Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34632283›Full record

ArticlePerspectives on behavior science2021

How to Be RAD: Repeated Acquisition Design Features that Enhance Internal and External Validity.

Megan S Kirby, Trina D Spencer, John Ferron

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Perspectives on behavior science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. The role of single case experimental designs in evidence creation in rehabilitation.European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Megan S KirbyCollege of Behavioral and Community Sciences, University of South Florida, 13301 Bruce B. Downs Blvd. MHC 1702, Tampa, FL 33612 USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6803-5360
Trina D SpencerCollege of Behavioral and Community Sciences, University of South Florida, 13301 Bruce B. Downs Blvd. MHC 1702, Tampa, FL 33612 USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3531-8276
John FerronCollege of Education, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6263-5912

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Repeated Acquisition Design (RAD) is a type of single-case research design (SCRD) that involves repeated and rapid measurement of irreversible discrete skills or behaviors through pre-and postintervention probes across different sets of stimuli. Researchers interested in the study of learning in animals and humans have used the RAD because of its sensitivity to detect immediate changes in rate or accuracy. Despite its strengths, critics of the RAD have cautioned against its use due to reasonable threats to internal validity like pretest effects, history, and maturation. Furthermore, many methodologists and researchers have neglected the RAD in their SCRD standards (e.g., What Works Clearinghouse [WWC], 2020; Horner et al., 2005). Unless given guidance to address threats to internal validity, researchers may avoid the design altogether or continue to use a weak version of the RAD. Therefore, we propose a set of 15 quality RAD indicators, comprising foundational elements that should be present in all RAD studies and additional features that enhance causal inference and external validity. We review contemporary RAD use and describe how the additional features strengthen the rigor of RAD studies. We end the article with suggested guidelines for interpreting effects and the strength of the evidence generated by RAD studies. We invite researchers to use these initial guidelines as a jumping off point for a more RAD future.

Indexed as

behavior analysiseducationmeasurementrepeated acquisition designsingle-case research design

Identifiers

PMID34632283
PMCPMC8476682

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.