ScholarGate
Trợ lý

So sánh phương pháp

Xem các phương pháp đã chọn cạnh nhau; những hàng khác biệt được làm nổi bật.

Realist Evaluation×Process Evaluation×
Lĩnh vựcPublic PolicyPublic Policy
HọProcess / pipelineProcess / pipeline
Năm ra đời19972015
Người khởi xướngRay Pawson & Nick TilleyHealth-promotion & MRC evaluation tradition (Saunders et al.; Moore et al.)
LoạiTheory-driven, generative evaluation approachImplementation-focused program evaluation
Công trình gốcPawson, R., & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic Evaluation. London: SAGE Publications. ISBN: 9780761950097Moore, G. F., Audrey, S., Barker, M., Bond, L., Bonell, C., Hardeman, W., et al. (2015). Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ, 350, h1258. DOI ↗
Tên gọi khácRealistic Evaluation, Theory-Driven Realist Evaluation, CMO Configuration Analysis, Pawson-Tilley EvaluationImplementation Evaluation, Implementation Fidelity Evaluation, Program Process Evaluation
Liên quan43
Tóm tắtRealist 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.Process evaluation examines how a program or policy was actually implemented, rather than only whether it achieved its outcomes. It documents what was delivered, to whom, how much, how well and in what context, so that outcome findings can be interpreted correctly. By assessing implementation fidelity, dose, reach, and the mechanisms and contextual factors at work, process evaluation explains why an intervention succeeded or failed and distinguishes a flawed program theory from a sound theory that was poorly delivered. The UK Medical Research Council's 2015 guidance and earlier health-promotion frameworks consolidated it as a core component of evaluating complex interventions.
ScholarGateBộ dữ liệu
  1. v1
  2. 2 Nguồn tài liệu
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 Nguồn tài liệu
  3. PUBLISHED

Đến trang tìm kiếm Tải xuống bản trình chiếu

ScholarGateSo sánh phương pháp: Realist Evaluation · Process Evaluation. Truy cập ngày 2026-06-24 từ https://scholargate.app/vi/compare