Subjective and Objective Methods of Evaluating Social Programs

Author:

Alemi Farrokh1

Affiliation:

1. Tulane University

Abstract

A practical problem in evaluation studies with limited resources is that all methodologies cannot be tried. Thus the evaluator must decide what questions must be answered and then choose which method would best provide the answers. The choice, however, is not simple. It involves several different trade-offs. These trade-offs are articulated through a discussion of the differences between (a) Bayesian and traditional statistics, (b) decision and cost benefit analysis, and (c) anthropological and traditional case studies. The intent of the article is to make evaluators sensitive to the implicit trade-offs associated with choosing a subjective or an objective method.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

General Social Sciences,Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)

Reference40 articles.

1. Influence of Attribute Formulation on the Evaluation of Apartments by Multi-Attribute Utility Procedures

2. The Neyman-Pearson theory as decision theory, and as inference theory; with a criticism of the Lindley-savage argument for Bayesian theory

3. Boruch, R.F. (1975) "On common contentions about randomized field experiments ," pp. 107-142 in Robert F. Boruch and Henry W. Riecken (eds.) Experimental Testing of Public Policy: the Proceedings of the 1974 Social Science Research Council Conference of Social Experiments, Boulder, CO: Westview.

Cited by 5 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. A Survey of 92 Quality Improvement Projects;The Joint Commission Journal on Quality Improvement;2001-11

2. Rapid Improvement Teams;The Joint Commission Journal on Quality Improvement;1998-03

3. EVALUATING DARE: DRUG EDUCATION AND THE MULTIPLE MEANINGS OF SUCCESS*;Review of Policy Research;1990-06

4. Restricting Patients' Choices of Physicians: A Decision Analytic Evaluation of Costs;Interfaces;1989-04

5. Using Experiments in Knowledge Utilization Research;Knowledge;1989-03

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3