Reporting single-case design studies: Advice in relation to the designs’ methodological and analytical peculiarities

Speech-to-text intervention to support text production among students with writing difficulties: a single-case study in nordic countries

Studies report that speech-to-text applications (STT) may support students with writing difficulties in text production. However, existing research is sparse, shows mixed results, and lacks information on STT interventions and their applicability in schools. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate whether a systematic and intensive assistive technology intervention focusing on STT can improve text production. A modified multiple-baseline across-subject design was used involving eight middle school students, four Norwegian and four Swedish. Their STT-produced narrative texts were collected during and after the intervention and the productivity, accuracy, and text quality were analysed. Keyboarding was the baseline control condition. The results demonstrated that seven of the eight students increased text productivity and that the proportion of word-level accuracy was maintained or improved. The use of punctuation progressed in participants with poor baseline skills. Most students' STT-produced texts had at least a similar ratio of meaningfulness and text quality as keyboarding. However, the magnitude of the changes and development patterns varied, with three students showing the most notable impacts. In conclusion, this study's intervention seemed beneficial in initially instructing STT, and the progress monitoring guided individually adapted future interventions such as balancing productivity and formal language aspects. Removing the spelling barrier with STT provided an opportunity for students to improve their higher-order skills, such as vocabulary diversity and overall text quality. Furthermore, visible progress, such as the ability to produce longer texts, might motivate continued STT usage. However, such development may not always be immediate.

Slope Identification and Decision Making: A Comparison of Linear and Ratio Graphs

Applied behavior analysts have traditionally relied on visual analysis of graphic data displays to determine the extent of functional relations between variables and guide treatment implementation. The present study assessed the influence of graph type on behavior analysts' (n = 51) ratings of trend magnitude, treatment decisions based on changes in trend, and their confidence in decision making. Participants examined simulated data presented on linear graphs featuring equal-interval scales as well as graphs with ratio scales (i.e., multiply/divide or logarithmic vertical axis) and numeric indicators of celeration. Standard rules for interpreting trends using each display accompanied the assessment items. Results suggested participants maintained significantly higher levels of agreement on evaluations of trend magnitude and treatment decisions and reported higher levels of confidence in making decisions when using ratio graphs. Furthermore, decision making occurred most efficiently with ratio charts and a celeration value. The findings have implications for research and practice.

Results reporting in single case experiments and single case meta-analysis

Single Case Experimental Design is a discipline grounded in applied behavior analysis where the needs of individual clients and the application of scientific inquiry are fundamental tenets. These two principles remain tantamount in the conduct of research using this methodology and the expansion of the method into evidence-based practice determinations. Although recommendations for quality indicators are widespread, implementation is not. Concurrent to the rise of quality indicators is an increasing interest in analysis methodology. Visual analysis has a history of application and validity, newer forms of analysis less so. While some argue for concordance between the two, it may be the differences that are worth exploration in understanding characteristics of trend and variability in much of the published literature. Design choice and visual analysis decisions are rarely fully articulated. Statistical analyses are likewise inadequately justified or described. Recommendations for the explicit language of reporting as derived from prior meta-analysis and a current review of two leading journals provides a scaffold consistent with existing guidelines but additive in detail, exemplars, and justification. This is intended to improve reporting of results for individual studies and their potential use in future meta-analytic work.