A Summative Evaluation of RCT Methodology: & An Alternative Approach to Causal Research

Main Article Content

Michael Scriven

Abstract

This review focuses on what might be called a reconsideration of the working credentials of the RCT design, and includes some radical new perspectives on these, with relatively brief coverage of the usual suspects.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Scriven, M. (2008). A Summative Evaluation of RCT Methodology: & An Alternative Approach to Causal Research. Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation, 5(9), 11–24. https://doi.org/10.56645/jmde.v5i9.160
Section
Research Articles

References

Brinkerhoff, R. (2003). The success case method; Find out quickly what's working and what's not. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.

Cartwright, N. (2007). Hunting causes and using them: Approaches in philosophy and economics. Cambridge, UK: University Press.

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511618758

Collins, N. H., & Paul, L. (Eds.). (2004). Causation and counterfactuals. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/1752.001.0001

Morgan, S. L., & Winship, C. (2007). Counterfactuals and causal inference: Methods and principles for social research. Cambridge,England: Cambridge University Press.

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511804564

Patton, M. Q. (2008). Advocacy impact evaluation. Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation, 5(9), 1-10.

https://doi.org/10.56645/jmde.v5i9.159

Scriven, M. (1966). Defects of the necessary condition analysis of causation, Philosophical Analysis and History. In W. Dray (Ed.) Reprint in: Sosa, E. & Tooley, M. (Eds.). Causation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Yin, R. K. (2002). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Newberry Park, CA: Sage.