The DOI matches its Crossref record; 63 of the 65 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
An improved effect size for single-case research: nonoverlap of all pairs.
Abstract
Nonoverlap of All Pairs (NAP), an index of data overlap between phases in single-case research, is demonstrated and field tested with 200 published AB contrasts. NAP is a novel application of an established effect size known in various forms as Area Under the Curve (AUC), the Common Language Effect Size (CL), the Probability of Superiority (PS), the Dominance Statistic (DS), Mann-Whitney's U, and Sommers D, among others. NAP was compared with 3 other non-overlap-based indices: PND (percent of nonoverlapping data), PEM (percent of data points exceeding the median), and PAND (percent of all nonoverlapping data), as well as Pearson's R(2). Five questions were addressed about NAP: (a) typical NAP values, (b) its ability to discriminate among typical single-case research results, (c) its power and precision (confidence interval width), (d) its correlation with the established effect size index, R(2), and (e) its relationship with visual judgments. Results were positive, the new index equaling or outperforming the other overlap indices on most criteria.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“the effect sizes found in SCED studies are usually higher than those found in group designs such as randomized controlled trials (Parker and Vannest, 2009; Shadish et al., 2016).”
From A Multiple-Baseline Evaluation of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy Focused on Repetitive Negative Thinking for Comorbid Generalized Anxiety Disorder and Depression (2020) · cites this paper as Parker and Vannest, 2009
In the citing paper
“Parker and Vannest (2009) proposed the following ranges in order to interpret NAP; scores ranging from 0 to 0.65 are weak effects, from 0.66 to 0.92 are medium effects, and from 0.93 to 1.0 are large or strong effects.”
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 Parker and Vannest (2009)
Citations
Cites
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
Muller, K. E., & Cohen, J. (1989) · Technometrics · doi:10.2307/1270020 · Cited by 99,603
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
Cohen, J. (1990) · Computers Environment and Urban Systems · doi:10.1016/0198-9715(90)90050-4 · Cited by 65,417
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.).
Lachenbruch, P. A., & Cohen, J. (1989) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2290095 · Cited by 37,421
An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples)
SHAPIRO, S. S., & WILK, M. B. (1965) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/52.3-4.591 · Cited by 23,480
The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.
Hanley, J. A., & McNeil, B. J. (1982) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiology.143.1.7063747 · Cited by 21,856
Practical Nonparametric Statistics
Groggel, D. J., & Conover, W. J. (2000) · Technometrics · doi:10.2307/1271101 · Cited by 11,076
The Use of Single-Subject Research to Identify Evidence-Based Practice in Special Education
Horner, R. H., Carr, E. G., Halle, J., McGee, G., Odom, S., & Wolery, M. (2005) · Exceptional Children · doi:10.1177/001440290507100203 · Cited by 3,368
Robust Tests for the Equality of Variances
Brown, M. B., & Forsythe, A. B. (1974) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1974.10482955 · Cited by 3,216
Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations.
Wilkinson, L., & Task Force on Statistical Inference (1999) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.54.8.594 · Cited by 2,791
Graphical Methods for Data Analysis.
Healy, M. J. R., Chambers, J. M., Cleveland, W. S., Kleiner, B., & Tukey, P. A. (1984) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A (General) · doi:10.2307/2981587 · Cited by 2,315
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Newson, R. B., 2000. snp15.1: Update to somersd. Stata Technical Bulletin 57: 35. In Stata Technical Bulletin Reprints, vol. 10, 322–323. College Station, TX: Stata Press.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
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
Self-citationEffect Size in Single-Case Research: A Review of Nine Nonoverlap Techniques
Parker, R. I., Vannest, K. J., & Davis, J. L. (2011) · Behavior Modification · doi:10.1177/0145445511399147 · Cited by 841
“Although well-documented limitations exist and call for its abandonment (Kratochwill et al., 2010; Parker & Vannest, 2009), PND (Scruggs et al., 1987) is still widely used and thus included here for comparison.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citationEvaluating 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
Self-citationSingle-case experimental designs: a systematic review of published research and current standards
Smith, J. D. (2012) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/a0029312 · Cited by 630
“Visual analysis, following systematic procedures such as those provided by Franklin, Gorman, Beasley, and Allison (1997) and Parsonson and Baer (1978), remains the standard by which SCED data are most commonly analyzed (Parker, Cryer, & Byrns, 2006). Visual analysis can arguably be applied to all SCEDs. However, a num…”
MethodKrasny-Pacini, A., & Evans, J. (2018) · Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.rehab.2017.12.002 · Cited by 373
An Improved Rank Correlation Effect Size Statistic for Single-Case Designs: Baseline Corrected Tau
Tarlow, K. R. (2016) · Behavior Modification · doi:10.1177/0145445516676750 · Cited by 289
“This substitution essentially discards any within-phase variation, resulting only in between-phase comparisons. This may be a useful strategy in some experimental designs; however, it is argued that including within-phase variation offers important insights about the reliability and consistency of observed data. To il…”
BackgroundResultInfluentialPediatric Feeding Disorders: A Quantitative Synthesis of Treatment Outcomes
Sharp, W. G., Jaquess, D. L., Morton, J. F., & Herzinger, C. V. (2010) · Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10567-010-0079-7 · Cited by 282
“The result yields a nomothetic effect size that can be interpreted in relation to effect sizes that have gained wide acceptance in large-scale group studies, with formulas available for estimating Cohen’s d and R squared from NAP ( Parker and Vannest 2009 ).”
MethodShadish, W. R., Hedges, L. V., & Pustejovsky, J. E. (2014) · Journal of School Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2013.11.005 · Cited by 283
“More recent overlap statistics such as the non-overlap of all pairs (NAP, Parker & Vannest, 2009) do not suffer from this specific deficiency, but factors influencing their magnitude are not well understood and need to be studied further.3 In contrast, the parametric modeling approach used to…”
MethodRamdoss, S. T., Machalicek, W., Rispoli, M. J., Mulloy, A. M., Lang, R. B., & O’Reilly, M. F. (2012) · Developmental Neurorehabilitation · doi:10.3109/17518423.2011.651655 · Cited by 270
“For single-case research design studies, Non-overlap of All Pairs (NAP) scores were calculated from graphed data [48].”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialRamdoss, S. T., Lang, R. B., Mulloy, A. M., Franco, J. H., O’Reilly, M. F., Didden, R., & Lancioni, G. E. (2010) · Journal of Behavioral Education · doi:10.1007/s10864-010-9112-7 · Cited by 236
“Using the guidelines for interpretation recommended by Parker and Vannest (2009), NAP scores between 0 and .65 can be classified as ‘‘weak effects’’, .66 to .92 as ‘‘medium effects’’, and .92 to 1.0 as ‘‘strong effects’’.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSingle-Case Design, Analysis, and Quality Assessment for Intervention Research
Lobo, M., Moeyaert, M., Cunha, A. B., & Babik, I. (2017) · Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy · doi:10.1097/npt.0000000000000187 · Cited by 198
Tate, R. L., Perdices, M., Rosenkoetter, U., McDonald, S., Togher, L., Shadish, W., Horner, R., Kratochwill, T., Barlow, D. H., Kazdin, A., et al. (2016) · Archives of Scientific Psychology · doi:10.1037/arc0000027 · Cited by 219
Interpreting Kendall’s Tau and Tau- U for single-case experimental designs
Brossart, D. F., Laird, V. C., & Armstrong, T. W. (2018) · Cogent Psychology · doi:10.1080/23311908.2018.1518687 · Cited by 210
“While our literature search was not as comprehensive as the one conducted by Smith (2012), we were able to collect a wide range of studies not included in Smith’s review as well as earlier studies (e.g., Parker & Hagan-Burke, 2007a; Parker, Hagan-Burke, & Vannest, 2007; Parker & Vannest, 2009).”
MethodRakap, S. (2015) · British Journal of Special Education · doi:10.1111/1467-8578.12091 · Cited by 203
Using response ratios for meta-analyzing single-case designs with behavioral outcomes
Pustejovsky, J. E. (2018) · Journal of School Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2018.02.003 · Cited by 214
Aydın, O., & Yassikaya, M. Y. (2021) · Perspectives on Behavior Science · doi:10.1007/s40614-021-00284-0 · Cited by 192
Single-Case Experimental Designs to Evaluate Novel Technology-Based Health Interventions
Dallery, J., Cassidy, R. N., & Raiff, B. R. (2013) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.2227 · Cited by 181
“Several meta-analyses have used a variant of the nonoverlap technique described above as a measure of effect size (see [64] for details about this technique) [65-67].”
MethodSingh, N. N., Lancioni, G. E., Winton, A. S. W., Karazsia, B. T., Myers, R. E., Latham, L. L., & Singh, J. (2014) · Mindfulness · doi:10.1007/s12671-014-0321-3 · Cited by 156
“Phi, calculated based on procedures illustrated by Parker and colleagues (e.g., Parker et al. 2007; Parker and Vannest 2009), offers a numeric value that represents the extent to which data from the baseline and mindfulness practice phases overlap.”
MethodJelsma, J., Pronk, M., Ferguson, G., & Jelsma-Smit, D. (2013) · Developmental Neurorehabilitation · doi:10.3109/17518423.2012.711781 · Cited by 150
“Non-overlap of all pairs (NAP) as recommended by Parker and Vannest [28] was used to determine the impact of treatment on each individual.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialValentine, J. C., Tanner‐Smith, E. E., Pustejovsky, J. E., & Lau, T. S. (2016) · Campbell Systematic Reviews · doi:10.4073/cmdp.2016.1 · Cited by 146
Mindfulness Training for Teachers Changes the Behavior of Their Preschool Students
Singh, N. N., Lancioni, G. E., Winton, A. S. W., Karazsia, B. T., & Singh, J. (2013) · Research in Human Development · doi:10.1080/15427609.2013.818484 · Cited by 162
“Phi offers a numerical expression of the extent to which data during the baseline and practice (postintervention) phases overlap and was calculated based on procedures described by Parker and colleagues (e.g., Parker et al., 2007; Parker & Vannest, 2009).”
MethodAcceptance and Commitment Therapy modules: Differential impact on treatment processes and outcomes
Villatte, J. L., Vilardaga, R., Villatte, M., Plumb Vilardaga, J. C., Atkins, D. C., & Hayes, S. C. (2016) · Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.brat.2015.12.001 · Cited by 136
“%) effects (Parker & Vannest, 2009).”
Maggin, D. M., Zurheide, J., Pickett, K. C., & Baillie, S. J. (2015) · Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions · doi:10.1177/1098300715573630 · Cited by 141
“…of 65% or below associated with a weak effect, between 66% and 92% associated with a moderate effect, and 93% and above considered a strong effect (Parker & Vannest, 2009); (b) the improvement rate difference (IRD), which also provides a summary of data overlap between phases with values of 70%…”
BackgroundWhalon, K. J., Conroy, M. A., Martínez, J. R., & Werch, B. L. (2015) · Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders · doi:10.1007/s10803-015-2373-1 · Cited by 165
“To provide an estimate of the magnitude of the intervention effect of each study, effect sizes (ES) were calculated using non-overlap of all pairs method (NAP; Parker and Vannest 2009), and Tau-U.”
MethodEffective Intervention for Behavior With a Daily Behavior Report Card: A Meta-Analysis
Vannest, K. J., Davis, J. L., Davis, C. R., Mason, B. A., & Burke, M. D. (2010) · School Psychology Review · doi:10.1080/02796015.2010.12087748 · Cited by 133
“Currently, more options are available to address this deficit (Parker, Hagan-Burke, & Vannest, 2007; Parker & Vannest, 2009).”
BackgroundSelf-citationShadish, W. R., Zelinsky, N. A. M., Vevea, J. L., & Kratochwill, T. R. (2016) · Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis · doi:10.1002/jaba.308 · Cited by 130
Bouck, E. C., Satsangi, R., & Park, J. (2017) · Remedial and Special Education · doi:10.1177/0741932517721712 · Cited by 130
Jamieson, M., Cullen, B., McGee-Lennon, M., Brewster, S., & Evans, J. (2014) · Neuropsychological Rehabilitation · doi:10.1080/09602011.2013.825632 · Cited by 41
“The NAP (Parker & Vannest, 2009) is a simple method for analysing the effectiveness of an intervention between baseline and intervention phases in a trial with a single participant.”
InfluentialCalculating Effect Size in Single-Case Research
Lenz, A. S. (2012) · Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development · doi:10.1177/0748175612456401 · Cited by 124
“Several studies (Parker et al., 2011; Parker & Vannest, 2009; Wolery, Busick, Reichow, & Barton, 2010) demonstrated that some methods of calculating effect size for SCRDs are more conservative when compared with others.”
ResultRecommendations for Choosing Single-Case Data Analytical Techniques.
Manolov, R., & Moeyaert, M. (2017) · The Behavior Therapist · doi:10.1016/j.beth.2016.04.008 · Cited by 122
Ramdoss, S. T., Mulloy, A. M., Lang, R. B., O’Reilly, M. F., Sigafoos, J., Lancioni, G. E., Didden, R., & Zein, F. E. (2011) · Research in Autism · doi:10.1016/j.rasd.2011.03.004 · Cited by 123
Effects of Augmentative and Alternative Communication on Challenging Behavior: A Meta-Analysis
Walker, V. L., & Snell, M. E. (2013) · Augmentative and Alternative Communication · doi:10.3109/07434618.2013.785020 · Cited by 124
“However, because NAP interpretative guidelines are “ tentative ” (Parker & Vannest, 2009, p. 364), the interpretation of effect sizes using the NAP statistic may be positively or negatively skewed, thus limiting the ability to compare results between reviews.”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialLequia, J. L., Machalicek, W., & Rispoli, M. J. (2011) · Research in Autism · doi:10.1016/j.rasd.2011.07.008 · Cited by 120
Single-Case-Design Research in Special Education: Next-Generation Guidelines and Considerations
Ledford, J. R., Lambert, J. M., Pustejovsky, J. E., Zimmerman, K. N., Hollins, N., & Barton, E. E. (2022) · Exceptional Children · doi:10.1177/00144029221137656 · Cited by 128
“Other effect sizes are based on other conceptual metrics, such as distributional nonoverlap (e.g., nonoverlap of all pairs; Parker & Vannest, 2009), progress toward a prespecified goal (percentage of goal obtained; Ferron et al., 2020), mean differences relative to within-participant variability in…”
BackgroundUse of an iPad Play Story to Increase Play Dialogue of Preschoolers with Autism Spectrum Disorders
Murdock, L. C., Ganz, J. B., & Crittendon, J. (2013) · Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders · doi:10.1007/s10803-013-1770-6 · Cited by 132
“Although several procedures are now available, recent data (Manolov et al. 2011) indicates that the Nonoverlap of All Pairs (NAP) effect size measure outperforms most others; thus, effect size for this study was calculated with the (NAP) procedure (Parker and Vannest 2009).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialBottom-up analysis of single-case research designs
Parker, R. I., & Vannest, K. J. (2012) · Journal of Behavioral Education · doi:10.1007/s10864-012-9153-1 · Cited by 117
“Bottom-up analysis possesses benefits that 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 (Faith et al. 1996; Parker and Vannest 2009).”
Self-citationGanz, J. B., Morin, K. L., Foster, M., Vannest, K. J., Genc‐Tosun, D., Gregori, E. V., & Gerow, S. (2017) · Augmentative and Alternative Communication · doi:10.1080/07434618.2017.1373855 · Cited by 113
Self-citationSingle-case design standards: An update and proposed upgrades
Kratochwill, T. R., Horner, R. H., Levin, J. R., Machalicek, W., Ferron, J. M., & Johnson, A. H. (2021) · Journal of School Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2021.10.006 · Cited by 112
Bossenbroek, R., Wols, A., Weerdmeester, J., Lichtwarck‐Aschoff, A., Granic, I., & van Rooij, M. M. J. W. (2020) · JMIR Mental Health · doi:10.2196/16066 · Cited by 121
“After the visual analysis, nonoverlap of all pairs (NAP [66]) was calculated, which reflects the proportion of NAP comparisons across A and B phases.”
MethodStevens, E. A., Park, S., & Vaughn, S. R. (2018) · Remedial and Special Education · doi:10.1177/0741932517749940 · Cited by 103
“NAP differs from PND, in that it evaluates all possible data overlap between the two phases (Parker & Vannest, 2009).”
BackgroundMethodDumont, E., Jansen, A., Kroes, D., de Haan, E., & Mulkens, S. (2019) · International Journal of Eating Disorders · doi:10.1002/eat.23053 · Cited by 98
“Effect sizes were computed by nonoverlap of all pairs (NAP; Parker & Vannest, 2009).”
MethodEffects of a Triadic Parent-Implemented Home-Based Communication Intervention for Toddlers
Brown, J. A., & Woods, J. J. (2015) · Journal of Early Intervention · doi:10.1177/1053815115589350 · Cited by 102
“In addition, NAP provides a p significance value (Parker & Vannest, 2009).”
BackgroundMethodSatsangi, R., & Bouck, E. C. (2014) · Learning Disability Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0731948714550101 · Cited by 97
“Tau-U scores are reported between 0 and 1, with 0.93 to 1 considered a large effect, 0.66 to 0.92 a medium effect, and 0 to 0.65 a small effect (Parker & Vannest, 2009).”
BackgroundInfluentialSanetti, L. M. H., Collier‐Meek, M. A., Long, A. C. J., Byron, J. R., & Kratochwill, T. R. (2015) · Journal of School Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2015.03.002 · Cited by 94
“Specifically, we applied non-overlap of all pairs (NAP; Parker and Vannest, 2009), TauU (Parker, Vannest, Davis, and Sauber, 2011) (without baseline trend control), TauU (Parker et al.”
MethodInfluentialBrossart, D. F., Vannest, K. J., Davis, J. L., & Patience, M. A. (2014) · Neuropsychological Rehabilitation · doi:10.1080/09602011.2013.868361 · Cited by 94
“…the median (PEM; Ma, 2006), percentage of all non-overlapping pairs (PAND; Parker, Hagan-Burke, & Vannest, 2007), non-overlap of all pairs (NAP; Parker & Vannest, 2009), the improvement rate difference (IRD; Parker, Vannest, & Brown, 2009), the percent of data exceeding the phase A median…”
BackgroundSelf-citationRispoli, M. J., Lang, R. B., Neely, L. C., Camargo, S. P. H., Hutchins, N. S., Davenport, K., & Goodwyn, F. D. (2012) · Journal of Behavioral Education · doi:10.1007/s10864-012-9164-y · Cited by 93
“Tau-U offers a more complete index of change between phases than other frequently used nonoverlap measures such as Non-Overlap of All Pairs (NAP, Parker and Vannest 2009) and Percentage of Non-Overlapping Data for single case data (PND, Scruggs et al. 1987).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialBailey, B., Bryant, L., & Hemsley, B. (2021) · Review Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders · doi:10.1007/s40489-020-00230-x · Cited by 96
An Evidence-Based Systematic Review on Cognitive Interventions for Individuals With Dementia
Hopper, T. L., Bourgeois, M. S., Pimentel, J. T., Qualls, C. D., Hickey, E. M., Frymark, T. B., & Schooling, T. L. (2013) · American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology · doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2012/11-0137 · Cited by 87
Laraway, S., Snycerski, S., Pradhan, S., & Huitema, B. E. (2019) · Perspectives on Behavior Science · doi:10.1007/s40614-019-00193-3 · Cited by 93
“…several such measures for SCDs (e.g., Beretvas & Chung, 2008; Brossart et al., 2006; Harvey, Boer, Meyer, Evans, 2009; Heyvaert et al., 2014; Huitema, 2011; Kratochwill et al., 2010; Olive & Smith, 2005; Parker & Vannest, 2009; Shadish, Hedges, & Pustejovksy, 2014a; Shadish et al., 2014b).”
Burns, M. K., Zaslofsky, A. F., Kanive, R., & Parker, D. C. (2012) · Journal of Behavioral Education · doi:10.1007/s10864-012-9160-2 · Cited by 85
Boesch, M. C., Wendt, O., Subramanian, A., & Hsu, N. (2012) · Research in Autism · doi:10.1016/j.rasd.2012.12.002 · Cited by 85
“Guidelines for interpreting scores are offered as follows: 0–65% indicates weak effects, 66–92% indicates medium effects, and 93–100% indicates large or strong effects (Parker & Vannest, 2009).”
BackgroundMethodThe Impact of Reading to Engage Children With Autism in Language and Learning (RECALL)
Whalon, K., Martinez, J. R., Shannon, D. K., Butcher, C., & Hanline, M. (2015) · Topics in Early Childhood Special Education · doi:10.1177/0271121414565515 · Cited by 79
“Available guidelines for interpreting nonoverlap measures vary but generally consider ES estimates ranging from .90 to .92 and higher as effective, between .66 and .92 as medium, and below .65 to .70 as weak or questionable (Parker & Vannest, 2009; Scruggs & Mastropieri, 1998).”
Backgroundde Jong, J. R., Vlaeyen, J. W. S., van Eijsden-Besseling, M. D. F., Loo, C., & Onghena, P. (2012) · Pain · doi:10.1016/j.pain.2012.07.001 · Cited by 89
“NAP equals the number of comparison pairs showing no overlap, divided by the total number of comparisons, and can be obtained as the area under the curve percentage from a receiver operating characteristic analysis [59].”
MethodEfficacy of Point-of-View Video Modeling
Mason, R. A., Davis, H. S., Boles, M. B., & Goodwyn, F. D. (2013) · Remedial and Special Education · doi:10.1177/0741932513486298 · Cited by 84
“…often contain few data points with short data series resulting in idiosyncratic patterns (Faith, Allison, & Gorman, 1997; Kratochwill et al., 2010; Parker & Vannest, 2009), which can make aggregating and computing effect sizes of intervention effects different from group meta-analytical research.”
BackgroundThe effect of a specialized dyslexia font, OpenDyslexic, on reading rate and accuracy
Wery, J., & Diliberto, J. A. (2016) · Annals of Dyslexia · doi:10.1007/s11881-016-0127-1 · Cited by 83
Single-case experimental designs: Reflections on conduct and analysis
Manolov, R., Gast, D. L., Perdices, M., & Evans, J. J. (2014) · Neuropsychological Rehabilitation · doi:10.1080/09602011.2014.903199 · Cited by 80
“A related challenge is how to compare intervention effects quantified with different primary indicators—for instance, a standardised mean difference arising from generalised least squares regression (Maggin et al., 2011) and the nonoverlap of all pairs (Parker & Vannest, 2009).”
BackgroundMethodMeta‐analyses and effect sizes in applied behavior analysis: A review and discussion
Dowdy, A., Peltier, C. J., Tincani, M., Schneider, W. J., Hantula, D. A., & Travers, J. C. (2021) · Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis · doi:10.1002/jaba.862 · Cited by 86
How Can Single-Case Data Be Analyzed? Software Resources, Tutorial, and Reflections on Analysis
Manolov, R., & Moeyaert, M. (2016) · Behavior Modification · doi:10.1177/0145445516664307 · Cited by 91
“Afterward, a quantification of choice can be computed on the rotated data (Parker et al., 2014b, suggest the nonoverlap of all pairs [NAP]; Parker & Vannest, 2009).”
BackgroundMethodCook, C. R., Duong, M. T., McIntosh, K., Fiat, A. E., Larson, M. F., Pullmann, M. D., & McGinnis, J. L. (2018) · School Psychology Review · doi:10.17105/spr-2017-0026.v47-2 · Cited by 92
“To cross-validate the results from visual analysis, two single case effect size estimates were computed: Tau-U (Tau-U; Parker, Vannest, Davis, & Sauber, 2011) and the nonoverlap of all pairs (NAP; Parker & Vannest, 2009).”
MethodBowman-Perrott, L. J., Burke, M. D., Zhang, N., & Zaini, S. (2014) · School Psychology Review · doi:10.1080/02796015.2014.12087427 · Cited by 74
“TauU values, equivalent to nonoverlap of all pairs (NAP), can be tentatively interpreted as small effects, 0 to 0.65; medium to high effects, 0.66 to 0.92; and large effects, 0.93 to 1.0 (Parker & Vannest, 2009).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialQi, C. H., Barton, E. E., Collier, M. L., Lin, Y., & Montoya, C. (2015) · Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities · doi:10.1177/1088357615613516 · Cited by 74
“PDO2 was introduced by Parker and Vannest (2009) to evaluate nonoverlap data points between baseline and intervention phases.”
BackgroundMethodLarson, M. F., Cook, C. R., Fiat, A. E., & Lyon, A. R. (2018) · School Mental Health · doi:10.1007/s12310-018-9250-y · Cited by 93
Therrien, M. C. S., & Light, J. (2018) · American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology · doi:10.1044/2017_ajslp-17-0104 · Cited by 72
McDuffie, A. S., Oakes, A., Machalicek, W., Ma, M., Bullard, L., Potter, S. N., & Abbeduto, L. (2015) · American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology · doi:10.1044/2015_ajslp-14-0137 · Cited by 73
“NAP statistically is equivalent to the area under the curve in Receiver Operating Characteristic analysis or a Mann–Whitney U test in nonparametric analysis (Parker & Vannest, 2009).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialComparison of randomization-test procedures for single-case multiple-baseline designs
Levin, J. R., Ferron, J. M., & Gafurov, B. S. (2016) · Developmental Neurorehabilitation · doi:10.1080/17518423.2016.1197708 · Cited by 72
Non-overlap analysis for single-case research.
Davis, J. L. (2014) · American Psychological Association eBooks · doi:10.1037/14376-005 · Cited by 74
Roth, M. E., Gillis, J. L., & Reed, F. D. D. (2013) · Journal of Behavioral Education · doi:10.1007/s10864-013-9189-x · Cited by 71
“Nonoverlap of all pairs is calculated by dividing the number of improving pairs (plus half of ties) by all pairs (Parker and Vannest 2009).”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialKlingbeil, D. A., Fischer, A. J., Renshaw, T. L., Bloomfield, B. S., Polakoff, B., Willenbrink, J. B., Copek, R. A., & Chan, K. T. (2017) · Psychology in the Schools · doi:10.1002/pits.21982 · Cited by 67
Zhang, D.-K., & Yan, P.-X. (2012) · The Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.1080/00220671.2011.627397 · Cited by 75
“As such, the PND measure may not be sufficiently sensitive to evaluate the magnitude of treatment effectiveness (Parker & Vannest, 2009 ).”
BackgroundSingh, N. N., Lancioni, G. E., Karazsia, B. T., Myers, R. E., Hwang, Y., & Anālayo, B. (2019) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00385 · Cited by 85
Treating Speech Subsystems in Childhood Apraxia of Speech With Tactual Input: The PROMPT Approach
Dale, P. S., & Hayden, D. (2013) · American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology · doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2013/12-0055 · Cited by 68
Function-Based Intervention in Inclusive School Settings: A Meta-Analysis
Walker, V. L., Chung, Y.-C., & Bonnet, L. K. (2017) · Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions · doi:10.1177/1098300717718350 · Cited by 68
“We applied two relatively new approaches to estimate intervention effect across each study participant: (a) Nonoverlap of All Pairs (NAP; Parker & Vannest, 2009) and (b) Tau-U (Parker, Vannest, Davis, & Sauber, 2011).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialLong, A. C. J., Miller, F. G., & Upright, J. J. (2018) · School Psychology · doi:10.1037/spq0000305 · Cited by 72
Flores-Gallegos, R., Rodríguez-Leis, P., & Fernández, T. (2021) · International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1016/j.ijcci.2021.100394 · Cited by 67
Analysis of Effect for Single-Case Design Research
Gage, N. A., & Lewis, T. J. (2012) · Journal of Applied Sport Psychology · doi:10.1080/10413200.2012.660673 · Cited by 67
“…pearson’s phi (calculated concurrently with PAND), percent of phase exceeding the Phase A median (PEM; Ma, 2006), IRD, non-overlap of all pairs (Parker & Vannest, 2009), Kendall’s Tau non-overlap (Parker, Vannest, Davis, & Sauber, 2011), and non-overlap with baseline trend control (Tau-U ;…”
MethodAlzrayer, N. M., Banda, D. R., & Koul, R. (2017) · Augmentative and Alternative Communication · doi:10.1080/07434618.2017.1306881 · Cited by 66
“The effect size was determined for navigation skills and symbol combination for each participant using a non-overlap of all pairs (NAP; Parker & Vannest, 2009) procedure with confidence interval (CI).”
MethodSingh, N. N., Lancioni, G. E., Karazsia, B. T., Myers, R. E., Winton, A. S. W., Latham, L. L., & Nugent, K. (2014) · Mindfulness · doi:10.1007/s12671-014-0369-0 · Cited by 66
Ledford, J. R., Lane, J. D., Elam, K. L., & Wolery, M. R. (2012) · American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities · doi:10.1352/1944-7558-117.5.413 · Cited by 66
Lang, R. B., Kuriakose, S., Lyons, G., Mulloy, A. M., Boutot, A., Britt, C., Caruthers, S., Ortega, L., O’Reilly, M. F., & Lancioni, G. E. (2011) · Research in Autism · doi:10.1016/j.rasd.2011.02.012 · Cited by 65
Boesch, M. C., Wendt, O., Subramanian, A., & Hsu, N. (2013) · Augmentative and Alternative Communication · doi:10.3109/07434618.2013.818059 · Cited by 65
Bouck, E. C., Bassette, L., Shurr, J. C., Park, J., Kerr, J., & Whorley, A. (2017) · Journal of Special Education Technology · doi:10.1177/0162643417727291 · Cited by 65
Ruiz, F. J., Flórez, C. L., García-Martín, M. B., Monroy-Cifuentes, A., Barreto-Montero, K., García-Beltrán, D. M., Riaño-Hernández, D., Sierra, M. A., Suárez-Falcón, J. C., Cardona-Betancourt, V., et al. (2018) · Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science · doi:10.1016/j.jcbs.2018.04.004 · Cited by 65
Sanetti, L. M. H., Williamson, K. M., Long, A. C. J., & Kratochwill, T. R. (2017) · Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions · doi:10.1177/1098300717722357 · Cited by 64
Towson, J. A., Akemoglu, Y., Watkins, L., & Zeng, S. (2021) · American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology · doi:10.1044/2021_ajslp-20-00401 · Cited by 39
A comparison of mean phase difference and generalized least squares for analyzing single-case data.
Manolov, R., & Solanas, A. (2013) · Journal of School Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2012.12.005 · Cited by 65
Ledford, J. R., King, S. A., Harbin, E. R., & Zimmerman, K. N. (2016) · Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities · doi:10.1177/1088357616634024 · Cited by 61
“Traditional values are based on those specified for nonoverlap of all pairs (Parker & Vannest, 2009).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialA Meta-Analysis of Mobile Technology Supporting Individuals With Disabilities
Cumming, T. M., & Rodríguez, C. D. (2017) · The Journal of Special Education · doi:10.1177/0022466917713983 · Cited by 60
“The following qualitative interpretations are suggested for Tau-U scores .65 or lower: weak or small, .66 to .92: medium or high, .93 and above: large or strong (Parker & Vannest, 2009; Rispoli et al., 2013).”
BackgroundRademaker, F., de Boer, A., Küpers, E., & Minnaert, A. E. M. G. (2020) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2020.602414 · Cited by 59
“In order to get an estimate of the evidence from single and/or multiple case study designs, the value for the non-overlap of all pairs effect size (NAP) was calculated (Parker and Vannest, 2009; Parker et al., 2011).”
BackgroundKrasny‐Pacini, A., Limond, J., Evans, J. J., Hiebel, J., Bendjelida, K., & Chevignard, M. (2014) · Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation · doi:10.1097/htr.0000000000000015 · Cited by 63
Hong, E. R., Gong, L.-Y., Ninci, J., Morin, K. L., Davis, J. L., Kawaminami, S., Shi, Y.-Q., & Noro, F. (2017) · Research in Developmental Disabilities · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2017.09.013 · Cited by 59
“PND, though widely used, has many limitations that make it a less desirable non-parametric effect size (Kratochwill et al., 2010/2014; Kratochwill et al., 2010; Parker, Vannest, Davis, 2011), such as the use of only the most positive data point in baseline (Parker & Vannest, 2009).”
BackgroundFrom Boulder to Stockholm in 70 Years: Single Case Experimental Designs in Clinical Research
Vlaeyen, J. W. S., Wicksell, R. K., Simons, L. E., Gentili, C., De, T. K., Tate, R. L., Vohra, S., Punja, S., Linton, S. J., Sniehotta, F. F., et al. (2020) · The Psychological Record · doi:10.1007/s40732-020-00402-5 · Cited by 63
Effects of an Automated Vocabulary and Comprehension Intervention
Spencer, E. J., Goldstein, H., Sherman, A., Noe, S., Tabbah, R., Ziolkowski, R. A., & Schneider, N. (2012) · Journal of Early Intervention · doi:10.1177/1053815112471990 · Cited by 72
Online Training for Paraeducators to Support the Communication of Young Children
Douglas, S. N., McNaughton, D., & Light, J. (2013) · Journal of Early Intervention · doi:10.1177/1053815114526782 · Cited by 58
“The mean number of communication opportunities provided during maintenance was 41, with limited variability (range = 37-44). a strong intervention effect of 1.0 was noted using NaP for communication opportunities provided by Carol.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialWilson, K. P. (2012) · Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders · doi:10.1007/s10803-012-1731-5 · Cited by 68
“Overlap analyses were completed for both treatment conditions using the NAP procedure, with the following results: 73 % non-overlap for video modeling, indicating a medium effect and 53 % non-overlap for in vivo modeling.”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialAnalyzing data from single-case alternating treatments designs.
Manolov, R., & Onghena, P. (2017) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/met0000133 · Cited by 57
Wood, A. G., Barker, J. B., Turner, M. J., & Sheffield, D. (2017) · Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports · doi:10.1111/sms.12926 · Cited by 57
Manolov, R., Losada, J., Chacón-Moscoso, S., & Sanduvete-Chaves, S. (2016) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00032 · Cited by 53
“Our choice of procedures [non-overlap of all pairs (NAPs); Parker and Vannest, 2009 and SLC; Solanas et al., 2010a] is based on the six criteria detailed below, although alternative quantifications are provided later in this article.”
BackgroundMethodSchlesinger, N., & Gray, S. I. (2017) · Annals of Dyslexia · doi:10.1007/s11881-017-0140-z · Cited by 56
Qi, C. H., Barton, E. E., Collier, M. L., & Lin, Y. (2017) · Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities · doi:10.1177/1088357617741282 · Cited by 56
“Although several nonoverlap methods have been proposed for synthesizing SCRD research (Ma, 2006; Parker & Vannest, 2009; Parker, Vannest, & Brown, 2009), there are critical limitations of these methods (Wolery et al., 2010).”
MethodInfluentialClinical outcomes of behavioral treatments for pica in children with developmental disabilities
Call, N. A., Simmons, C. A., Mevers, J. E. L., & Alvarez, J. P. (2015) · Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders · doi:10.1007/s10803-015-2375-z · Cited by 55
“Analysis of Outcome Data Following the methodology employed by Parker and Vannest (2009), nonoverlap of all pairs (NAP) scores were calculated from the clinical data collected for each participant.”
BackgroundMethodInfluential
Metadata
- Authors
- Parker, R. I., & Vannest, K.
- Affiliations
- Texas A&M University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Parker, Richard I.
- ORCID
- Vannest, Kimberly
- Venue
- Behavior Therapy
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2009-12
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 357-367
- ISSN
- 0005-7894 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2028628292
- Cited by
- 1,126
- References
- 65
- Citations by year
- 2026: 61 · 2025: 95 · 2024: 85 · 2023: 97 · 2022: 99 · 2021: 90 · 2020: 87 · 2019: 81 · 2018: 86 · 2017: 84 · 2016: 69 · 2015: 57 · 2014: 49 · 2013: 30 · 2012: 35
- FWCI
- 12.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Behavior Therapy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (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
- effect size, single subject research, data overlap, R-squared, visual assessment, confidence interval width, statistical power
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Models, Psychological, Probability, Psychology, Research Design, Confidence Intervals, Area Under Curve
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
