A Meta-Analysis of the Graduated Guidance Procedure

Review ArticleAçık Erişim

Özet

We conducted a descriptive analysis and meta-analysis of single-case research design (SCRD) studies investigating the effectiveness of the graduated guidance procedure. Once we identified studies through electronic databases and reference lists, we used What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) Standards to evaluate each study. Then, we described studies in terms of various descriptive variables, calculated effect sizes through three non-parametric effect size methods, and analyzed results across studies. Results showed 11 of the 27 studies met WWC Standards or met standards with reservation. Of the 11, seven studies resulted in a large effect. We found the graduated guidance procedure to be an evidence-based practice when evaluating the findings against contemporary evidence standards. However, this review also showed that the majority of the reviewed studies (n = 20) had no effects and only one third of the studies had moderate or strong effects. Implications for researchers and practitioners are discussed. © Hammill Institute on Disabilities 2023.

Anahtar Kelimeler

RDL Kalıcı Bağlantı (PID)
https://rdlopen.rawdatalibrary.net/r/ebyu/11939Resmi atıflarda kullanılan kalıcı adres
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/00224669231200461Yayıncı resmi DOI adresi
Tam Kayıt
AlanDeğerDil
dc.contributor.authorTekin-Iftar, Elif
dc.contributor.authorAult, Melinda Jones
dc.contributor.authorCollins, Belva C.
dc.contributor.authorOlcay, Seray
dc.contributor.authorDegirmenci, H. Deniz
dc.contributor.authorAydın, Orhan
dc.date.accessioned2026-10-18T20:26:54.940287101Z
dc.date.available2026-10-18T20:26:54.940287101Z
dc.date.issued2024
dc.description.abstractWe conducted a descriptive analysis and meta-analysis of single-case research design (SCRD) studies investigating the effectiveness of the graduated guidance procedure. Once we identified studies through electronic databases and reference lists, we used What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) Standards to evaluate each study. Then, we described studies in terms of various descriptive variables, calculated effect sizes through three non-parametric effect size methods, and analyzed results across studies. Results showed 11 of the 27 studies met WWC Standards or met standards with reservation. Of the 11, seven studies resulted in a large effect. We found the graduated guidance procedure to be an evidence-based practice when evaluating the findings against contemporary evidence standards. However, this review also showed that the majority of the reviewed studies (n = 20) had no effects and only one third of the studies had moderate or strong effects. Implications for researchers and practitioners are discussed. © Hammill Institute on Disabilities 2023.
dc.description.sponsorshipThe author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study was supported by Anadolu University Research Fund (Project Number: 2105E134).
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/00224669231200461
dc.identifier.eissn1538-4764
dc.identifier.endpage87
dc.identifier.issn0022-4669
dc.identifier.issue2
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85173514516
dc.identifier.startpage76
dc.identifier.urihttps://rdlopen.rawdatalibrary.net/r/ebyu/11939
dc.identifier.volume58
dc.identifier.wosWOS:001075523600001
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherSAGE Publications Inc.
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Special Education
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subjectgraduated guidance
dc.subjectresponse prompting
dc.subjectsystematic instruction
dc.titleA Meta-Analysis of the Graduated Guidance Procedure
dc.typeReview Article
dspace.entity.typePublication
rdl.citation.scopus6
rdl.citation.wos7
rdl.source.indexSCOPUS
rdl.source.indexWOS
rdl.wos.indexSocial Science Citation Index (SSCI)