Date of Award

5-1-2021

Language

English

Document Type

Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

College/School/Department

Department of Educational and Counseling Psychology

Program

Educational Psychology and Methodology

Content Description

1 online resource (vi, 194 pages) : illustrations (some color)

Dissertation/Thesis Chair

Mariola Moeyaert

Committee Members

Kevin Quinn, Benjamin Solomon

Keywords

Excel tool, metric, quantification technique, single case design, single case experimental design, Single subject research, Quantitative research, Experimental design

Subject Categories

Special Education and Teaching

Abstract

Certain quantification techniques may be more appropriate than others for single-case design analysis depending on the research questions, the data/graph characteristics, and other desired features. The purpose of this study was a.) to develop a user-friendly tool that could assist researchers in choosing, justifying, and calculating the estimate of single-case design quantification techniques and b.) to validate and test the effectiveness of the developed tool. A total of sixteen different quantification techniques and nine different research questions, data characteristics, and desired features that may affect the appropriateness of the single-case experimental design quantification technique were identified to be included in the tool. The resulting tool provides a ranking of recommended quantification techniques, from most appropriate to least appropriate, depending on the user input (i.e., the research questions, data characteristics, and desired features that are relevant depending on the graph and data set). A pretest and posttest design was utilized to test the effectiveness of the tool. Five AB graphs were displayed to twenty-five single-case design researchers/practitioners. These participants were asked to choose an appropriate SCED quantification technique, justify their use of the quantification technique, and calculate the resulting estimate both before and after accessing the tool. A rubric was developed to objectively score participants’ responses. Results of a two-tailed paired t-test showed that the tool caused a statistically significant change in ability to choose a quantification technique and justify the use of the quantification technique. There were no statistically significant differences in effectiveness of the tool across academic department affiliation and education level. Results show that those who use single-case designs may need support in choosing and justifying their use of appropriate quantification techniques, but that the developed tool can be a helpful resource. The free tool can be accessed at https://osf.io/7usbj/.

Download

Share

COinS