Quantitative integration of single-subject studies: Methods and misinterpretations
Tóm tắt
Derenne and Baron (1999) criticized a quantitative literature review by Kollins, Newland, and Critchfield (1997) and raised several important issues with respect to the integration of single-subject data. In their criticism they argued that the quantitative integration of data across experiments conducted by Kollins et al. is a meta-analysis and, as such, is inappropriate. We reply that Kollins et al. offered behavior analysts a technique for integrating quantitative information in a way that draws from the strengths of behavior analysis. Although the quantitative technique is true to the original spirit of meta-analysis, it bears little resemblance to meta-analyses as currently conducted or defined and offers behavior analysts a potentially useful tool for comparing data from multiple sources. We also argue that other criticisms raised by Derenne and Baron were inaccurate or irrelevant to the original article. Our response highlights two main points: (a) There are meaningful quantitative techniques for examining single-subject data across studies without compromising the integrity of behavior analysis; and (b) the healthiest way to refute or question findings in any viable field of scientific inquiry is through empirical investigation.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Allison, D. B., & Gorman, B. S. (1993). Calculating effect sizes for meta-analysis: The case of the single case. Behaviour Research, & Therapy, 31, 621–631.
Baron, A., & Galizio, M. (1983). Instructional control of human operant behavior. The Psychological Record, 33, 495–520.
Baron, A., & Perone, M. (1982). The place of the human subject in the operant laboratory. The Behavior Analyst, 5, 143–158.
Baron, A., Perone, M., & Galizio, M. (1991a). Analyzing the reinforcement process at the human level: Can application and behavioristic interpretation replace laboratory research? The Behavior Analyst, 14, 95–105.
Baron, A., Perone, M., & Galizio, M. (1991b). The experimental analysis of human behavior: Indispensable, ancillary, or irrelevant? The Behavior Analyst, 14, 145–155.
Baum, W. M. (1974). On two types of deviation from the matching law: Bias and undermatching. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 22, 231–242.
Baum, W. M. (1979). Matching, undermatching, and overmatching in studies of choice. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 32, 269–281.
Branch, M. N. (1991). On the difficulty of studying “basic” behavioral processes in humans. The Behavior Analyst, 14, 107–110.
Busk, P. L., & Serlin, R. C. (1992). Meta-analysis for single-case research. In T. R. Kratochwill & J. R. Levin (Eds.), Single case research design and analysis: New directions for psychology and education (pp. 187–212). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Cleveland, W. S. (1985). The elements of graphing data. Pacific Grove, CA: Wadsworth and Brooks/Cole.
Davison, M., & McCarthy, D. (1988). The matching law. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Derenne, A., & Baron, A. (1999). Human sensitivity to reinforcement: A comment on Kollins, Newland, and Critchfield’s (1997) quantitative literature review. The Behavior Analyst, 22, 35–42.
Dougherty, D. M. (1994). The selective renaissance of the experimental analysis of human behavior. The Behavior Analyst, 17, 169–174.
Gingerich, W. J. (1984). Meta-analysis of applied time-series data. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 20, 71–79.
Glass, G. V., McGaw, B., & Smith, M. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Herrnstein, R. J. (1970). On the law of effect. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 13, 243–266.
Horne, P. J., & Lowe, C. F. (1993). Determinants of human performance on concurrent schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 59, 29–60.
Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Hyten, C., & Madden, G. J. (1993). The scallop in human fixed-interval research: A review of problems with data description. The Psychological Record, 43, 471–500.
Hyten, C., & Reilly, M. P. (1992). The renaissance of the experimental analysis of human behavior. The Behavior Analyst, 15, 109–114.
Kollins, S. H., Newland, M. C. & Critchfield, T. S. (1997). Human sensitivity to reinforcement in operant choice: How much do consequences matter? Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 4, 208–220. Erratum: Psychomonic Bulletin and Review, 4, 431.
Mosteller, F. (1990). The future of meta-analysis. In K. W. Wachter & M. L. Straf (Eds.), The future of meta-analysis (pp. 185–190). New York. Russell Sage Foundation.
Myers, D. L., & Myers, L. E. (1977). Under-matching: A reappraisal of performance on concurrent variable-interval schedules of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 27, 203–214.
Newland, M. C. (1997). Quantifying the molecular structure of behavior: Separate effects of caffeine, cocaine, and adenosine agonists on interresponse times and lever press durations. Behavioural Pharmacology, 8, 1–16.
Perone, M. (1985). On the impact of human operant research: Asymmetrical patterns of cross-citation between human and nonhuman research. The Behavior Analyst, 8, 185–189.
Pierce, W. D., & Epling, W. F. (1983). Choice, matching, and human behavior: A review of the literature. The Behavior Analyst, 6, 57–76.
Salzburg, C. L., Strain, P. S., & Baer, D. M. (1987). Meta-analysis for single subject research: When does it clarify? When does it obscure? Remedial and Special Education, 8, 43–48.
Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (1998). Summarizing single-subject research: Issues and applications. Behavior Modification, 22, 221–242.
Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A., & Casto, G. (1987a). The quantitative synthesis of single subject research: Methodology and validation. Remedial and Special Education, 8, 24–33.
Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A., & Casto, G. (1987b). “The quantitative synthesis of single subject research: Methodology and validation”: Reply to Owen White. Remedial and Special Education, 8, 40–42.
Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A., & Casto, G. (1987c). “The quantitative synthesis of single subject research: Methodology and validation”: Response to Salzberg, Strain & Baer. Remedial and Special Education, 8, 49–52.
Shull, R. L., & Lawrence, P. S. (1991). Preparations and principles. The Behavior Analyst, 14, 133–138.
Sidman, M. (1960). Tactics of scientific research. New York: Free Press.
Takahashi, M., & Iwamoto, T. (1986). Human concurrent performances: The effects of experience, instructions, and schedule-correlated stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 45, 257–267.
Wachter, K. W., & Straf, M. L. (1990). The future of meta-analysis. New York. Russell Sage Foundation.
Wanchisen, B. A., Tatham, T. A., & Mooney, S. E. (1989). Variable-ratio conditioning history produces high- and low-rate fixed-interval performance in rats. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 52, 167–179.
Weiner, H. (1969). Controlling human fixed-interval performance. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 12, 349–373.
Weiner, H. (1972). Controlling human fixed-interval performance with fixed-ratio responding or differential reinforcement of low-rate responding in mixed schedules. Psychonomic Science, 26, 191–192.
White, D. M. (1987). “The quantitative synthesis of single subject research: Methodology and validation” comment. Remedial and Special Education, 8, 34–39.
White, D. M, Rusch, F. R., Kazdin, A. E., & Hartmann, D. P. (1989). Applications of meta-analysis in individual subject research. Behavioral Assessment, 11, 281–296.
Zeiler, M. D. (1984). The sleeping giant: Reinforcement schedules. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 42, 485–493.