Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Repeated Measures, Cross-Over, Carry-Over, and Latin Square Designs01:15

Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Repeated Measures, Cross-Over, Carry-Over, and Latin Square Designs

307
Body:Bioequivalence experimental study designs play a pivotal role in testing the effectiveness of various treatments. Key among these are the repeated measures, cross-over, carry-over, and Latin square designs. In the repeated measures design, each subject receives all treatments, allowing for temporal comparisons. This type of design is useful in reducing variability but requires careful planning to avoid bias.The cross-over design, an economical method, involves sequential administration of...
307
Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Completely Randomized and Randomized Block Designs01:20

Bioequivalence Experimental Study Designs: Completely Randomized and Randomized Block Designs

338
Body:Bioequivalence experimental study designs are crucial methodologies used in evaluating and comparing the bioavailability of different drug products. These designs are categorized into various types: completely randomized, randomized block, repeated measures, cross and carry-over, and Latin square designs.Completely randomized designs involve randomly allocating treatments to all subjects participating in the experiment. This allocation is achieved by assigning unique random numbers to...
338
Randomized Experiments01:13

Randomized Experiments

9.1K
The randomization process involves assigning study participants randomly to experimental or control groups based on their probability of being equally assigned. Randomization is meant to eliminate selection bias and balance known and unknown confounding factors so that the control group is similar to the treatment group as much as possible. A computer program and a random number generator can be used to assign participants to groups in a way that minimizes bias.
Simple randomization
Simple...
9.1K
Group Design02:01

Group Design

10.9K
The most basic experimental design involves two groups: the experimental group and the control group. The two groups are designed to be the same except for one difference— experimental manipulation. The experimental group gets the experimental manipulation—that is, the treatment or variable being tested—and the control group does not. Since experimental manipulation is the only difference between the experimental and control groups, we can be sure that any differences between...
10.9K
Experimental Designs01:16

Experimental Designs

18.3K
An experimental design is a systematic process that allows researchers to evaluate the relationship between dependent and independent variables. There are three widely used types of experimental design - pre-experimental design, true experimental design, and quasi-experimental design. In pre-experimental design, the researcher compares the data before and after some interventions or treatments. The true-experimental design has more than one purposefully created group, a commonly measured...
18.3K
Multiple Comparison Tests01:13

Multiple Comparison Tests

4.5K
Multiple comparison test, abbreviated as MCT, is a post hoc analysis generally performed after comparing multiple samples with one or more tests. An MCT will help identify a significantly different sample among multiple samples or a factor among multiple factors.
It would be easy to compare two samples using a significance alpha level of 0.05. In other words, there is only one sample pair to be compared. However, it would be difficult to identify a significantly different sample if the number...
4.5K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Reporting guidelines for single-case experimental design research: Recommendations for data analysis.

Journal of school psychology·2026
Same author

Comparing masked and traditional visual analysis of multiple-baseline designs.

Journal of applied behavior analysis·2025
Same author

Randomization in single-case design experiments: Addressing threats to internal validity.

School psychology (Washington, D.C.)·2025
Same author

Academic and behavior combined support: A single-case practice-based replication study.

Journal of school psychology·2024
Same author

Fine-grained effect sizes.

School psychology (Washington, D.C.)·2024
Same author

Problem solving team interventions: Web-based and consultant-based experimental evaluations.

Journal of school psychology·2024
Same journal

The overlooked role of internalizing symptoms in adolescent executive function: Insights from self- and teacher ratings.

Journal of school psychology·2026
Same journal

How do schools support students after a behavioral threat assessment?

Journal of school psychology·2026
Same journal

The roles of parent and teacher support in students' academic development: Do associations change over the course of adolescence or is support always important for all students?

Journal of school psychology·2026
Same journal

Pragmatic measures for school-based research and practice: Best practices and future directions.

Journal of school psychology·2026
Same journal

Pragmatic measurement of mechanisms: Does use of coping strategies mediate the effects of a teacher stress intervention?

Journal of school psychology·2026
Same journal

Beyond the individual: Latent growth patterns of schoolwide bullying perpetration, traditional victimization, and cyber victimization in relation to social and emotional learning.

Journal of school psychology·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Feb 28, 2026

A Within-Subject Experimental Design using an Object Location Task in Rats
09:28

A Within-Subject Experimental Design using an Object Location Task in Rats

Published on: May 6, 2021

5.3K

Additional comparisons of randomization-test procedures for single-case multiple-baseline designs: Alternative effect

Joel R Levin1, John M Ferron2, Boris S Gafurov3

  • 1University of Arizona, United States.

Journal of School Psychology
|June 22, 2017
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Randomization tests for single-case studies are less effective for gradual or delayed effects. Fixed start-point procedures outperformed randomized ones, but adjusted tests can recover power.

Keywords:
Alternative effect typesMultiple-baseline designRandomization statistical testsSingle-case intervention research

More Related Videos

The Innovation Arena: A Method for Comparing Innovative Problem-Solving Across Groups
14:14

The Innovation Arena: A Method for Comparing Innovative Problem-Solving Across Groups

Published on: May 13, 2022

6.4K
A Psychophysics Paradigm for the Collection and Analysis of Similarity Judgments
08:12

A Psychophysics Paradigm for the Collection and Analysis of Similarity Judgments

Published on: March 1, 2022

3.0K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Feb 28, 2026

A Within-Subject Experimental Design using an Object Location Task in Rats
09:28

A Within-Subject Experimental Design using an Object Location Task in Rats

Published on: May 6, 2021

5.3K
The Innovation Arena: A Method for Comparing Innovative Problem-Solving Across Groups
14:14

The Innovation Arena: A Method for Comparing Innovative Problem-Solving Across Groups

Published on: May 13, 2022

6.4K
A Psychophysics Paradigm for the Collection and Analysis of Similarity Judgments
08:12

A Psychophysics Paradigm for the Collection and Analysis of Similarity Judgments

Published on: March 1, 2022

3.0K

Area of Science:

  • Psychology
  • Statistics
  • Behavioral Science

Background:

  • Single-case experimental designs (SCEDs) are crucial for evaluating interventions.
  • Randomization tests are statistical procedures used to analyze SCED data.
  • Previous research indicated superior performance of randomized intervention start points.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate randomization test performance with delayed abrupt and immediate gradual intervention effects.
  • To compare fixed versus randomized intervention start points in simulation studies.
  • To explore methods for improving statistical power in SCED analyses.

Main Methods:

  • Simulation study comparing randomization test procedures.
  • Application of tests to simulated data with delayed abrupt and immediate gradual effects.
  • Investigation of adjusted randomization tests for specific alternative effect types.

Main Results:

  • Statistical power was significantly diminished for delayed abrupt and immediate gradual effects.
  • Fixed intervention start-point procedures outperformed randomized start-point procedures in this context.
  • Adjusted randomization tests successfully recaptured lost statistical power.

Conclusions:

  • Standard randomization tests are less sensitive to gradual or delayed intervention effects in SCEDs.
  • The choice of intervention start points (fixed vs. randomized) impacts statistical power.
  • Adjusting randomization tests based on anticipated effect types can enhance detection of intervention effects.