Сравнение на методи
Прегледайте избраните методи един до друг; редовете с разлики са откроени.
| Метод на фокус групи с множество източници× | Метод Делфи× | |
|---|---|---|
| Област≠ | Методология на проучванията | Качествени методи |
| Семейство | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Година на възникване≠ | 1980s–1990s | 1963 |
| Създател≠ | Developed from focus group methodology; formalized in applied social research (Krueger, Morgan, and colleagues) | Norman Dalkey & Olaf Helmer (RAND Corporation) |
| Тип≠ | Qualitative data collection technique | Structured iterative expert-elicitation process |
| Основополагащ източник≠ | Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2015). Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research (5th ed.). Sage. ISBN: 978-1483365244 | Dalkey, N. & Helmer, O. (1963). An Experimental Application of the Delphi Method to the Use of Experts. Management Science, 9(3), 458-467. DOI ↗ |
| Други названия≠ | multi-stakeholder focus group, multiple-source focus group, cross-source focus group, MSFG | Delphi Yöntemi, Delphi technique, expert consensus method |
| Свързани≠ | 4 | 5 |
| Резюме≠ | The multi-source focus group method extends the standard focus group design by deliberately recruiting participants from two or more distinct stakeholder groups — for example, clinicians and patients, teachers and students, or managers and frontline staff. Separate sessions are held for each source group using a shared discussion protocol, and the resulting data are analyzed both within each group and across groups to reveal convergences, tensions, and perspectives that no single-source design could uncover. | The Delphi method is a structured, iterative survey technique developed by Norman Dalkey and Olaf Helmer at the RAND Corporation in 1963 for eliciting and converging expert opinion on complex topics where empirical data are unavailable or insufficient. It collects independent judgements from a geographically dispersed expert panel over multiple anonymous rounds, feeding aggregated results back to participants after each round so they can revise their views in light of the group's collective position. |
| ScholarGateНабор от данни ↗ |
|
|