ScholarGate
助手

方法对比

并排查看您选择的方法;存在差异的行会高亮显示。

Realist Evaluation×现实主义综合×
领域Public Policy证据综合
方法族Process / pipelineProcess / pipeline
起源年份19972005
提出者Ray Pawson & Nick TilleyRay Pawson (2005)
类型Theory-driven, generative evaluation approachFramework
开创性文献Pawson, R., & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic Evaluation. London: SAGE Publications. ISBN: 9780761950097Pawson, R., Greenhalgh, T., Harvey, G., & Walshe, K. (2005). Realist review—a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy and programme evaluation. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 10(S1), 21–35. DOI ↗
别名Realistic Evaluation, Theory-Driven Realist Evaluation, CMO Configuration Analysis, Pawson-Tilley EvaluationRealist Review, CMO Configuration, Mechanism-Based Synthesis
相关41
摘要Realist 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.Realist synthesis is a theory-driven, interpretive method for evidence synthesis developed by Ray Pawson (2005) that focuses on understanding HOW and WHY interventions work, rather than WHETHER they work. Grounded in realist philosophy, realist synthesis examines Context-Mechanism-Outcome (CMO) configurations: how specific contextual conditions activate mechanisms that produce outcomes. Unlike traditional systematic reviews, which typically answer 'Does intervention X reduce outcome Y?', realist synthesis asks 'Under what conditions, through what mechanisms, for which populations does X work?' This approach is particularly valuable for complex interventions (policies, programs, multi-component treatments) where effectiveness varies dramatically across contexts, and for understanding why interventions succeed in some settings but fail in others.
ScholarGate数据集
  1. v1
  2. 2 来源
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 3 来源
  3. PUBLISHED

前往搜索 下载幻灯片

ScholarGate方法对比: Realist Evaluation · Realist Synthesis. 于 2026-06-25 检索自 https://scholargate.app/zh/compare