Cited by 114Behavioral and Psychological StudiesMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference

Comparing Visual and Statistical Analysis in Single-Case Studies Using Published Studies

Open access
Harrington, Magadalena, Velicer, Wayne F.·2015·Multivariate Behavioral Research

Abstract

Little is known about the extent to which interrupted time series analysis (ITSA) can be applied to short, single-case study designs and whether those applications produce results consistent with visual analysis (VA). This article examines the extent to which ITSA can be applied to single-case study designs and compares the results based on two methods: ITSA and VA, using papers published in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis in 2010. The study was made possible by the development of software called UnGraph®, which facilitates the recovery of raw data from the graphs. ITSA was successfully applied to 94% of the examined graphs with the number of observations ranging from 8 to 136. Moderate to high lag-1 autocorrelations (>.50) were found for 46% of the data series. Effect sizes similar to group-level Cohen's d were identified based on the tertile distribution. Effects ranging from 0.00 to 0.99 were classified as small, those ranging from 1.00 to 2.49 as medium, and large effect sizes were defined as 2.50 or greater. Comparison of the conclusions from VA and ITSA had a low level of agreement (Kappa =.14, accounting for the agreement expected by chance). The results demonstrate that ITSA can be broadly implemented in applied behavior analysis research. These two methods should be viewed as complementary and used concurrently.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/00273171.2014.973989

Cites

80 of 80 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Aitken AC On least squares and lineal combination of observations Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburg H 1934 55 42 47
  2. Biosoft UnGraph for Windows (Version 5.0) 2004 Cambridge, U.K Author
  3. Harrop JW Velicer WF A comparison of three alternative methods of time series model identification Multivariate Behavioral Research 1985 20 27 44 26776274
  4. Van den Noortgate W Onghena P Combining singlecase experimental studies using hierarchical linear models School Psychology Quarterly 2003a 18 325 346

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Harrington, M., & Velicer, W. F.
Affiliations
University of Rhode Island (US)
Corresponding author
Velicer, Wayne F.
Venue
Multivariate Behavioral Research
Published
2015-03-04
Volume
50
Issue
2
Pages
162-183
ISSN
  • 0027-3171 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7906
OpenAlex
W1969454087
Cited by
114
References
80
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 6 · 2014: 1
FWCI
19.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Multivariate Behavioral Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Journal of Media Literacy Education (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA020112, DA020112)
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
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Keywords
interrupted time series, visual analysis, single-case experimental design, autocorrelation, effect size, applied behavior analysis, measurement agreement
MeSH terms
Humans, Research Design, Reproducibility of Results, Behavioral Research, Interrupted Time Series Analysis

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