IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/revpol/v5y1986i4p709-721.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Improving The Quality Of Research Synthesis In Program Evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Fred B. Bryant

Abstract

Because research synthesis enables one to determine either the overall effectiveness of different types of treatments, it is becoming increasingly popular as a tool in program evaluation. Numerous methodological problems arise, however, when research synthesis is applied to studies conducted in field settings. The present paper categorlzes and discusses these problems as being threats to either the (1) internal validity (whether one can draw conclusions about cause and effect), (2) statistical conclusion validity (whether one's inferential statistics are capable of detecting cause‐and effect relationships, (3) construct validity (whether one's treatments and outcome measures are valid operationalizations of the independent and dependent variables of interest), or (4) external validity (whether one can generalize results to particular populations, settings, or time periods) of research synthesis (see Cook & Campbell, 1979). Specific recommendations are made for minimizing these threats to validity, In order to improve the quality of research synthesis in program evaluation. Finally, the validit framework is applied to an actual synthesis to identify strengths, weaknesses, and potential means of enhancing research quality.

Suggested Citation

  • Fred B. Bryant, 1986. "Improving The Quality Of Research Synthesis In Program Evaluation," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 5(4), pages 709-721, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:5:y:1986:i:4:p:709-721
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-1338.1986.tb00523.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-1338.1986.tb00523.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1541-1338.1986.tb00523.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:5:y:1986:i:4:p:709-721. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipsonea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.