以重新获得大量失去的效力。
