ScholarGate
Assistant

Comparer des méthodes

Examinez les méthodes sélectionnées côte à côte ; les lignes qui diffèrent sont mises en évidence.

Realist Evaluation×Contribution Analysis×
DomainePublic PolicyPublic Policy
FamilleProcess / pipelineProcess / pipeline
Année d'origine19972001
Auteur d'origineRay Pawson & Nick TilleyJohn Mayne
TypeTheory-driven, generative evaluation approachTheory-based approach to causal inference about contribution
Source fondatricePawson, R., & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic Evaluation. London: SAGE Publications. ISBN: 9780761950097Mayne, J. (2012). Contribution analysis: Coming of age? Evaluation, 18(3), 270–280. DOI ↗
AliasRealistic Evaluation, Theory-Driven Realist Evaluation, CMO Configuration Analysis, Pawson-Tilley EvaluationMayne's Contribution Analysis, Contribution Story Analysis, Theory-Based Contribution Analysis
Apparentées43
RésuméRealist evaluation is a theory-driven approach to evaluating programs and policies that asks not simply 'does it work?' but 'what works, for whom, in what circumstances, and why?'. Developed by Ray Pawson and Nick Tilley in their 1997 book Realistic Evaluation, it treats interventions as theories incarnate: programs offer resources or opportunities that trigger underlying mechanisms of reasoning and response in participants, and those mechanisms only fire in particular contexts. The unit of analysis is the Context-Mechanism-Outcome (CMO) configuration, and the goal is to build and refine middle-range theory that explains differential outcomes across settings.Contribution analysis is a theory-based evaluation approach that addresses the attribution problem — establishing whether and how an intervention made a difference — without relying on an experimental counterfactual. Developed by John Mayne from 2001 onward, it works by articulating the program's theory of change, gathering evidence along that chain, and then assembling a 'contribution story' that is progressively stress-tested against rival explanations. The aim is not statistical attribution but a credible, evidence-based conclusion that the program plausibly contributed to observed results, in the face of other influencing factors.
ScholarGateJeu de données
  1. v1
  2. 2 Sources
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 Sources
  3. PUBLISHED

Aller à la recherche Télécharger les diapositives

ScholarGateComparer des méthodes: Realist Evaluation · Contribution Analysis. Consulté le 2026-06-24 sur https://scholargate.app/fr/compare