IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v70y2018icp44-50.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Attitudes toward evaluation: An exploratory study of students’ and stakeholders’ social representations

Author

Listed:
  • Schultes, Marie-Therese
  • Kollmayer, Marlene
  • Mejeh, Mathias
  • Spiel, Christiane

Abstract

Positive attitudes toward evaluation among stakeholders are an important precondition for successful evaluation processes. However, empirical studies focusing on stakeholders’ attitudes toward evaluation are scarce. The present paper explores the approach of assessing social representations as indicators of people’s attitudes toward evaluation. In an exploratory study, two groups were surveyed: University students (n = 60) with rather theoretical knowledge of evaluation and stakeholders (n = 61) who had shortly before taken part in participatory evaluation studies. Both groups were asked to name their free associations with the term “evaluation”, which were subsequently analyzed lexicographically. The results indicate different social representations of evaluation in the two groups. The student group primarily saw evaluation as an “appraisal”, whereas the stakeholders emphasized the “improvement” resulting from evaluation. Implications for further evaluation research and practice are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Schultes, Marie-Therese & Kollmayer, Marlene & Mejeh, Mathias & Spiel, Christiane, 2018. "Attitudes toward evaluation: An exploratory study of students’ and stakeholders’ social representations," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 44-50.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:70:y:2018:i:c:p:44-50
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2018.06.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718918300788
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2018.06.002?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kirchler, Erich & Maciejovsky, Boris & Schneider, Friedrich, 2003. "Everyday representations of tax avoidance, tax evasion, and tax flight: Do legal differences matter?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 535-553, August.
    2. Sridharan, Sanjeev & Nakaima, April, 2011. "Ten steps to making evaluation matter," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 135-146, May.
    3. Roseland, Denise & Lawrenz, Frances & Thao, Mao, 2015. "The relationship between involvement in and use of evaluation in multi-site evaluations," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 75-82.
    4. Daigneault, Pierre-Marc, 2014. "Taking stock of four decades of quantitative research on stakeholder participation and evaluation use: A systematic map," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 171-181.
    5. Stark, Jennifer & Kogler, Christoph & Gaisbauer, Helmut & Sedmak, Clemens & Kirchler, Erich, 2016. "Differentiating Views of Inheritance: The Free Association Task as a Method to Assess Social Representations of Wealth, Inherit, and Bequeath," Review of Behavioral Economics, now publishers, vol. 3(1), pages 91-111, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sridharan, Sanjeev & Jones, Bobby & Caudill, Barry & Nakaima, April, 2016. "Steps towards incorporating heterogeneities into program theory: A case study of a data-driven approach," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 88-97.
    2. Friedrich Schneider & Robert Klinglmair, 2004. "Shadow economies around the world: what do we know?," Economics working papers 2004-03, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria.
    3. Musharraf Rasool Cyan & Antonios M. Koumpias & Jorge Martinez-Vazquez, 2016. "The Effects of Media Campaigns on Individual Attitudes towards Tax Compliance; Quasi-experimental Evidence from Survey Data in Pakistan," International Center for Public Policy Working Paper Series, at AYSPS, GSU paper1609, International Center for Public Policy, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    4. Cãƒtãƒlina Cozmei, 2012. "Playing The Fiscal Lottery Game," Proceedings of the INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 6(1), pages 511-521, November.
    5. Traxler, Christian, 2010. "Social norms and conditional cooperative taxpayers," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 89-103, March.
    6. Schneider, Friedrich G., 2007. "Shadow Economies and Corruption All Over the World: New Estimates for 145 Countries," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 1, pages 1-66.
    7. Marjorie Tendero & Cécile Bazart, 2018. "" Empty lands " ? Social representations of contaminated brownfields in France," Working Papers halshs-01709548, HAL.
    8. Sridharan, Sanjeev & Nakaima, April, 2023. "Learning from experiences of evaluators implementing theory-driven evaluations in diverse settings: Building on the contributions of John Mayne," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    9. Dinah M. Payne & Cecily A. Raiborn, 2018. "Aggressive Tax Avoidance: A Conundrum for Stakeholders, Governments, and Morality," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 147(3), pages 469-487, February.
    10. Wrede, Matthias, 2013. "Rational choice of itemized deductions," FAU Discussion Papers in Economics 01/2013, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Institute for Economics.
    11. Friedrich Schneider, 2014. "Outside the State - the Shadow Economy and Shadow Economy Labor Force," CESifo Working Paper Series 4829, CESifo.
    12. Shalini Shukla & Rakesh Kumar, 2019. "Role of Trust in Adoption of Online Good Service Tax Filing in India," Vikalpa: The Journal for Decision Makers, , vol. 44(3), pages 99-114, September.
    13. Sandra Aulia & Haula Rosdiana & Inayati Inayati, 2022. "Trust, Power, and Tax Risk into the “Slippery Slope”: A Corporate Tax Compliance Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-18, November.
    14. Blaufus, Kay & Hundsdoerfer, Jochen & Jacob, Martin & Sünwoldt, Matthias, 2016. "Does legality matter? The case of tax avoidance and evasion," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 182-206.
    15. Klimm, Felix, 2019. "Suspicious success – Cheating, inequality acceptance, and political preferences," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 36-55.
    16. Boris Maciejovsky & Herbert Schwarzenberger & Erich Kirchler, 2012. "Rationality Versus Emotions: The Case of Tax Ethics and Compliance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 109(3), pages 339-350, September.
    17. Greil, Stefan & Schwarz, Christian & Stein, Stefan, "undated". "Perceived Fairness in the Taxation of a Digital Business Model [Fairness und die Besteuerung digitaler Geschäftsmodelle]," Duesseldorf Working Papers in Applied Management and Economics 47, Duesseldorf University of Applied Sciences.
    18. Friedrich Schneider & Friedrich Schneider, 2008. "Shadow Economies and Corruption all over the World: What do we Really Know?," Chapters, in: Michael Pickhardt & Edward Shinnick (ed.), The Shadow Economy, Corruption and Governance, chapter 7, pages 122-187, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Tânia Menezes Montenegro, 2021. "Tax Evasion, Corporate Social Responsibility and National Governance: A Country-Level Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-19, October.
    20. Olena Tymchenko & Yuliia Sybirianska & Alla Abramova, 2019. "The Approach to Tax Debtors Segmentation," Economic Studies journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 5, pages 103-119.

    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:eee:epplan:v:70:y:2018:i:c:p:44-50. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    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.