Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare and contrast frameworks for evaluating methodological rigor in single case research. Specifically, research on high-probability requests to increase compliance in young children was evaluated. Ten studies were identified and were coded using 4 frameworks. These frameworks were the Council for Exceptional Children Standards for Evidence-based Practices, What Works Clearinghouse, Risk of Bias Assessment for Single Subject Experimental Designs, and Single Case Analysis and Review Framework. Significant differences were found across frameworks, both in the rating of rigor and the study effects. Implications for determining high-quality research and effective practices are discussed.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 267-284 |
Number of pages | 18 |
Journal | Infants and Young Children |
Volume | 35 |
Issue number | 4 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Oct 1 2022 |
Keywords
- compliance
- early childhood
- high-probability requests
- methodological rigor
- single case design
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health
- Developmental and Educational Psychology
- Psychiatry and Mental health