Autocorrelation and estimates of treatment effect size for single‐case experimental design data
Abstract
We examined the degree of autocorrelation among single‐case design data with six measures used to estimate treatment effect size. The most commonly used measures of effect size for single‐case data over the last 5 years published in peer‐reviewed journals were selected for comparison. The overall mean degree of autocorrelation was 0.46 (SD = 0.33) across the 304 data paths, which represents a moderate degree of autocorrelation. Overall, it appears that non‐parametric measures of effect size (i.e., percent of non‐overlapping data [PND], non‐overlap of all pairs [NAP], and improvement rate difference [IRD] values) were substantially and significantly more influenced by the degree of autocorrelation. Tau‐U effect size estimate was the non‐parametric exception as it was not significantly influenced by the degree of autocorrelation. Parametric measures of effect sizes such as standardized mean difference (SMD) and log response ratio (LRR) values did not appear to be significantly influenced by the degree of autocorrelation. For SMD, LRR, and Tau‐U values, the correlation between the effect size value and the degree of autocorrelation was minimal. For NAP, IRD, and PND values, the correlation between the effect size value and the degree of autocorrelation was moderate, indicating that these estimates of effect size should be avoided as the degree of autocorrelation between data points increases.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
High levels of autocorrelation can lead to overestimation of the effect measure and therefore NAP scores should be interpreted with some caution.
“High levels of autocorrelation can lead to overestimation of the effect measure and therefore NAP scores should be interpreted with some caution”
From Acceptance and commitment therapy for individuals with depressive and anxiety symptoms following acquired brain injury: A non-concurrent multiple baseline design across four cases. (2023) · cites this paper as Barnard-Brak et al., 2021
Confidence intervals computed for NAP do assume independence.
“confidence intervals computed for NAP do assume independence (Barnard-Brak et al., 2021).”
From Acceptance and commitment therapy for individuals with depressive and anxiety symptoms following acquired brain injury: A non-concurrent multiple baseline design across four cases. (2023) · cites this paper as Barnard-Brak et al., 2021
NAP does not control for autocorrelation.
“As mentioned earlier, NAP does not control for autocorrelation.”
From Acceptance and commitment therapy for individuals with depressive and anxiety symptoms following acquired brain injury: A non-concurrent multiple baseline design across four cases. (2023) · cites this paper as Barnard-Brak et al., 2021
Cites
Combining nonoverlap and trend for single-case research: Tau-U
Parker, R. I., Vannest, K. J., Davis, J. L., & Sauber, S. B. (2011) · Behavior Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.beth.2010.08.006 · Cited by 1,468 · see citing works
An improved effect size for single-case research: nonoverlap of all pairs.
Parker, R. I., & Vannest, K. (2009) · Behavior Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.beth.2008.10.006 · Cited by 1,126 · see citing works
Evaluating Intervention Effects in Single‐Case Research Designs
Vannest, K. J., & Ninci, J. (2015) · Journal of Counseling & Development · doi:10.1002/jcad.12038 · Cited by 665 · see citing works
Comparing Visual and Statistical Analysis in Single-Case Studies Using Published Studies
Harrington, M., & Velicer, W. F. (2015) · Multivariate Behavioral Research · doi:10.1080/00273171.2014.973989 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Rauwenhoff, J. C. C., Bol, Y., Peeters, F., van den Hout, A. J. H. C., Geusgens, C. A. V., & van Heugten, C. M. (2023) · Neuropsychological Rehabilitation · doi:10.1080/09602011.2022.2053169 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
- Authors
- Barnard‐Brak, L., Watkins, L., & Richman, D. M.
- Affiliations
- Department of Special Education and Multiple Abilities The University of Alabama Tuscaloosa Alabama USA
- University of Alabama (US)
- Texas Tech University (US)
- Venue
- Behavioral Interventions
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2021-03-26
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 595-605
- ISSN
- 1072-0847 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-078X
- OpenAlex
- W3148414295
- Cited by
- 41
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 7
- FWCI
- 8.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Behavioral Interventions (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
- Keywords
- autocorrelation, single-case experimental design, treatment effect size, effect size measures, standardized mean difference, log response ratio
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review