Methodological studies: Moving from the lab to the field: The role of fidelity and achieved relative intervention strength

Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness

Volumn 2, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 87-110

  Hulleman, Chris S ^a   Cordray, David S ^a  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Intervention strength; Multilevel modeling; Student motivation; Treatment effectiveness; Treatment fidelity

Indexed keywords

EID: 85009636761     PISSN: 19345747     EISSN: 19345739     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/19345740802539325     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Angrist, J. D., Imbens, G. W., & Rubin, D. B. (1996). Identification of causal effects using instrumental variables. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 91, 444-455.
2. Bloom, H. S. (1984). Accounting for no-shows in experimental evaluation designs. Evaluation Review, 8, 225-246.
3. Boruch, R. F., & Gomez, H. (1977, November). Sensitivity, bias, and theory in impact evaluations. Professional Psychology, pp. 411-434.
4. Cordray, D. S. (2006, June). The cause… or the ‘what’ of what works? Paper presented at the Institute for Education Sciences 2006 Research Conference, Washington, DC.
5. Cordray, D. S., & Jacobs, N. (2005, June). Treatment fidelity and core components in school-based ATOD prevention programs. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Prevention Research, Washington, DC.
6. Cordray, D. S.,&Pion, G. M. (2006).Treatment strength and integrity:Models andmethods. In R. R. Bootzin & P. E. McKnight (Eds.), Strengthening research methodology: Psychological measurement and evaluation (pp. 103-124). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
7. Dane, A.V.,&Schneider, B.H. (1998). Program integrity in primary and early secondary prevention: Are implementation effects out of control? Clinical Psychology Review, 18(1), 23-45.
8. Dusenbury, L., Brannigan, B., Falco, M., & Hansen, W. B. (2003). A review of research on fidelity of implementation: Implications for drug abuse prevention in school settings. Health Education Research, 18(2), 237-256.
9. Eccles, J., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., Meece, J. L., et al. (1983). Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievementmotives: Psychological and sociological approaches (pp. 75-146). San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
10. Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blasé, K. A., Friedman, R. M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature (FMHI Publication #231). Tampa: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network.
11. Gottfredson, G. D. (1984). A theory-ridden approach to program evaluation: A method for stimulating researcher-implementer collaboration. American Psychologist, 39, 1101-1112.
12. Hedges, L.V. (2007). Effect sizes in cluster-randomized designs. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 32, 341-370.
13. Holland, P.W. (1986). Statistics and causal inference. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 81, 945-960.
14. Hulleman, C. S. (2008). The role of utility value in the development of interest and achievement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
15. Hulleman, C. S., Durik, A. M., Schweigert, S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2008). The importance of utility value in predicting interest and performance in academics and sports. Journal of Educational Psychology. 100, 398-416.
16. Hulleman, C. S., Godes, O., Hendricks, B., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2008). Enhancing interest in math and psychology with a utility value intervention. Unpublished manuscript.
17. Hulleman, C. S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2008). A randomized field trial of expectancyvalue motivation in high school science. Unpublished manuscript.
18. Hulleman, C. S., Hendricks, B., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2007, April). The role of utility value in promoting interest and achievement. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association annual meeting, Chicago.
19. Jo, B., Asparouhov, T., Muthen, B. O., Ialongo, N. S., & Brown, C. H. (2008). Cluster randomized trials with treatment noncompliance. Psychological Methods, 13, 1-18.
20. Malka, A.,&Covington, M.V. (2005). Perceiving school performance as instrumental to future goal attainment: Effects on graded performance. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30, 60-80.
21. Mowbray, C. T., Holter, M. C., Teague, G. B., & Bybee, D. (2003). Fidelity criteria: Development, measurement, and validation. American Journal of Evaluation, 24, 315-340.
22. O’Donnell, C. L. (2008). Defining, conceptualizing, andmeasuring fidelity of implementation and its relationship to outcomes in K-12 curriculum intervention research. Review of Educational Research, 78, 33-84.
23. Orwin, R. G., Sonnefeld, L. J., Cordray, D. S., Pion, G. M., & Perl, H. I. (1998). Constructing quantitative implementation scales from categorical service data: Examples from a multisite evaluation. Evaluation Review, 22, 245-288.
24. Raudenbush, S.W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
25. Raudenbush, S. W., Bryk, A., & Congdon, R. (2007). HLM for Windows: Version 6.04. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.
26. Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasiexperimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
27. Simons, J., Dewitte, S., & Lens, W. (2003). "Don’t do it for me. Do it for yourself!" Stressing the personal relevance enhances motivation in physical education. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 25, 145-160.
28. Sloane, F. C. (2005). The scaling of reading interventions: Building multi-level insight. Reading Research Quarterly, July/August/September, 361-366.
29. Waltz, J., Addis, M. E., Koerner, K., & Jacobson, N. S. (1993). Testing the integrity of a psychotherapy protocol: Assessment of adherence and competence. rJournal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61, 620-630.
30. Yeaton, W. H., & Sechrest, L. (1981). Critical dimensions in the choice and maintenance of successful treatments: strength, integrity, and effectiveness, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 49, 156-167.