Módszerek összehasonlítása

	Triangulált Delphi Technika	Háromszögelten strukturált interjú
Tudományterület	Kérdőíves felmérések módszertana	Kérdőíves felmérések módszertana
Módszercsalád	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Keletkezés éve	Delphi: 1963; triangulation integration: 1970s–1990s	1978 (Denzin's triangulation framework); structured interviews in use from early 20th century
Megalkotó	Norman Dalkey & Olaf Helmer (Delphi); triangulation principle from Norman Denzin	Norman K. Denzin (triangulation framework); structured interview tradition predates
Típus	Expert-consensus data collection with multi-method validation	Triangulated quantitative/qualitative data collection technique
Alapmű	Dalkey, N., & Helmer, O. (1963). An experimental application of the Delphi method to the use of experts. Management Science, 9(3), 458–467.	Denzin, N. K. (1978). The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Alternatív nevek	Delphi with triangulation, mixed-method Delphi, multi-method Delphi, triangulation-enhanced Delphi	triangulated standardized interview, multi-source structured interview, cross-validated structured interview
Kapcsolódó	5	3
Összefoglaló	The Triangulated Delphi Technique combines the structured expert-consensus process of the classic Delphi method with deliberate triangulation — integrating data from at least one additional source or method (e.g., systematic literature review, interviews, survey data) to cross-validate findings and enhance the credibility of expert judgments. It retains the iterative, anonymous, multi-round panel format while embedding verification steps that reduce reliance on panel consensus alone.	A triangulated structured interview applies the triangulation principle — using multiple independent sources, methods, or perspectives to cross-validate findings — to the structured interview format. The researcher administers the same fixed set of questions across different respondent groups, time points, or complementary data sources, then systematically compares the results to confirm, qualify, or explain discrepancies. This strengthens confidence in the accuracy of the data beyond what any single structured interview session could provide.