Comparison of false positive and false negative rates of two indices of individual reliable change: Jacobson-Truax and Hageman-Arrindell methods

BackgroundQuantification of change is crucial for correctly estimating the effect of a treatment and for distinguishing random or non-systematic changes from substantive changes. The objective of the present study was to learn about the performance of two distribution-based methods [the Jacobson-Tru...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Rodrigo Ferrer-Urbina, Antonio Pardo, Willem A. Arrindell, Giannina Puddu-Gallardo
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-07-01
Series:Frontiers in Psychology
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1132128/full
_version_ 1797780557380190208
author Rodrigo Ferrer-Urbina
Antonio Pardo
Willem A. Arrindell
Giannina Puddu-Gallardo
author_facet Rodrigo Ferrer-Urbina
Antonio Pardo
Willem A. Arrindell
Giannina Puddu-Gallardo
author_sort Rodrigo Ferrer-Urbina
collection DOAJ
description BackgroundQuantification of change is crucial for correctly estimating the effect of a treatment and for distinguishing random or non-systematic changes from substantive changes. The objective of the present study was to learn about the performance of two distribution-based methods [the Jacobson-Truax Reliable Change Index (RCI) and the Hageman-Arrindell (HA) approach] that were designed for evaluating individual reliable change.MethodsA pre-post design was simulated with the purpose to evaluate the false positive and false negative rates of RCI and HA methods. In this design, a first measurement is obtained before treatment and a second measurement is obtained after treatment, in the same group of subjects.ResultsIn relation to the rate of false positives, only the HA statistic provided acceptable results. Regarding the rate of false negatives, both statistics offered similar results, and both could claim to offer acceptable rates when Ferguson’s stringent criteria were used to define effect sizes as opposed to when the conventional criteria advanced by Cohen were employed.ConclusionSince the HA statistic appeared to be a better option than the RCI statistic, we have developed and presented an Excel macro so that the greater complexity of calculating HA would not represent an obstacle for the non-expert user.
first_indexed 2024-03-12T23:45:37Z
format Article
id doaj.art-b4bfa32f2a1a47c1875a9764508206ce
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1664-1078
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-12T23:45:37Z
publishDate 2023-07-01
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format Article
series Frontiers in Psychology
spelling doaj.art-b4bfa32f2a1a47c1875a9764508206ce2023-07-14T09:22:16ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Psychology1664-10782023-07-011410.3389/fpsyg.2023.11321281132128Comparison of false positive and false negative rates of two indices of individual reliable change: Jacobson-Truax and Hageman-Arrindell methodsRodrigo Ferrer-Urbina0Antonio Pardo1Willem A. Arrindell2Giannina Puddu-Gallardo3Universidad de Tarapacá, Av. General Velásquez, Arica, ChileUniversidad Autónoma de Madrid, Ciudad Universitaria de Cantoblanco, Madrid, SpainUniversity of Social Sciences and Humanities, Vietnam National University, Ho Chi Minh City, VietnamUniversidad de Tarapacá, Av. General Velásquez, Arica, ChileBackgroundQuantification of change is crucial for correctly estimating the effect of a treatment and for distinguishing random or non-systematic changes from substantive changes. The objective of the present study was to learn about the performance of two distribution-based methods [the Jacobson-Truax Reliable Change Index (RCI) and the Hageman-Arrindell (HA) approach] that were designed for evaluating individual reliable change.MethodsA pre-post design was simulated with the purpose to evaluate the false positive and false negative rates of RCI and HA methods. In this design, a first measurement is obtained before treatment and a second measurement is obtained after treatment, in the same group of subjects.ResultsIn relation to the rate of false positives, only the HA statistic provided acceptable results. Regarding the rate of false negatives, both statistics offered similar results, and both could claim to offer acceptable rates when Ferguson’s stringent criteria were used to define effect sizes as opposed to when the conventional criteria advanced by Cohen were employed.ConclusionSince the HA statistic appeared to be a better option than the RCI statistic, we have developed and presented an Excel macro so that the greater complexity of calculating HA would not represent an obstacle for the non-expert user.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1132128/fullindividual reliable changeassessment of changeJacobson-Truax methodHageman-Arrindell approachfalse negativesfalse positives
spellingShingle Rodrigo Ferrer-Urbina
Antonio Pardo
Willem A. Arrindell
Giannina Puddu-Gallardo
Comparison of false positive and false negative rates of two indices of individual reliable change: Jacobson-Truax and Hageman-Arrindell methods
Frontiers in Psychology
individual reliable change
assessment of change
Jacobson-Truax method
Hageman-Arrindell approach
false negatives
false positives
title Comparison of false positive and false negative rates of two indices of individual reliable change: Jacobson-Truax and Hageman-Arrindell methods
title_full Comparison of false positive and false negative rates of two indices of individual reliable change: Jacobson-Truax and Hageman-Arrindell methods
title_fullStr Comparison of false positive and false negative rates of two indices of individual reliable change: Jacobson-Truax and Hageman-Arrindell methods
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of false positive and false negative rates of two indices of individual reliable change: Jacobson-Truax and Hageman-Arrindell methods
title_short Comparison of false positive and false negative rates of two indices of individual reliable change: Jacobson-Truax and Hageman-Arrindell methods
title_sort comparison of false positive and false negative rates of two indices of individual reliable change jacobson truax and hageman arrindell methods
topic individual reliable change
assessment of change
Jacobson-Truax method
Hageman-Arrindell approach
false negatives
false positives
url https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1132128/full
work_keys_str_mv AT rodrigoferrerurbina comparisonoffalsepositiveandfalsenegativeratesoftwoindicesofindividualreliablechangejacobsontruaxandhagemanarrindellmethods
AT antoniopardo comparisonoffalsepositiveandfalsenegativeratesoftwoindicesofindividualreliablechangejacobsontruaxandhagemanarrindellmethods
AT willemaarrindell comparisonoffalsepositiveandfalsenegativeratesoftwoindicesofindividualreliablechangejacobsontruaxandhagemanarrindellmethods
AT gianninapuddugallardo comparisonoffalsepositiveandfalsenegativeratesoftwoindicesofindividualreliablechangejacobsontruaxandhagemanarrindellmethods