A Survey of Publication Practices of Single-Case Design Researchers When Treatments Have Small or Large Effects

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: A Survey of Publication Practices of Single-Case Design Researchers When Treatments Have Small or Large Effects
Language: English
Authors: William R. Shadish, Nicole A. M. Zelinsky, Jack L. Vevea, Thomas R. Kratochwill
Source: Grantee Submission. 2016 49(3):656-673.
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 18
Publication Date: 2016
Sponsoring Agency: Institute of Education Sciences (ED)
Contract Number: R305D100046
R305D100033
R305D150041
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Descriptors: Effect Size, Bias, Writing for Publication, Researchers, Outcomes of Treatment, Literature Reviews, Authors, Publications, Research Design
DOI: 10.1002/jaba.308
ISSN: 1938-3703
Abstract: The published literature often underrepresents studies that do not find evidence for a treatment effect; this is often called "publication bias." Literature reviews that fail to include such studies may overestimate the size of an effect. Only a few studies have examined publication bias in single-case design (SCD) research, but those studies suggest that publication bias may occur. This study surveyed SCD researchers about publication preferences in response to simulated SCD results that show a range of small to large effects. Results suggest that SCD researchers are more likely to submit manuscripts that show large effects for publication and are more likely to recommend acceptance of manuscripts that show large effects when they act as a reviewer. A non-trivial minority of SCD researchers (4% to 15%) would drop 1 or 2 cases from the study if the effect size is small and then submit for publication. This article ends with a discussion of implications for publication practices in SCD research.
Abstractor: As Provided
IES Funded: Yes
Entry Date: 2024
Accession Number: ED653105
Database: ERIC
Be the first to leave a comment!
You must be logged in first