Cargando…

Comparing the Bayesian Unknown Change-Point Model and Simulation Modeling Analysis to Analyze Single Case Experimental Designs

Recently, there has been an increased interest in developing statistical methodologies for analyzing single case experimental design (SCED) data to supplement visual analysis. Some of these are simulation-driven such as Bayesian methods because Bayesian methods can compensate for small sample sizes,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Natesan Batley, Prathiba, Nandakumar, Ratna, Palka, Jayme M., Shrestha, Pragya
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7843386/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33519641
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.617047
_version_ 1783644129575567360
author Natesan Batley, Prathiba
Nandakumar, Ratna
Palka, Jayme M.
Shrestha, Pragya
author_facet Natesan Batley, Prathiba
Nandakumar, Ratna
Palka, Jayme M.
Shrestha, Pragya
author_sort Natesan Batley, Prathiba
collection PubMed
description Recently, there has been an increased interest in developing statistical methodologies for analyzing single case experimental design (SCED) data to supplement visual analysis. Some of these are simulation-driven such as Bayesian methods because Bayesian methods can compensate for small sample sizes, which is a main challenge of SCEDs. Two simulation-driven approaches: Bayesian unknown change-point model (BUCP) and simulation modeling analysis (SMA) were compared in the present study for three real datasets that exhibit “clear” immediacy, “unclear” immediacy, and delayed effects. Although SMA estimates can be used to answer some aspects of functional relationship between the independent and the outcome variables, they cannot address immediacy or provide an effect size estimate that considers autocorrelation as required by the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) Standards. BUCP overcomes these drawbacks of SMA. In final analysis, it is recommended that both visual and statistical analyses be conducted for a thorough analysis of SCEDs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7843386
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78433862021-01-30 Comparing the Bayesian Unknown Change-Point Model and Simulation Modeling Analysis to Analyze Single Case Experimental Designs Natesan Batley, Prathiba Nandakumar, Ratna Palka, Jayme M. Shrestha, Pragya Front Psychol Psychology Recently, there has been an increased interest in developing statistical methodologies for analyzing single case experimental design (SCED) data to supplement visual analysis. Some of these are simulation-driven such as Bayesian methods because Bayesian methods can compensate for small sample sizes, which is a main challenge of SCEDs. Two simulation-driven approaches: Bayesian unknown change-point model (BUCP) and simulation modeling analysis (SMA) were compared in the present study for three real datasets that exhibit “clear” immediacy, “unclear” immediacy, and delayed effects. Although SMA estimates can be used to answer some aspects of functional relationship between the independent and the outcome variables, they cannot address immediacy or provide an effect size estimate that considers autocorrelation as required by the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) Standards. BUCP overcomes these drawbacks of SMA. In final analysis, it is recommended that both visual and statistical analyses be conducted for a thorough analysis of SCEDs. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-01-15 /pmc/articles/PMC7843386/ /pubmed/33519641 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.617047 Text en Copyright © 2021 Natesan Batley, Nandakumar, Palka and Shrestha. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychology
Natesan Batley, Prathiba
Nandakumar, Ratna
Palka, Jayme M.
Shrestha, Pragya
Comparing the Bayesian Unknown Change-Point Model and Simulation Modeling Analysis to Analyze Single Case Experimental Designs
title Comparing the Bayesian Unknown Change-Point Model and Simulation Modeling Analysis to Analyze Single Case Experimental Designs
title_full Comparing the Bayesian Unknown Change-Point Model and Simulation Modeling Analysis to Analyze Single Case Experimental Designs
title_fullStr Comparing the Bayesian Unknown Change-Point Model and Simulation Modeling Analysis to Analyze Single Case Experimental Designs
title_full_unstemmed Comparing the Bayesian Unknown Change-Point Model and Simulation Modeling Analysis to Analyze Single Case Experimental Designs
title_short Comparing the Bayesian Unknown Change-Point Model and Simulation Modeling Analysis to Analyze Single Case Experimental Designs
title_sort comparing the bayesian unknown change-point model and simulation modeling analysis to analyze single case experimental designs
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7843386/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33519641
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.617047
work_keys_str_mv AT natesanbatleyprathiba comparingthebayesianunknownchangepointmodelandsimulationmodelinganalysistoanalyzesinglecaseexperimentaldesigns
AT nandakumarratna comparingthebayesianunknownchangepointmodelandsimulationmodelinganalysistoanalyzesinglecaseexperimentaldesigns
AT palkajaymem comparingthebayesianunknownchangepointmodelandsimulationmodelinganalysistoanalyzesinglecaseexperimentaldesigns
AT shresthapragya comparingthebayesianunknownchangepointmodelandsimulationmodelinganalysistoanalyzesinglecaseexperimentaldesigns