Vertaile menetelmiä
Tarkastele valitsemiasi menetelmiä rinnakkain; eroavat rivit korostetaan.
| Mobiili-Delphi-tekniikka× | Nominaaliryhmätekniikka× | |
|---|---|---|
| Tieteenala≠ | Kyselytutkimuksen metodologia | Laadulliset menetelmät |
| Menetelmäperhe | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Syntyvuosi≠ | Classic Delphi: 1950s; mobile variant: 2000s–2010s | 1971 |
| Kehittäjä≠ | Olaf Helmer, Norman Dalkey, Nicholas Rescher (RAND Corporation) — mobile adaptation emerged early 21st century | André L. Delbecq and Andrew H. Van de Ven |
| Tyyppi≠ | Iterative expert consensus technique | Qualitative research method |
| Alkuperäislähde≠ | Hasson, F., Keeney, S., & McKenna, H. (2000). Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 32(4), 1008–1015. DOI ↗ | Delbecq, A. L., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1971). A group process model for problem identification and program planning. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 7(4), 466–492. link ↗ |
| Rinnakkaisnimet | mobile Delphi, smartphone Delphi, mDelphi, mobile consensus survey | NGT, structured group process, nominal group process, priority-setting group method |
| Liittyvät | 6 | 6 |
| Tiivistelmä≠ | The Mobile Delphi Technique applies the structured, iterative Delphi consensus process through smartphone or tablet interfaces, enabling geographically dispersed expert panels to participate in multiple rounds of rating and feedback from any location. It preserves the anonymity and controlled feedback loop of the classic Delphi while reducing response latency through push notifications and mobile-optimised questionnaires. | The Nominal Group Technique (NGT) is a structured group facilitation method designed to generate and prioritise ideas, problems, or solutions while ensuring equal participation from all members. Developed by Delbecq and Van de Ven in 1971, it combines silent individual idea generation with structured group discussion and systematic voting to produce a ranked list of priorities. Unlike unstructured focus groups, NGT prevents dominant voices from suppressing quieter participants, making it especially valuable for needs assessment, program planning, and stakeholder priority-setting in applied research and policy contexts. |
| ScholarGateAineisto ↗ |
|
|