Salīdzināt metodes
Apskatiet izvēlētās metodes blakus; rindas, kas atšķiras, ir izceltas.
| Tehnika "Nominal Group Technique" (NGT)× | Strukturēta intervija× | |
|---|---|---|
| Nozare≠ | Kvalitatīvās metodes | Aptauju metodoloģija |
| Saime | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Izcelsmes gads≠ | 1971 | 1940s–1950s |
| Autors≠ | André L. Delbecq and Andrew H. Van de Ven | Survey research tradition; formalized by Campbell, Katona, and Kahn in mid-20th century |
| Tips≠ | Qualitative research method | Quantitative / mixed data collection technique |
| Pirmavots≠ | 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 ↗ | Fontana, A., & Frey, J. H. (2000). The interview: From structured questions to negotiated text. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (2nd ed., pp. 645–672). Sage. link ↗ |
| Citi nosaukumi | NGT, structured group process, nominal group process, priority-setting group method | standardized interview, formal interview, schedule-based interview, fixed-format interview |
| Saistītās≠ | 6 | 4 |
| Kopsavilkums≠ | 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. | A structured interview is a data collection technique in which every participant is asked exactly the same pre-specified questions in the same order, using standardized wording. Because the interview schedule is fixed, responses across participants are directly comparable, enabling quantitative aggregation and statistical analysis. It sits at the most standardized end of the interview continuum, between the self-administered questionnaire and the semi-structured interview. |
| ScholarGateDatu kopa ↗ |
|
|