TY - JOUR
T1 - A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review of the Literature to Evaluate Potential Threats to Internal Validity in Probe Procedures for Chained Tasks
AU - Alexander, Jennifer L.
AU - Smith, Katie A.
AU - Mataras, Theologia
AU - Shepley, Sally B.
AU - Ayres, Kevin M.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2014, © Hammill Institute on Disabilities 2014.
PY - 2015/11/29
Y1 - 2015/11/29
N2 - The two most frequently used methods for assessing performance on chained tasks are single opportunity probes (SOPs) and multiple opportunity probes (MOPs). Of the two, SOPs may be easier and less time-consuming but can suppress actual performance. In comparison, MOPs can provide more information but present the risk of participants acquiring steps from probing alone. The authors reviewed and summarized 20 years of single-case design literature that evaluated methods of teaching chained tasks to individuals with disabilities. The authors identified a total of 33 studies. Individual tiers of multiple baseline and probe design graphs were analyzed to evaluate possible differences in participant responding within and between baseline and intervention conditions. Differences were evident, but none considered statistical when comparing data from SOPs and MOPs. The authors discuss possible publication bias as a reason for these findings and offer future research ideas to extend the literature on probe procedures.
AB - The two most frequently used methods for assessing performance on chained tasks are single opportunity probes (SOPs) and multiple opportunity probes (MOPs). Of the two, SOPs may be easier and less time-consuming but can suppress actual performance. In comparison, MOPs can provide more information but present the risk of participants acquiring steps from probing alone. The authors reviewed and summarized 20 years of single-case design literature that evaluated methods of teaching chained tasks to individuals with disabilities. The authors identified a total of 33 studies. Individual tiers of multiple baseline and probe design graphs were analyzed to evaluate possible differences in participant responding within and between baseline and intervention conditions. Differences were evident, but none considered statistical when comparing data from SOPs and MOPs. The authors discuss possible publication bias as a reason for these findings and offer future research ideas to extend the literature on probe procedures.
KW - chained tasks
KW - developmental disabilities
KW - functional skills
KW - probe procedures
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84942316782&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84942316782&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/0022466914550096
DO - 10.1177/0022466914550096
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84942316782
SN - 0022-4669
VL - 49
SP - 135
EP - 145
JO - Journal of Special Education
JF - Journal of Special Education
IS - 3
ER -