社会和行为改变干预的现实主义评价:共同建设理论和影响证据

Q2 Social Sciences African Evaluation Journal Pub Date : 2022-11-21 DOI:10.4102/aej.v10i1.657
S. Igras, M. Diakité, A. Kohli, Carley Fogliani
{"title":"社会和行为改变干预的现实主义评价:共同建设理论和影响证据","authors":"S. Igras, M. Diakité, A. Kohli, Carley Fogliani","doi":"10.4102/aej.v10i1.657","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: A complexity-aware approach, realist evaluation is ideal for norms-shifting interventions (NSIs), which are not well-understood but gaining prominence in behaviour change programming in Africa and globally to foster enabling socionormative environments that sustain behaviour change. A new application of realist evaluation to NSIs uses an adapted approach employing realism values that is suitable for social and behaviour change (SBC) programme evaluation more generally.Objectives: This article shares the authors’ reflections on tailoring realist evaluation approaches for use with community-based norms-shifting programmes. It describes how realist evaluation enables co-building of programme theory that conceptually underpins NSIs, guides evaluation efforts and yields benefits beyond theory-proving.Method: Two NSIs in Niger and Senegal illustrate how locally refined theories of change (TOC) and identification of evidence gaps in causal pathways guided a series of rapid programme and quasi-experimental outcome studies. Over two years externally and internally led studies assessed intermediate or mediating norms-shifting effects and outcomes comprising the realist evaluation. Studies drew from experiential, existing and new data.Results: The tailored approach created a co-owned evaluation, from joint exploration of SBC theory to review of evidence generation. Five values applied to the research–practice partnerships reinforced a realist perspective: participatory, complexity, shared ownership, practice-oriented and valuing all forms of data.Conclusion: Bounded by TOC exploration for programme inquiry, realist evaluation embeds learning and assessment concretely into local programming and knowledge building. Integrating evaluation practice with realism values creates a nexus and a unique and significant dynamic between programme implementers and evaluators that transcends NSI research and programme practice.","PeriodicalId":37531,"journal":{"name":"African Evaluation Journal","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Realist evaluation of social and behaviour change interventions: Co-building theory and evidence of impact\",\"authors\":\"S. Igras, M. Diakité, A. Kohli, Carley Fogliani\",\"doi\":\"10.4102/aej.v10i1.657\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: A complexity-aware approach, realist evaluation is ideal for norms-shifting interventions (NSIs), which are not well-understood but gaining prominence in behaviour change programming in Africa and globally to foster enabling socionormative environments that sustain behaviour change. A new application of realist evaluation to NSIs uses an adapted approach employing realism values that is suitable for social and behaviour change (SBC) programme evaluation more generally.Objectives: This article shares the authors’ reflections on tailoring realist evaluation approaches for use with community-based norms-shifting programmes. It describes how realist evaluation enables co-building of programme theory that conceptually underpins NSIs, guides evaluation efforts and yields benefits beyond theory-proving.Method: Two NSIs in Niger and Senegal illustrate how locally refined theories of change (TOC) and identification of evidence gaps in causal pathways guided a series of rapid programme and quasi-experimental outcome studies. Over two years externally and internally led studies assessed intermediate or mediating norms-shifting effects and outcomes comprising the realist evaluation. Studies drew from experiential, existing and new data.Results: The tailored approach created a co-owned evaluation, from joint exploration of SBC theory to review of evidence generation. Five values applied to the research–practice partnerships reinforced a realist perspective: participatory, complexity, shared ownership, practice-oriented and valuing all forms of data.Conclusion: Bounded by TOC exploration for programme inquiry, realist evaluation embeds learning and assessment concretely into local programming and knowledge building. Integrating evaluation practice with realism values creates a nexus and a unique and significant dynamic between programme implementers and evaluators that transcends NSI research and programme practice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37531,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"African Evaluation Journal\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"African Evaluation Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4102/aej.v10i1.657\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African Evaluation Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4102/aej.v10i1.657","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:现实主义评估是一种复杂性意识方法,是规范转移干预(nsi)的理想选择。规范转移干预尚未得到充分理解,但在非洲和全球的行为改变规划中日益突出,以促进维持行为改变的有利社会规范环境。现实主义评价对国家安全研究所的新应用采用了一种采用现实主义价值观的变通方法,这种方法更普遍地适用于社会和行为改变方案评价。目的:本文分享了作者对裁剪现实主义评估方法以用于社区规范转变方案的思考。它描述了现实主义评估如何能够共同建立在概念上支持国家情报研究所的计划理论,指导评估工作并产生超越理论证明的好处。方法:尼日尔和塞内加尔的两个国家信息研究所说明了当地完善的变化理论(TOC)和因果途径证据缺口的识别如何指导了一系列快速规划和准实验结果研究。在两年多的时间里,外部和内部主导的研究评估了中间或中介规范转移的影响和结果,包括现实主义评估。研究取材于经验的、现有的和新的数据。结果:量身定制的方法创建了一个共同拥有的评估,从共同探索SBC理论到审查证据生成。应用于研究-实践伙伴关系的五个价值观强化了现实主义观点:参与性、复杂性、共享所有权、以实践为导向和重视所有形式的数据。结论:以TOC对节目探究的探索为界,现实主义评价将学习和评估具体地嵌入到当地的节目和知识建设中。将评估实践与现实主义价值观相结合,在项目执行者和评估者之间建立了一种联系,一种独特而重要的动态,超越了国家安全评价研究和项目实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Realist evaluation of social and behaviour change interventions: Co-building theory and evidence of impact
Background: A complexity-aware approach, realist evaluation is ideal for norms-shifting interventions (NSIs), which are not well-understood but gaining prominence in behaviour change programming in Africa and globally to foster enabling socionormative environments that sustain behaviour change. A new application of realist evaluation to NSIs uses an adapted approach employing realism values that is suitable for social and behaviour change (SBC) programme evaluation more generally.Objectives: This article shares the authors’ reflections on tailoring realist evaluation approaches for use with community-based norms-shifting programmes. It describes how realist evaluation enables co-building of programme theory that conceptually underpins NSIs, guides evaluation efforts and yields benefits beyond theory-proving.Method: Two NSIs in Niger and Senegal illustrate how locally refined theories of change (TOC) and identification of evidence gaps in causal pathways guided a series of rapid programme and quasi-experimental outcome studies. Over two years externally and internally led studies assessed intermediate or mediating norms-shifting effects and outcomes comprising the realist evaluation. Studies drew from experiential, existing and new data.Results: The tailored approach created a co-owned evaluation, from joint exploration of SBC theory to review of evidence generation. Five values applied to the research–practice partnerships reinforced a realist perspective: participatory, complexity, shared ownership, practice-oriented and valuing all forms of data.Conclusion: Bounded by TOC exploration for programme inquiry, realist evaluation embeds learning and assessment concretely into local programming and knowledge building. Integrating evaluation practice with realism values creates a nexus and a unique and significant dynamic between programme implementers and evaluators that transcends NSI research and programme practice.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
African Evaluation Journal
African Evaluation Journal Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal publishes high quality peer-reviewed articles merit on any subject related to evaluation, and provide targeted information of professional interest to members of AfrEA and its national associations. Aims of the African Evaluation Journal (AEJ): -AEJ aims to be a high-quality, peer-reviewed journal that builds evaluation-related knowledge and practice in support of effective developmental policies on the African continent. -AEJ aims to provide a communication platform for scholars and practitioners of evaluation to share and debate ideas about evaluation theory and practice in Africa. -AEJ aims to promote cross-fertilisation of ideas and methodologies between countries and between evaluation scholars and practitioners in the developed and developing world. -AEJ aims to promote evaluation scholarship and authorship, and a culture of peer-review in the African evaluation community.
期刊最新文献
Erratum: Review of Goldman and Pabari’s book through the lens of the work of Sulley Gariba Table of Contents Vol 11, No 1 (2023) Improving citizen-based monitoring in South Africa: A social media model A results-based monitoring and evaluation system for the Namibian Child Support Grant programme Lessons learned from an occupational therapy programme needs assessment
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1