Last data update: May 13, 2024. (Total: 46773 publications since 2009)
Records 1-3 (of 3 Records) |
Query Trace: Chen HT[original query] |
---|
Using the exhibited generalization approach to evaluate a carbon monoxide alarm ordinance
Chen HT , Yip F , Lavonas EJ , Iqbal S , Turner N , Cobb B , Garbe P . Eval Program Plann 2014 47c 35-44 Current interests in enhancing the focus of external validity or transferability call for developing practical evaluation approaches and illustrating their applications in this area for meeting the need. This study takes the challenge by introducing an innovative evaluation approach, named the exhibited generalization approach, and applying it in evaluating the carbon monoxide (CO) alarm ordinance passed by Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. The stakeholders specifically asked evaluators to determine the answers to the following two questions: (1) Does the alarm ordinance work? (2) What generalizable information can the Mecklenburg experience provide to other jurisdictions trying to decide if the alarm ordinance's planning, implementation, adoption, and outcomes are transferable to their communities? This study illustrates how to apply the exhibited generalization approach to provide the stakeholders with answers to these questions. Our results indicate that the alarm ordinance was effective in increasing CO alarm ownerships and reducing CO poisoning cases. The evaluation provides potential users and other interested parties with the necessary information on contextual factors and the causal mechanism underlying the CO alarm ordinance, so that these parties and users could decide whether the Mecklenburg alarm ordinance would be transferable to their own communities. Discussions include implications of this study for contributing in further advancing evaluation theory in addressing transferability or external validity issues. |
Formal theory versus stakeholder theory: new insights from a tobacco-focused prevention program evaluation
Chen HT , Turner NC . Am J Eval 2012 33 (3) 395-413 Health promotion and social betterment program interventions are based on either formal theory from academia or stakeholder theory from stakeholders' observations and experiences in working with clients. Over time, formal theory-based interventions have acquired high prestige, while stakeholder theory-based interventions have been held in low esteem. Here we examine the assumption that formal theory-based interventions are superior to stakeholder-based interventions in addressing community problems. The article elaborates on these ideas via a case study of a community-based, environmental tobacco smoke prevention program evaluation. The authors conclude that although both types of interventions had their strengths and limitations in the real world, the stakeholder theory-based intervention was more viable and effective than the formal theory-based intervention in this case due to implementation reasons. Findings are useful in understanding these two intervention types, in developing better strategies to address community problems, and in advancing program theory and theory-driven evaluation. |
The bottom-up approach to integrative validity: a new perspective for program evaluation
Chen HT . Eval Program Plann 2009 33 (3) 205-14 The Campbellian validity model and the traditional top-down approach to validity have had a profound influence on research and evaluation. That model includes the concepts of internal and external validity and within that model, the preeminence of internal validity as demonstrated in the top-down approach. Evaluators and researchers have, however, increasingly recognized that in an evaluation, the over-emphasis on internal validity reduces that evaluation's usefulness and contributes to the gulf between academic and practical communities regarding interventions. This article examines the limitations of the Campbellian validity model and the top-down approach and provides a comprehensive, alternative model, known as the integrative validity model for program evaluation. The integrative validity model includes the concept of viable validity, which is predicated on a bottom-up approach to validity. This approach better reflects stakeholders' evaluation views and concerns, makes external validity workable, and becomes therefore a preferable alternative for evaluation of health promotion/social betterment programs. The integrative validity model and the bottom-up approach enable evaluators to meet scientific and practical requirements, facilitate in advancing external validity, and gain a new perspective on methods. The new perspective also furnishes a balanced view of credible evidence, and offers an alternative perspective for funding. |
- Page last reviewed:Feb 1, 2024
- Page last updated:May 13, 2024
- Content source:
- Powered by CDC PHGKB Infrastructure