IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v97y2023ics0149718923000368.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Towards an evolutionary approach to learning from assumptions: Lessons from the evaluation of Dancing with Parkinson’s

Author

Listed:
  • Nakaima, April
  • Sridharan, Sanjeev
  • Gibson, Rachael

Abstract

This paper highlights how learnings from exploring assumptions can be strengthened by taking an evolutionary approach to theory building and analysis. We discuss theory-driven evaluation applied to a community-based intervention implemented by Dancing With Parkinson’s in Toronto, Canada, targeting Parkinson’s disease (PD), a neurodegenerative condition affecting movement. A major gap in the literature is understanding the mechanisms by which dance might make a difference in the daily lives of people living with PD. This study was an early exploratory evaluation to better understand mechanisms and short-term outcomes. Conventional thinking generally favors “permanent” over “transitory” changes, and “long-term” over “short-term” effects. Yet, for people living with degenerative conditions (and also people experiencing chronic pain and other chronic symptoms), transitory and short-term changes may be highly valued and welcomed relief. In order to study and link multiple longitudinal events to explore key linkages in the theory of change, we piloted the use of diaries, with brief entries filled out daily by participants. The aim was to better understand the short-term experiences of participants using their daily routines as a means of learning about potential mechanisms, what matters to participants, and to see if small effects could be observed on days when participants danced versus days when they did not dance and also longitudinally over several months. Our initial theoretical stance began with a view of dance as exercise and the well-established benefits of exercise; yet, we explored through the diary data collected, as well as client interviews and literature review, potential other mechanisms of dancing (such as group interaction, touch, stimulation by the music, and esthetics including “feeling lovely”). This paper does not develop a full, comprehensive theory of dance but moves towards a more comprehensive view that locates dance within the routine activities of participants’ daily lives. We argue that given the challenges of evaluating complex interventions comprising multiple, interacting components, there is a need for an evolutionary learning process to understand heterogeneities in mechanisms -- what works for whom -- when faced with knowledge incompleteness in the theory of change.

Suggested Citation

  • Nakaima, April & Sridharan, Sanjeev & Gibson, Rachael, 2023. "Towards an evolutionary approach to learning from assumptions: Lessons from the evaluation of Dancing with Parkinson’s," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:97:y:2023:i:c:s0149718923000368
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2023.102259
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718923000368
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2023.102259?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. Sridharan, Sanjeev & Nakaima, April, 2020. "Valuing and embracing complexity: How an understanding of complex interventions needs to shape our evaluation capacities building initiatives," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    2. Nakaima, April & Sridharan, Sanjeev, 2020. "Reflections on experiential learning in evaluation capacity building with a community organization, Dancing With Parkinson’s," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    3. Nylen, Kirk & Sridharan, Sanjeev, 2020. "Experiments in evaluation capacity building: Enhancing brain disorders research impact in Ontario," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    4. Gibson, Rachael & Robichaud, Sarah, 2020. "Evaluating Dancing With Parkinson's: Reflections from the perspective of a community organization," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    5. 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.
    6. Mark, Melvin M., 2023. "Surfacing, as well as testing, “elliptical assumptions” in a theory of change: Principled discovery," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    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 & 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).
    2. Teasdale, Rebecca M., 2022. "Representing the values of program participants: Endogenous evaluative criteria," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    3. Sridharan, Sanjeev & Nakaima, April, 2020. "Valuing and embracing complexity: How an understanding of complex interventions needs to shape our evaluation capacities building initiatives," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    4. Myrta Kohler & Hanna Mayer & Jürg Kesselring & Susi Saxer, 2020. "Urinary incontinence in stroke survivors – Development of a programme theory," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(15-16), pages 3089-3096, August.

    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:97:y:2023:i:c:s0149718923000368. 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.