{"title":"John Mayne和贡献分析的经验法则：与两种相关方法的比较","authors":"F. Leeuw","doi":"10.3138/cjpe.75448","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article discusses differences and similarities between (methodological) rules of thumb of contribution analysis, realist evaluation, and the policy-scientific approach to (program) evaluations. John Mayne’s work and his operating procedures are presented and structured. One of the conclusions is that the three approaches form a ‘family.’ This ‘family’ can substantially contribute to at least six of the 10 “declarations of the Program Theory Manifesto” presented in 2019.","PeriodicalId":43924,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"John Mayne and Rules of Thumb for Contribution Analysis: A Comparison With Two Related Approaches\",\"authors\":\"F. Leeuw\",\"doi\":\"10.3138/cjpe.75448\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article discusses differences and similarities between (methodological) rules of thumb of contribution analysis, realist evaluation, and the policy-scientific approach to (program) evaluations. John Mayne’s work and his operating procedures are presented and structured. One of the conclusions is that the three approaches form a ‘family.’ This ‘family’ can substantially contribute to at least six of the 10 “declarations of the Program Theory Manifesto” presented in 2019.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43924,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.75448\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.75448","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
John Mayne and Rules of Thumb for Contribution Analysis: A Comparison With Two Related Approaches
This article discusses differences and similarities between (methodological) rules of thumb of contribution analysis, realist evaluation, and the policy-scientific approach to (program) evaluations. John Mayne’s work and his operating procedures are presented and structured. One of the conclusions is that the three approaches form a ‘family.’ This ‘family’ can substantially contribute to at least six of the 10 “declarations of the Program Theory Manifesto” presented in 2019.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
