Abstract
This paper defines and promotes the qualities of a “bottom-up” approach to single-case research (SCR) data analysis. Although “top-down” models, for example, multi-level or hierarchical linear models, are gaining momentum and have much to offer, interventionists should be cautious about analyses that are not easily understood, are not governed by a “wide lens” visual analysis, do not yield intuitive results, and remove the analysis process from the interventionist, who alone has intimate understanding of the design logic and resulting data patterns. “Bottom-up” analysis possesses benefits which fit well with SCR, including applicability to designs with few data points and few phases, customization of analyses based on design and data idiosyncrasies, conformation with visual analysis, and directly meaningful effect sizes. Examples are provided to illustrate these benefits of bottom-up analyses.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abramson, J. H. (2012). Programs for epidemiologists-Windows version (WinPepi) [Computer software]. Retrieved from http://www.brixtonhealth.com/pepi4windows.html.
Allison, D. B., & Gorman, B. S. (1993). Calculating effect sizes for meta-analysis: The case of the single case. Behavior, Research, and Therapy, 31, 621–631.
Allison, D. B., Silverstein, J. M., & Gorman, B. S. (1996). Power, sample size estimation, and early stopping rules. In R. D. Frandlin, D. B. Allison, & B. S. Gorman (Eds.), Design and analysis of single case research (pp. 335–371). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., & Rothstein, H. (2007). Meta-analysis: Fixed effect vs random effects. Retrieved February 20, 2012, from http://www.Meta-Analysis.com.
Faith, M. S., Allison, D. B., & Gorman, B. S. (1996). Meta-analysis of single-case research. In R. D. Franklin, D. B. Allison, & B. S. Gorman (Eds.), Design and analysis of single-case research (pp. 245–277). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. CITY?. Harcourt: Academic Press.
Horner, R. J., Carr, E. G., Halle, J., McGee, G., Odom, S., & Wolery, M. (2005). The use of single-subject research to identify evidence based practice in special education. Exceptional Children, 71, 165–179.
Hornik, K. (2012). The R FAQ. Retrieved February 14, 2012 from http://cran.r-project.org/doc/FAQ/R-FAQ.html#Citing-this-document. ISBN 3-900051-08-9.
Huitema, B. E., & McKean, J. W. (2000). Design specification issues in time series intervention models. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60, 38–58.
Kazdin, A. E. (2010). Single case research designs: Methods for clinical and applied settings (2nd ed.). NY: Oxford University Press.
Kratochwill, T. R., & Levin, J. R. (2010). Enhancing the scientific credibility of single-case intervention research: Randomization to the rescue. Psychological Methods, 15, 122–144.
Maggin, D. M., Swaminathan, H., Rogers, H. J., O’Keeffe, B. V., Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2011). A generalized least squares regression approach for computing effect sizes in single-case research: application examples. Journal of School Psychology, 49, 301–321.
Parker, R. I., Hagan-Burke, S., & Vannest, K. (2007). Percentage of all non-overlapping data (PAND). The Journal of Special Education, 40, 194–204.
Parker, R. I., & Vannest, K. J. (2009). An improved effect size for single case research: NonOverlap of All Pairs (NAP). Behavior Therapy, 40, 357–367.
Parker, R., Vannest, K. J., & Davis, J. L. (2011a). Nine non-overlap techniques for single case research. Behavior Modification, 35, 303–322.
Parker, R., Vannest, K. J., & Davis, J. L. (in press). Simple graph rotation to control baseline trend within data non-overlap. Journal of Special Education.
Parker, R. I., Vannest, K. J., Davis, J. L., & Sauber, S. B. (2011b). Combining nonoverlap and trend for single case research: Tau-U. Behavior Therapy, 42, 287–299.
Sanchez-Meca, J., & Marin-Martinez, F. (2010). Weighting by inverse variance or by sample size in meta, analysis: A simulation study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 70(1), 56–73.
Schwarz, C. J. (2007). Sampling, regression, experimental design and analysis for environmental scientists, biologists, and resource managers. Burnaby: Simon Fraser University.
Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (1994). The utility of the PND statistic: A reply to Allison and Gorman. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 32, 879–883.
Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (1998). Summarizing single-subject research: Issues and applications. Behavior Modification, 22, 221–242.
Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (2001). How to summarize single-participant research: Ideas and applications. Exceptionality, 9, 227–244.
StatsDirect Ltd. (2002). StatsDirect statistical software. England. Retrieved February 14, 2012 from http://www.statsdirect.com.
van den Noorgate, W., & Onghena, P. (2007). The aggregation of single-case results using hierarchical linear models. The Behavior Analyst, 8, 196–208.
van den Noortgate, W., & Onghena, P. (2008). A multilevel meta-analysis of single subject experimental design studies. Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention, 2, 142–158.
White, O. R., & Haring, N. G. (1980). Exceptional teaching (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Parker, R.I., Vannest, K.J. Bottom-Up Analysis of Single-Case Research Designs. J Behav Educ 21, 254–265 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-012-9153-1
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-012-9153-1