Strategies for Researching Programs’ Impact on Capability: A Scoping Review

IF 1.8 3区 社会学 Q3 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
Wouter J. Rijke, J. Meerman, B. Bloemen, S. Venkatapuram, J. V. D. van der Klink, G. J. van der Wilt
{"title":"Strategies for Researching Programs’ Impact on Capability: A Scoping Review","authors":"Wouter J. Rijke, J. Meerman, B. Bloemen, S. Venkatapuram, J. V. D. van der Klink, G. J. van der Wilt","doi":"10.1080/19452829.2023.2209027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Researchers seeking to assess the impact of a program on the capability of its target audience face numerous methodological challenges. The purpose of our review was to see to what extent such challenges are recognised and what choices researchers made in order to address them, and why. We identified 3354 studies by searching five databases in addition to cross-checking references from selected studies. A total of 71 studies met our pre-defined selection criteria: empirical studies reporting data on how interventions impacted the beneficiaries’ capability, providing sufficient detail on how impact was measured, in English language. Four independent raters assessed those studies on four domains: descriptive information, consideration of causal attribution, operationalisation of capability, and interpretation of findings. Challenges related to capability impact assessment were not widely explicitly acknowledged, and available measures to address these challenges were not being used routinely. Major weaknesses included little attention to causal attribution, infrequent justification of the specific content of capability, and failure to research the constitutive elements of capability and their interactions. Research into a program’s impact on the capability of its recipients is challenging for several reasons, but options are available to further improve the quality of this type of research.","PeriodicalId":46538,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Development and Capabilities","volume":"24 1","pages":"401 - 423"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Human Development and Capabilities","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19452829.2023.2209027","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT Researchers seeking to assess the impact of a program on the capability of its target audience face numerous methodological challenges. The purpose of our review was to see to what extent such challenges are recognised and what choices researchers made in order to address them, and why. We identified 3354 studies by searching five databases in addition to cross-checking references from selected studies. A total of 71 studies met our pre-defined selection criteria: empirical studies reporting data on how interventions impacted the beneficiaries’ capability, providing sufficient detail on how impact was measured, in English language. Four independent raters assessed those studies on four domains: descriptive information, consideration of causal attribution, operationalisation of capability, and interpretation of findings. Challenges related to capability impact assessment were not widely explicitly acknowledged, and available measures to address these challenges were not being used routinely. Major weaknesses included little attention to causal attribution, infrequent justification of the specific content of capability, and failure to research the constitutive elements of capability and their interactions. Research into a program’s impact on the capability of its recipients is challenging for several reasons, but options are available to further improve the quality of this type of research.
研究项目对能力影响的策略:范围审查
研究人员试图评估一个项目对其目标受众能力的影响,面临着许多方法上的挑战。我们回顾的目的是看看这些挑战在多大程度上得到了承认,研究人员为了解决这些挑战做出了哪些选择,以及为什么。我们通过检索5个数据库,并交叉核对所选研究的参考文献,确定了3354项研究。共有71项研究符合我们预先定义的选择标准:经验研究报告了干预措施如何影响受益人能力的数据,并提供了如何测量影响的足够细节,以英语语言。四名独立评价者从四个方面对这些研究进行了评估:描述性信息、因果归因的考虑、能力的可操作性和对结果的解释。与能力影响评估相关的挑战没有得到广泛明确的承认,并且处理这些挑战的可用措施没有被常规使用。主要的弱点包括对因果归因的关注较少,对能力具体内容的论证较少,以及对能力构成要素及其相互作用的研究失败。由于几个原因,研究一个项目对其接受者能力的影响是具有挑战性的,但是可以选择进一步提高这类研究的质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
6.70%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: Journal of Human Development and Capabilities: A Multi-Disciplinary Journal for People-Centered Development is the peer-reviewed journal of the Human Development and Capabilities Association. It was launched in January 2000 to promote new perspectives on challenges of human development, capability expansion, poverty eradication, social justice and human rights. The Journal aims to stimulate innovative development thinking that is based on the premise that development is fundamentally about improving the well-being and agency of people, by expanding the choices and opportunities they have. Accordingly, the Journal recognizes that development is about more than just economic growth and development policy is more than just economic policy: it cuts across economic, social, political and environmental issues. The Journal publishes original work in philosophy, economics, and other social sciences that expand concepts, measurement tools and policy alternatives for human development. It provides a forum for an open exchange of ideas among a broad spectrum of academics, policy makers and development practitioners who are interested in confronting the challenges of human development at global, national and local levels.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信