IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/evarev/v50y2026i1p89-115.html

Taking Stock of Qualitative Methods of Evaluation: A Study of Practices and Quality Criteria

Author

Listed:
  • Thilo Bodenstein
  • Achim Kemmerling

Abstract

Research on evaluation has mapped the landscape of quantitative evaluation methods. There are far fewer overviews for qualitative methods of evaluation. We present a review of scholarly articles from five widely read evaluation research journals, examining the types of methods used and the transparency of their quality criteria. We briefly look at a large sample of 1070 articles and then randomly select 50 for in-depth study. We document a remarkable variety of qualitative methods, but some stand out: Case studies and stakeholder analysis, often combined with interview techniques. Articles rarely define and conceptualize their methods explicitly. This is understandable from a practical point of view, but it can make it difficult to critically interrogate findings and build systematic knowledge. Finally, we find that the transparency of qualitative criteria required in the literature is not always sufficient, which can hinder the synthesis of results.

Suggested Citation

  • Thilo Bodenstein & Achim Kemmerling, 2026. "Taking Stock of Qualitative Methods of Evaluation: A Study of Practices and Quality Criteria," Evaluation Review, , vol. 50(1), pages 89-115, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:50:y:2026:i:1:p:89-115
    DOI: 10.1177/0193841X251370426
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0193841X251370426
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0193841X251370426?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. Hugh Sharma Waddington & Hikari Umezawa & Howard White, 2025. "What Can We Learn From Qualitative Impact Evaluations About the Effectiveness of Lobby and Advocacy? A Meta-Evaluation of Dutch aid Programmes and Assessment Tool," Evaluation Review, , vol. 49(5), pages 851-879, October.
    2. Michael Bamberger & Vijayendra Rao & Michael Woolcock, 2009. "Using Mixed Methods in Monitoring and Evaluation: Experiences from International Development’," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series 10709, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    3. Burt S. Barnow & Sanjay K. Pandey & Qian “Eric†Luo, 2024. "How Mixed-Methods Research Can Improve the Policy Relevance of Impact Evaluations," Evaluation Review, , vol. 48(3), pages 495-514, June.
    4. William J. Filstead, 1981. "Using Qualitative Methods in Evaluation Research," Evaluation Review, , vol. 5(2), pages 259-268, April.
    5. Pamela R. Buckley & Abigail A. Fagan & Fred C. Pampel & Karl G. Hill, 2020. "Making Evidence-Based Interventions Relevant for Users: A Comparison of Requirements for Dissemination Readiness Across Program Registries," Evaluation Review, , vol. 44(1), pages 51-83, 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. Quan Nha Hong & Sergi FÃ bregues, 2026. "A Critical Reflection of Generalization in Mixed Methods Research," Evaluation Review, , vol. 50(2), pages 200-230, April.
    2. Nadel, Sara & Pritchett, Lant, 2016. "Searching for the Devil in the Details: Learning about Development Program Design," Working Paper Series rwp16-041, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    3. Lemire, Sebastian & Freeman, Brian & Porowski, Allan, 2026. "Co-developing practice guides: A researcher-practitioner model for evidence-based practice," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    4. Diether W. Beuermann & Maria Amelina, 2018. "Does participatory budgeting improve decentralized public service delivery? Experimental evidence from rural Russia," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 339-379, November.
    5. Fatoumata Nankoto Cissé, 2022. "How impact evaluation methods influence the outcomes of development projects? Evidence from a meta-analysis on decentralized solar nano projects," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 22008, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    6. Ruth Stewart & Carina van Rooyen & Thea de Wet, 2012. "Purity or pragmatism? Reflecting on the use of systematic review methodology in development," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(3), pages 430-444, September.
    7. Fatoumata Nankoto Cissé, 2022. "How impact evaluation methods influence the outcomes of development projects? Evidence from a meta-analysis on decentralized solar nano projects," Post-Print halshs-03623394, HAL.
    8. Konrad Obermann & Jasper Scheppe & Bernd Glazinski, 2013. "More Than Figures? Qualitative Research In Health Economics," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(3), pages 253-257, March.
    9. Thomas Delahais, 2026. "External Validity for Complex Interventions: Towards Pragmatic Strategies for Evaluators," Evaluation Review, , vol. 50(2), pages 256-278, April.
    10. Rob Tulder & M. May Seitanidi & Andrew Crane & Stephen Brammer, 2016. "Enhancing the Impact of Cross-Sector Partnerships," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 135(1), pages 1-17, April.
    11. Schuster, Roseanne C. & Brewis, Alexandra & Wutich, Amber & Safi, Christelle & Vanrespaille, Teresa Elegido & Bowen, Gina & SturtzSreetharan, Cindi & McDaniel, Anne & Ochandarena, Peggy, 2023. "Individual interviews versus focus groups for evaluations of international development programs: Systematic testing of method performance to elicit sensitive information in a justice study in Haiti," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    12. Sarah Baird & Laura Camfield & Ashraful Haque & Nicola Jones & Anas Masri & Kate Pincock & Mahesh C. Puri, 2021. "No One Left Behind: Using Mixed-Methods Research to Identify and Learn from Socially Marginalised Adolescents in Low- and Middle-Income Countries," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 33(5), pages 1163-1188, October.
    13. Gil, Alejandro & Brennan, Mark & Chaudhary, Anil Kumar & Maximova, Siela N., 2023. "Evaluation of cacao projects in Colombia: The case of the rural Productive Partnerships Project (PAAP)," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    14. Deval Desai & Michael Woolcock, 2012. "The politics of rule of law systems in developmental states: 'political settlements' as a basis for promoting effective justice institutions for marginalized groups," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series esid-008-12, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    15. Sara Nadel and Lant Pritchett, 2016. "Searching for the Devil in the Details: Learning about Development Program Design," Working Papers 434, Center for Global Development.
    16. Channing Arndt & Karl Pauw & James Thurlow, 2016. "The Economy-wide Impacts and Risks of Malawi's Farm Input Subsidy Program," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 98(3), pages 962-980.
    17. Blundo-Canto, Genowefa & Bax, Vincent & Quintero, Marcela & Cruz-Garcia, Gisella S. & Groeneveld, Rolf A. & Perez-Marulanda, Lisset, 2018. "The Different Dimensions of Livelihood Impacts of Payments for Environmental Services (PES) Schemes: A Systematic Review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 160-183.
    18. Gagné, Marie-Hélène & Piché, Geneviève & Brunson, Liesette & Clément, Marie-Ève & Drapeau, Sylvie & Jean, Sarah-Maude, 2023. "Efficacy of the Triple P – Positive Parenting Program on 0–12 year-old Quebec children's behavior," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    19. De Hoop, Thomas & Van Kempen, Luuk & Linssen, Rik & Van Eerdewijk, Anouka, 2010. "Women's Autonomy and Subjective Well-Being in India: How Village Norms Shape the Impact of Self-Help Groups," MPRA Paper 25921, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Howard White & Hugh Waddington, 2012. "Why do we care about evidence synthesis? An introduction to the special issue on systematic reviews," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(3), pages 351-358, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:50:y:2026:i:1:p:89-115. 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.