title: A survey of publication practices of single-case design researchers when treatments have small or large effects.
abstract: The published literature often underrepresents studies that do not find evidence for a treatment effect; this is often called publication bias. Literature reviews that fail to include such studies may overestimate the size of an effect. Only a few studies have examined publication bias in single-case design (SCD) research, but those studies suggest that publication bias may occur. This study surveyed SCD researchers about publication preferences in response to simulated SCD results that show a range of small to large effects. Results suggest that SCD researchers are more likely to submit manuscripts that show large effects for publication and are more likely to recommend acceptance of manuscripts that show large effects when they act as a reviewer. A nontrivial minority of SCD researchers (4% to 15%) would drop 1 or 2 cases from the study if the effect size is small and then submit for publication. This article ends with a discussion of implications for publication practices in SCD research.
authors.affiliation: University of California, Merced.
authors.forename: William R
authors.initials: WR
authors.lastname: Shadish
authors.affiliation: University of California, Merced.
authors.forename: Nicole A M
authors.initials: NA
authors.lastname: Zelinsky
authors.affiliation: University of California, Merced.
authors.forename: Jack L
authors.initials: JL
authors.lastname: Vevea
authors.affiliation: University of Wisconsin, Madison.
authors.forename: Thomas R
authors.initials: TR
authors.lastname: Kratochwill
mesh_terms: D006801:Humans; D017594:Publication Bias; D012107:Research Design; D012108:Research Personnel / Q000523:psychology* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires
keywords: effect size; publication bias; single-case design