The research on SCEDs can be conducted with a single participant or through the individual evaluation of multiple participants’ performances, and these performances are shown with graphical data. Single-case experimental designs (SCEDs), which are increasingly used in the fields of education and psychology, are unique methods that allow questioning the causal and functional relation between dependent and independent variables among the participants or between conditions (Kratochwill et al., 2010 Maggin et al., 2017 Maggin & Odom, 2014 Tekin-Iftar, 2018). Based on the obtained results and considering the data extraction process, we presented various recommendations for the researchers that will use the PlotDigitizer program for the quantitative analysis of single-case graphs. ![]() The results showed that PlotDigitizer could be an alternative to other programs as it is free and can run on many current and outdated systems, and it is valid and reliable as it is nearly perfect. ![]() Based on our sampling, we calculated intercoder and intracoder Pearson correlation coefficients. Besides, using the values we digitized, we recalculated the 23 effect sizes presented in the original articles for validity analysis. We performed the digitization of 6.846 data points on three different computers using 15 hypothetical graphs with 20 data series and 186 graphs with 242 data series from 29 published articles to accomplish the goal. In this study, we aimed to analyze the validity and reliability of the PlotDigitizer software program, which is widely used in literature and an alternative to other data extraction programs, on computers with different operating systems. Researchers typically use data extraction software programs to extract raw data from the graphs in articles. Since nobody is willing to disclose anything beyond what individual states require, we can't say for sure.Access to raw data of graphs presented in original articles to calculate the effect size of single-case research is a challenge for researchers conducting studies such as meta-analysis. What other companies' clients lost data through Alta's possibly rogue employee?. This (Johnson & Johnson revelation) might indicate that Alta Resources had a much more significant breach than has been reported (or not reported, as it were). In my interview July 7 with a Disney spokesman, I asked at least three times for some indication of the number of club members involved and got nowhere as he repeatedly claimed to be prevented from disclosing that information because the case was still under investigation. The Johnson & Johnson disclosure involves only a handful of customers, according to the document, but this is a single incident report to a single state agency, and, of course, the population of New Hampshire can be counted on your fingers and toes. ![]() Unless Alta Resources has had TWO employees defect with customer data, then this could be the same breach as the aforementioned Disney breach.Īs "d2d" notes, the piecemeal nature of these reporting requirements makes it virtually impossible for anyone to ascertain the scope of a given data-breach incident, which in turn may allow companies to avoid the full public-relations hit that can come when a big number gets attached to these stories. ![]() The state of New Hampshire posts their data loss notification letters online, and a letter dated July 9th, 2007 blames Alta Resources for a data loss incident, and mentions the same "employee fraud" situation as the Disney breach. We found it via the Granite State (Live free or die!). We didn't find this in the press, however. Apparently, Alta Resources also lost data for another client: Johnson & Johnson. A (now former) employee of Alta Resources allegedly stole an undisclosed number of credit cards, and subsequently attempted to sell them to undercover law enforcement, per Paul McNamara's article.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |