Wolfe Katie, Dickenson Tammiee S, Miller Bridget, McGrath Kathleen V
1 University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA.
Behav Modif. 2019 May;43(3):361-388. doi: 10.1177/0145445518768723. Epub 2018 Apr 10.
A growing number of statistical analyses are being developed for single-case research. One important factor in evaluating these methods is the extent to which each corresponds to visual analysis. Few studies have compared statistical and visual analysis, and information about more recently developed statistics is scarce. Therefore, our purpose was to evaluate the agreement between visual analysis and four statistical analyses: improvement rate difference (IRD); Tau-U; Hedges, Pustejovsky, Shadish (HPS) effect size; and between-case standardized mean difference (BC-SMD). Results indicate that IRD and BC-SMD had the strongest overall agreement with visual analysis. Although Tau-U had strong agreement with visual analysis on raw values, it had poorer agreement when those values were dichotomized to represent the presence or absence of a functional relation. Overall, visual analysis appeared to be more conservative than statistical analysis, but further research is needed to evaluate the nature of these disagreements.
针对单病例研究,越来越多的统计分析方法正在被开发出来。评估这些方法的一个重要因素是每种方法与视觉分析的对应程度。很少有研究对统计分析和视觉分析进行比较,关于最近开发的统计方法的信息也很匮乏。因此,我们的目的是评估视觉分析与四种统计分析方法之间的一致性:改善率差异(IRD);Tau-U;赫奇斯、普斯特约夫斯基、沙迪什(HPS)效应量;以及病例间标准化均值差异(BC-SMD)。结果表明,IRD和BC-SMD与视觉分析的总体一致性最强。虽然Tau-U在原始值上与视觉分析有很强的一致性,但当这些值被二分以表示功能关系的存在或不存在时,其一致性较差。总体而言,视觉分析似乎比统计分析更保守,但需要进一步的研究来评估这些差异的性质。