Related Experiment Videos
Group designs in clinical research
1Department of Communication Disorders, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis 55455.
The Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders
|August 1, 1987
Summary
Single-subject research designs are not inherently superior to group designs for clinical research. The choice between these methods often depends more on researcher preference than on intrinsic advantages for studying individual participants.
Area of Science:
- Clinical Psychology
- Research Methodology
Background:
- Single-subject research designs (SSRDs) are often favored for clinical research due to their focus on individual participants over time.
- SSRDs share structural similarities with therapeutic interventions, leading some to consider them ideal for clinical studies.
Purpose of the Study:
- To critically evaluate the assertion that single-subject research designs are intrinsically more appropriate for clinical research than group designs.
- To compare the suitability of single-subject versus group research strategies for addressing clinical research questions.
Main Methods:
- The study employs a comparative analysis of single-subject and group research designs within the context of clinical research.
- It examines the theoretical underpinnings and practical implications of each design approach.
Main Results:
- Despite the resemblance between SSRDs and clinical sessions, SSRDs are not intrinsically superior to group designs for clinical research.
- The selection between single-subject and group designs is frequently influenced by researcher predilections.
Conclusions:
- Neither single-subject nor group research designs hold an intrinsic advantage for all clinical research scenarios.
- Both SSRDs and group designs represent viable, often competing, approaches to clinical research questions, with researcher preference playing a significant role.