Constructing Theories of Change

Mason, Paul; Barnes, Marian

doi:10.1177/1356389007075221

Cited by 101 publications

(89 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A theory may also be constructed by the evaluator rather than implementers (Chen & Rossi, 1980). Mason and Barnes (2007) advocate building theory as an intervention progresses; this could be useful where theory is unclear or where there are many unknown factors at the beginning. Depending on the evaluation approach, multiple theories may emerge from different stakeholders, including the evaluator who may be aware of competing theoretical possibilities (Chen & Rossi, 1980); this could be useful in comparing the utility of different theoretical explanations.…”

Section: Process Evaluation and Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving Process Evaluations of Health Behavior Interventions

Morgan‐Trimmer

2013

Eval Health Prof

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reflects on the current state of process evaluations of health behavior interventions and argues that evaluation practice in this area could be improved by drawing on the social science literature to a greater degree. While process evaluations of health behavior interventions have increasingly engaged with the social world and sociological aspects of interventions, there has been a lag in applying relevant and potentially useful approaches from the social sciences. This has limited the scope for health behavior process evaluations to address pertinent contextual issues and methodological challenges. Three aspects of process evaluations are discussed: the incorporation of contexts of interventions; engagement with the concept of "process" in process evaluation; and working with theory to understand interventions. Following on from this, the article also comments on the need for new methodologies and on the implications for addressing health inequalities.

show abstract

Section: Process Evaluation and Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving Process Evaluations of Health Behavior Interventions

Morgan‐Trimmer

2013

Eval Health Prof

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A theory of change 5 seeks to establish the links between an intervention, its wider context, and its outcomes (Weiss, 1995, Mason and Barnes, 2007, White, 2009). The aim should be to clearly set out the theory behind an intervention, outlining how it will be implemented, why it is being implemented, what its aims are, how it is supposed to work, and in what conditions.…”

Section: Setting Out a Programme's Theory Of Changementioning

confidence: 99%

Addressing attribution of cause and effect in small n impact evaluations: towards an integrated framework

White¹,

Phillips²

2012

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie) works to improve the lives of people in the developing world by supporting the production and use of evidence on what works, when, why and for how much. 3ie is a new initiative which responds to demands for better evidence, and will enhance development effectiveness by promoting better-informed policies. 3ie finances high-quality impact evaluations and campaigns to inform better programme and policy design in developing countries.The 3ie Working Paper series covers both conceptual issues related to impact evaluation and findings from specific studies or systematic reviews. The views in the papers are those of the authors, and cannot be taken to represent the views of 3ie, its members, or any of its funders.This Working Paper was written by Howard White and Daniel Phillips, 3ie, and edited by Catherine Robinson. Production and cover design by Radhika Menon and Mukul Soni, 3ie. AcknowledgementsThe authors would like to thank members of the cross-college working group on impact evaluation, especially Clare Chandler, who offered advice and useful information which helped in the paper's development. We would like to thank Fred Carden, Rick Davies, Katherine Hay, Lina Payne, Wendy Olsen, John Mayne, Bruno Marchal, Robert Brinkerhoff, Julia Betts, Karl Hughes, Kimberly Bowman and Eric Djimeu for constructive criticism, ideas and information that have led to revisions of the paper. We are also grateful to colleagues from 3ie whose ideas and information have contributed to our work. AbstractWith the results agenda in the ascendancy in the development community, there is an increasing need to demonstrate that development spending makes a difference, that it has an impact. This requirement to demonstrate results has fuelled an increase in the demand for, and production of, impact evaluations. There exists considerable consensus among impact evaluators conducting large n impact evaluations involving tests of statistical difference in outcomes between the treatment group and a properly constructed comparison group. However, no such consensus exists when it comes to assessing attribution in small n cases, i.e. when there are too few units of assignment to permit tests of statistical difference in outcomes between the treatment group and a properly constructed comparison group.We examine various evaluation approaches that could potentially be suitable for small n analysis and find that a number of them share a methodological core which could provide a basis for consensus. This common core involves the specification of a theory of change together with a number of further alternative causal hypotheses. Causation is established beyond reasonable doubt by collecting evidence to validate, invalidate, or revise the hypothesised explanations, with the goal of rigorously evidencing the links in the actual causal chain.We argue that, properly applied, approaches which undertake these steps can be used to address attribution of cause and effect. However, we also find that more ne...

show abstract

“…An intervention can be a policy, instrument, program, or individual project that has goals and logic. Another key concept is theory of change or intervention logic, which is the logical backbone of the policy, instrument, program, or project to be evaluated (Mason and Barnes 2007;Vogel 2012). Intervention logic explains how inputs are transformed into outcomes and impacts as a result of a set of activities.…”

Section: Basic Setup For Learning By Evaluatingmentioning

confidence: 99%