Detecting potential hucksterism in meta-analysis using a follow-up fail-safe test

Meta-analysis is an analysis of analyses. It is a technique widely used by researchers and practitioners to aggregate and summarize statistically reported empirical educational research. In 10 years, meta-analysis appeared more than 600 times in research journals and dissertation abstracts. Although most meta-analyses were reported as significant, few of the findings determined how many unpublished “no-effect” studies, if sampled, would have invalidated significance. If significant meta-analysis results are over represented through selective sampling, hucksterism in the form of sampling bias exists. An explanation for using a follow-up test called the fail-safe N is provided with tables constructed to assist researchers and practitioners to estimate, without calculation, the relative stability of meta-analysis results. The implication is that failsafe N should routinely be used and reported in meta-analysis research.     

Social skills interventions across school settings: Case study reviews of students with mild disabilities

This study investigates the efficacy of a social skills training program with seven mildly handicapped students across three school settings: regular classroom, special education resource room, and recess. It was found that social skills training generated improvement on both pre-post measures and behavior ratings. Improvements were maintained 2 weeks after treatment was discontinued for seven students. All students' performance generalized from resource room to regular classroom settings; only four students' performance generalized to the recess setting.     

Can ability-achievement regression to the mean account for MDT discretionary decisions?

The test scores of 153 referred students who received inconsistent placements according to California's discrepancy criterion, which does not take regression into account (standard score distribution procedure), were reanalyzed using a procedure that accounts for regression. Students involved in these MDT discretionary decisions were placed into one of three groups: ineligible (originally met discrepancy criterion, but not placed), resource class (originally did not meet discrepancy criterion, but placed in a less restrictive pull-out program), and special day class (originally did not meet discrepancy criterion, but placed in a more restrictive, essentially full-time special education class). All of these placements were inconsistent with the nonregressed ability-achievement discrepancy criterion the MDTs used at the time of the IEP meeting. To evaluate how many of these students could be considered to be underachieving when regression is considered, regressed discrepancy scores were computed using the students' scores on the WISC-R and one or more of the following achievement tests: WRAT, PIAT, and W-J. Regression “accounted” for a significant proportion of the inconsistent placements in all three groups: ineligible (25.0%), resource class (31.5%), and special day class (46.9%). Implications for professional practice and public policy are discussed.     

Multimethod behavioral treatment of long-term selective mutism

This single-subject, experimental research design examined the efficacy of treating severe, long-term selective mutism in a 9-year-old male using shaping, multiple re-inforcers, natural consequences, stimulus fading, and mild aversives. Different treatment regimens were implemented in the home and school environments. A multiple baseline design across settings with changing criterion was used to evaluate the home intervention, and an A-B-A design was used for the school intervention. The home intervention resulted in an increase in the number of verbalizations in each setting and prompted generalization to additional settings. The school intervention increased the number of people spoken to, but the results were not maintained at follow-up nor did they generalize outside of the training situation. Possible explanations for the discrepancy in maintenance and generalization data between the two programs are presented.