Combining nonoverlap and trend for single-case research: Tau-U.

By Richard I. Parker, Kimberly J. Vannest, John L. Davis, Stephanie B. Sauber. The Behavior Therapist, 2011

1,487 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4098fd1e19d9d2bf5d7d952c3f79dade59a05409

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

A Systematic Review of Teacher-Delivered Behavior-Specific Praise on K–12 Student Performance (2019, positive): “…baseline trend (which we defined as 20% or greater of all baseline data pairs showing improvement over time, i.e., monotonic trend), includes phase contrast and intervention trend in the calculation, and has strong statistical power (Parker, Vannest, Davis, & Sauber, 2011; Vannest & Ninci, 2015).”
Academic Benefits of Peer Tutoring: A Meta-Analytic Review of Single-Case Research (2013, methodology): “TauU is an effect size measure based on nonoverlap between phases that can also control for confounding baseline trends (Parker et al., 2011).”
Interpreting Kendall’s Tau and Tau-U for single-case experimental designs (2018, methodology): “In their review of 176 single-case data sets, Parker et al. (2011b) found that within-phase trends were generally smaller in magnitude than between-phase differences.”
Social Skill Interventions for Youth and Adults With Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Systematic Review (2018, background): “Tau-U is conservative because it compares all data points in each phase (Pos-Neg)/Pairs), and controls for baseline trend (Parker et al., 2011).”
A Meta-Analysis of Interventions to Promote Self-Determination for Students With Disabilities (2018, methodology): “We ultimately selected Tau-U because it has more statistical power than any other nonoverlap index, and it is also the most discriminating (Parker et al., 2011).”
Bottom-Up Analysis of Single-Case Research Designs (2012, methodology): “Both of these options require a few hand calculations on the statistical program output (Schwarz 2007), as detailed by Parker et al. 2011a, b.”
Promoting Positive Behavior Using the Good Behavior Game (2016, background): “When tested, 75% of TauU values remained unchanged after r auto was cleansed (Parker et al., 2011).”
A Meta-Analysis of Single-Case Research Using Mathematics Manipulatives With Students At Risk or Identified With a Disability (2020, neutral): “First, to aggregate ESs, only Phase A (i.e., baseline) and Phase B (i.e., first intervention phase) data were included in the analyses.”
Teaching Subtraction and Multiplication with Regrouping Using the Concrete–Representational–Abstract Sequence and Strategic Instruction Model (2014, methodology): “Tau-U was calculated for each student; this form of analysis combines the analysis of nonoverlapping data points between phases with analysis of trend within the intervention phase while also accounting for any trend within baseline (Parker, Vannest, Davis, & Sauber, 2011).”
Using Virtual Manipulative Instruction to Teach the Concepts of Area and Perimeter to Secondary Students With Learning Disabilities (2015, background): “Mark’s Tau-U score (Parker et al., 2011) was 1.0 for area and perimeter (90% CI [0.469, 1.531]).”