000			01591naa a2200193uu 4500
001			5092116430717
003			OSt
005			20190211160137.0
008			050921s2005 xx ||||gr |0|| 0 eng d
100	1		_aFARRIGNTON, David P _921840
245	1	0	_aMethodological Quality Standards for Evaluation Research
260			_aThousand Oaks : _bSage Publications, _cMay 2003
520	3		_aEvaluation studies vary in methodological quality. It is essential to develop methodological quality standars for evaluation research that can be understood and easily used by scholars, practitioners, policy makers, the mass media, and systematic reviews. This article proposes that such standards should be based on statisticl conclusion validity, internal validity, construct valitity, external validity, and descriptive validity. Methodological quality scales are reviwed, and it is argued that efforts should de made to improve them. Pawson and Tilley's challenge to the Campbell evaluation tradition is also assessed. It is concluded that this challenge does not have any implications for methological quality standars, because the Campbell tradition already emphasizes the need to study moderators and mediators in evaluation research
650		4	_amethodological Quality; Evaluation; Validity; Crime Reduction; Systematic Reviews _921841
773	0	8	_tThe Annals of The American Academy of Political and Social Science _g587, p. 49-68 _dThousand Oaks : Sage Publications, May 2003 _xISSN 0002-7162 _w
942			_cS
998			_a20050921 _b1643^b _cAnaluiza
998			_a20050922 _b1630^b _c
999			_aConvertido do Formato PHL _bPHL2MARC21 1.1 _c13631 _d13631
041			_aeng