Self-management intervention configurations show strong mean effect sizes but substantial effect size heterogeneity in single-case research¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · quant-synthesis r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2019 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 2 of 2 entries) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Strong mean effect sizes were identified across self-management intervention configurations in the reviewed single-case studies. → Briesch 2019 q3 i? Alongside strong mean effect sizes, there was often a substantial degree of effect size heterogeneity across studies. → Briesch 2019 (2)

Evidence¶

Briesch 2019¶

Briesch, A.M., Daniels, B. & Beneville, M. (2019). Unpacking the Term “Self-Management”: Understanding Intervention Applications Within the School-Based Literature. J Behav Educ 28, 54–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-018-9303-1

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r?

Systematic review with meta-analysis of 56 single-case studies of self-management interventions. The review reports that "strong mean effect sizes were identified across intervention configurations"; no specific effect size values are printed in the available text.

"Although strong mean effect sizes were identified across intervention configurations, there was also often a substantial degree of effect size heterogeneity."

Briesch 2019 (2)¶

Briesch, A.M., Daniels, B. & Beneville, M. (2019). Unpacking the Term “Self-Management”: Understanding Intervention Applications Within the School-Based Literature. J Behav Educ 28, 54–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-018-9303-1

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Same systematic review of 56 single-case studies: alongside the strong mean effects, the review notes "a substantial degree of effect size heterogeneity" across intervention configurations; no heterogeneity statistics are printed in the available text.

"Although strong mean effect sizes were identified across intervention configurations, there was also often a substantial degree of effect size heterogeneity."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• There is a lack of consensus regarding student-, intervention-, and setting-level variables supporting self-monitoring use in schools — related
• Prompted self-monitoring is the most frequently used self-management configuration in school-based single-case research — related
• Substantial variability exists in the specific components used across self-management interventions despite established effectiveness — related
• Self-management interventions targeted math calculation skills most often, with mean effect sizes of 2.66 for social studies, 2.28 for reading, 1.97 for math, and 1.13 for writing — related
• Effect size heterogeneity in self-management interventions may be explained by grade level, disability status, and general versus special education setting — related
• Academic self-management interventions for students with emotional and behavioral disorders show a large overall mean effect size of 1.80 across 22 studies — related
• Single-case effects of self-management interventions are not moderated by intervention characteristics (duration, fidelity assessment, fidelity method, or training) — related
• Self-management interventions significantly and positively impact academic outcomes (achievement and work completion) in single-case design studies — related
• School-based self-management interventions significantly and positively impact classroom behaviors of school-age students with challenging behaviors (single-case design synthesis) — related
• The review found evidence supporting generalization and maintenance of self-management intervention effects for students with emotional and behavioral disorders — related
• Substantial unexplained heterogeneity characterises short-term effects of targeted K-6 interventions — related
• Self-monitoring interventions produce strong effects for students with ASD across behavioral targets and school settings (overall Tau-U = .83) — a narrower finding that bears on this claim