2020
DOI: 10.1007/s40614-020-00265-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Search and Selection Procedures of Literature Reviews in Behavior Analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
18
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 98 publications
0
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The additional inclusion criteria reduced the included studies to a total of 33. These studies included both published articles as well as unpublished theses and dissertations to reduce the likelihood of publication bias influencing review findings (King et al, 2020).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The additional inclusion criteria reduced the included studies to a total of 33. These studies included both published articles as well as unpublished theses and dissertations to reduce the likelihood of publication bias influencing review findings (King et al, 2020).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thorough searches prevent publication bias but are resource-intensive and incapable of identifying all relevant studies (Delaney & Tamás, 2018). Many authors either do not provide important details regarding search procedures or use approaches that incorporate bias into results (e.g., exclusive inclusion of peer-reviewed articles; King, Kostewicz, et al, 2020). Meta-analyses often compensate for limitations in literature searches with techniques designed to assess the influence of publication bias on findings (e.g., Lin & Chu, 2018).…”
Section: Important Features Of the Meta-analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently developed effect sizes that allow for the combination of effects from single case and group designs (e.g., between-case effects, design comparable effects) may allow for more representative analyses of special education research (Shadish et al, 2015). Although increasingly featured in meta-analyses of SCD (e.g., Maggin et al, 2017), some researchers maintain the distinct methodological procedures and effects of single case and group designs are fundamentally incompatible (King, Kostewicz, et al, 2020). Despite these misgivings, the What Works Clearinghouse (What Works Clearinghouse [WWC], 2020), the primary research evaluation entity of the Department of Education, recently established a preference for design comparable effect sizes and no longer requires visual analysis to be used in characterizing study findings.…”
Section: Important Features Of the Meta-analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Low agreement poses serious questions for the use of visual analysis as a means of supporting the effectiveness of interventions. The absence of transparent or consistent guidelines for the procedure in the research literature represents an additional explanation for the lack of consensus among analysts may occur due to ( Barton et al, 2019 ; King et al, 2020 ).…”
Section: Issues With Traditional Visual Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%