IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v99y2023ics0149718923001003.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring changes with traditional and retrospective pre-posttest self-report surveys for a brief intervention program

Author

Listed:
  • Kowalski, Monica J.

Abstract

Traditional and retrospective pre-posttest self-report surveys were used to evaluate a brief intervention program, the Latino Enrollment Institute (LEI) at the University of Notre Dame. Results showed that the retrospective approach yielded a greater magnitude of change in participants’ perceptions of changes in their understanding and practices related to the LEI content. In addition, the retrospective approach identified changes in participant’s beliefs that were unable to be detected using traditional pre-posttest surveys due to ceiling effects at the time of the pretest. Implications for evaluators are to consider retrospective designs to measure changes in beliefs when participants self-select into interventions and therefore presumably hold high beliefs about the content at the outset of the intervention.

Suggested Citation

  • Kowalski, Monica J., 2023. "Measuring changes with traditional and retrospective pre-posttest self-report surveys for a brief intervention program," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:99:y:2023:i:c:s0149718923001003
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2023.102323
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718923001003
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2023.102323?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. Geldhof, G. John & Warner, Danielle A. & Finders, Jennifer K. & Thogmartin, Asia A. & Clark, Adam & Longway, Kelly A., 2018. "Revisiting the utility of retrospective pre-post designs: The need for mixed-method pilot data," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 83-89.
    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. Miller, J. Jay, 2020. "Developing self-care competency among child welfare workers: A first step," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    2. Agans, Jennifer P. & Maley, Mary & Rainone, Nicolette & Cope, Marie & Turner, Andrew & Eckenrode, John & Pillemer, Karl, 2020. "Evaluating the evidence for youth outcomes in 4-H: A scoping review," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    3. Sarah Clement & Katie Spellman & Laura Oxtoby & Kelly Kealy & Karin Bodony & Elena Sparrow & Christopher Arp, 2023. "Redistributing Power in Community and Citizen Science: Effects on Youth Science Self-Efficacy and Interest," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-16, May.
    4. Tibbitts, Deanne C. & Aicher, Sue A. & Sugg, Judith & Handloser, Kimberlee & Eisman, Liz & Booth, Lauren D. & Bradley, Ryan D., 2021. "Program evaluation of trauma-informed yoga for vulnerable populations," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    5. Melanie McKoin Owens & Alexis Zickafoose & Gary Wingenbach & Sana Haddad & Jamie Freeny & Josephine Engels, 2022. "Selected Texan K-12 Educators’ Perceptions of Youth Suicide Prevention Training," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-12, October.

    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:99:y:2023:i:c:s0149718923001003. 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.