IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/evarev/v8y1984i3p413-424.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Introspection, Deduction, and Guesswork in Policy Evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Stuart S. Nagel

    (University of Illinois)

Abstract

There is a need for more use of introspection, deduction, and guesswork in policy/pro gram evaluation to supplement the possible overemphasis on statistical/behavioral analysis. Introspective interviewing of knowledgeable insiders can often determine the magnitude of relations more meaningfully than statistical analysis can in view of reciprocal causation, spurious causation, multicollinearity, and other confounding factors. Deduction from empirically validated premises avoids the problem of lack of an experimental group, a control group, after-data, before-data, bureaucratic inertia, and damages from experimenting. Guesswork can be combined with sensitivity analysis to determine the effects of guesses and missing information on bottom-line conclusions where statistical analysis, introspective authority, or deduction is questionable.

Suggested Citation

  • Stuart S. Nagel, 1984. "Introspection, Deduction, and Guesswork in Policy Evaluation," Evaluation Review, , vol. 8(3), pages 413-424, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:8:y:1984:i:3:p:413-424
    DOI: 10.1177/0193841X8400800307
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0193841X8400800307
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0193841X8400800307?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stuart S. Nagel, 1984. "Public Policy Goals, Means, and Methods," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 3(2), pages 192-192, February.
    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. Stuart Nagel & John Long, 1985. "P/G% Analysis," Evaluation Review, , vol. 9(2), pages 209-214, April.
    2. Ridgley, Mark A, 1996. "Fair sharing of greenhouse gas burdens," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 517-529, June.
    3. Stuart Nagel, 1989. "Doing better than the optimum," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 193-220, April.
    4. Stuart S. Nagel, 1988. "Evaluating Cities, Multidimensionality, and Diminishing Returns," Evaluation Review, , vol. 12(1), pages 60-75, February.
    5. Cheol H. Oh & Seung-Hwan Myeong, 2002. "Evaluating E-Government: A Lesson From Korea," International Review of Public Administration, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 33-43, December.
    6. C.E. Teasley, 1989. "When a Picture Is Worth More Than a Thousand Words," Evaluation Review, , vol. 13(1), pages 91-103, February.

    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:sae:evarev:v:8:y:1984:i:3:p:413-424. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.