Single-case effect size calculation: Comparing regression and non-parametric approaches across previously published reading intervention data sets

Growing from demands for accountability and research-based practice in the field of education, there is recent focus on developing standards for the implementation and analysis of single-case designs. Effect size methods for single-case designs provide a useful way to discuss treatment magnitude in the context of individual intervention. Although a standard effect size methodology does not yet exist within single-case research, panel experts recently recommended pairing regression and non-parametric approaches when analyzing effect size data. This study compared two single-case effect size methods: the regression-based, Allison-MT method and the newer, non-parametric, Tau-U method. Using previously published research that measured the Words read Correct per Minute (WCPM) variable, these two methods were examined by comparing differences in overall effect size scores and rankings of intervention effect. Results indicated that the regression method produced significantly larger effect sizes than the non-parametric method, but the rankings of the effect size scores had a strong, positive relation. Implications of these findings for research and practice are discussed.     

Assessment of cognitive function across pregnancy using CANTAB: A longitudinal study

Significant changes in endogenous plasma hormone levels are required to sustain pregnancy which provides a unique opportunity to study their effect on cognitive function.     

Weak ventral striatal responses to monetary outcomes predict an unwillingness to resist cigarette smoking

As a group, cigarette smokers exhibit blunted subjective, behavioral, and neurobiological responses to nondrug incentives and rewards, relative to nonsmokers. Findings from recent studies suggest, however, that there are large individual differences in the devaluation of nondrug rewards among smokers. Moreover, this variability appears to have significant clinical implications, since reduced sensitivity to nondrug rewards is associated with poorer smoking cessation outcomes. Currently, little is known about the neurobiological mechanisms that underlie these individual differences in the responsiveness to nondrug rewards. Here, we tested the hypothesis that individual variability in reward devaluation among smokers is linked to the functioning of the striatum. Specifically, functional magnetic resonance imaging was used to examine variability in the neural response to monetary outcomes in nicotine-deprived smokers anticipating an opportunity to smoke—circumstances found to heighten the devaluation of nondrug rewards by smokers in prior work. We also investigated whether individual differences in reward-related brain activity in those expecting to have access to cigarettes were associated with the degree to which the same individuals subsequently were willing to resist smoking in order to earn additional money. Our key finding was that deprived smokers who exhibited the weakest response to rewards (i.e., monetary gains) in the ventral striatum were least willing to refrain from smoking for monetary reinforcement. These results provide evidence that outcome-related signals in the ventral striatum serve as a marker for clinically meaningful individual differences in reward-motivated behavior among nicotine-deprived smokers.     

Research-Based Knowledge in Psychology: What,if Anything,is Its Incremental Value to the Practitioner?

This essay reflects an ongoing dialogue between a clinician versed in mainstream psychological research and theory, and a social psychologist with experience both as a researcher and contributor to applied undertakings in various domains about the “incremental value” of research-based knowledge—that is, its value beyond that provided by the other sources of knowledge available to the practitioner. These sources include knowledge about the needs and coping strategies of all human beings, as well as knowledge both about the specific life circumstances of those one is seeking to help, and knowledge about language and culture. Examples from the clinical practice of the first author are offered, coupled with in-principle arguments about the underspecified and contingent nature of research-based generalizations. By way of rebuttal, examples of arguably useful findings are provided by the second author—especially findings that serve as correctives to biases in lay psychology (notably unwarranted “dispositionism”) and to widespread shortcomings in judgment and decision-making (particularly, Kahneman and Tversky’s work on “prospect theory” ). Both authors agree on the value of a “bricoleur” treatment strategy that relies on careful attention to the specifics of the case at hand and avoids one-size-fits-all applications of theory and prior research, and both agree that research-based findings are more useful in predicting behavior and designing intervention strategies that apply to groups and large samples of individuals rather than single actors. A concluding discussion focuses on necessary criteria and strategies for increasing the usefulness of laboratory and field research for the practitioner.     

A nice surprise? Predictive processing and the active pursuit of novelty

Recent work in cognitive and computational neuroscience depicts human brains as devices that minimize prediction error signals: signals that encode the difference between actual and expected sensory stimulations. This raises a series of puzzles whose common theme concerns a potential misfit between this bedrock informationtheoretic vision and familiar facts about the attractions of the unexpected. We humans often seem to actively seek out surprising events, deliberately harvesting novel and exciting streams of sensory stimulation. Conversely, we often experience some wellexpected sensations as unpleasant and to-be-avoided. In this paper, I explore several core and variant forms of this puzzle, using them to display multiple interacting elements that together deliver a satisfying solution. That solution requires us to go beyond the discussion of simple information-theoretic imperatives (such as 'minimize long-term prediction error') and to recognize the essential role of species-specific prestructuring, epistemic foraging, and cultural practices in shaping the restless, curious, novelty-seeking human mind.     

Change in Maternal Stress for Families in Treatment for their Children with Oppositional Defiant Disorder

Our objective was to predict change in maternal stress over the course of a randomized clinical trial comparing the efficacy of two interventions for Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD): Parent Management Training and Collaborative & Proactive Solutions. In a secondary analysis of data collected from this randomized clinical trial, we examined whether children’s self-reported positive relations with their parents impacted responsiveness to treatment, which in turn impacted maternal stress. One hundred thirty-four children and their parents (38.1% female, ages 7–14, M age?=?9.51, SD?=?1.77) were tracked across three time points: pre-treatment; one-week post-treatment; and six-month post-treatment. Hierarchical linear models tested change in children’s reports of positive relations with parents, clinician reports of ODD severity, and maternal reports of parenting stress. Models then tested multilevel mediation from positive relations with parents, through ODD severity, onto maternal stress. Hypothesized indirect effects were supported such that children’s reports of positive views toward parents uniquely predicted reductions in ODD severity over time, which in turn uniquely predicted reductions in maternal stress. Results highlight the promise of potential secondary benefits for parents following interventions for children with oppositional problems. Furthermore, results underscore the importance of the parent–child relationship as both a protective factor and as an additional target to complement interventions for child disruptive behaviors.