IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/evarev/v9y1985i5p523-545.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Triangulation in Evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Jennifer Greene

    (Cornell University)

  • Charles McClintock

    (Cornell University)

Abstract

More effective use of mixed-methods evaluation designs employing quantitative and qualitative methods requires clarification of important design and analysis issues. Design needs include assessments of the relative costs and benefits of alternative mixed-methods designs, which can be differentiated by the independence of the different methods and their sequential or concurrent implementation. The evaluation reported herein illustrates an independent, concurrent mixed-method design and highlights its significant triangulation benefits. Strategies for analyzing quantitative and qualitative results are further needed. Underlying this analysis challenge is the issue of cross-paradigm triangulation. A comment on this issue is provided, in conjunction with several triangulation analysis strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Jennifer Greene & Charles McClintock, 1985. "Triangulation in Evaluation," Evaluation Review, , vol. 9(5), pages 523-545, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:9:y:1985:i:5:p:523-545
    DOI: 10.1177/0193841X8500900501
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0193841X8500900501
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0193841X8500900501?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. von dem Knesebeck, Olaf & Joksimovic, Ljiljana & Badura, Bernhard & Siegrist, Johannes, 2002. "Evaluation of a community-level health policy intervention," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 111-122, July.

    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:9:y:1985:i:5:p:523-545. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.