Research Methods Brief: Anatomy of Process Evaluations for P/CVE

Process Evaluations are evaluations focused on understanding how a program is implemented. This also can include evaluating the extent to which a program is implemented according to plan (i.e., evaluating its “program fidelity”). In short, process evaluations seek to identify a program’s “moving p...
Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Michael J. Williams [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Deutsch ; Englisch ; Französisch

Erschienen:	2022

Schlagwörter:	preventing violent extremism pve countering violent extremism cve p/cve design evaluation process evaluation

Übergeordnetes Werk:	In: Journal for Deradicalization - Daniel Koehler, 2015, (2022), 30, Seite 262-274
Übergeordnetes Werk:	year:2022 ; number:30 ; pages:262-274

Links:	Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Journal toc

Katalog-ID:	DOAJ04898132X

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	DOAJ04898132X
003	DE-627
005	20230308140931.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	230227s2022 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|ger c
035			\|a (DE-627)DOAJ04898132X
035			\|a (DE-599)DOAJ2884a06fbe5a4167b50451e26592fb18
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a ger \|a eng \|a fre
050		0	\|a JA1-92
100	0		\|a Michael J. Williams \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Research Methods Brief: Anatomy of Process Evaluations for P/CVE
264		1	\|c 2022
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a Process Evaluations are evaluations focused on understanding how a program is implemented. This also can include evaluating the extent to which a program is implemented according to plan (i.e., evaluating its “program fidelity”). In short, process evaluations seek to identify a program’s “moving parts” to assess the extent to which they are functioning as intended. Ideally, that includes uncovering the theoretical mechanisms—the reasons “why”—a program’s outputs or outcomes are (or are not) achieved. Understanding why a program is (or is not) working as well as expected is the backbone of evidence-based P/CVE program design and evaluation, and is essential to informing sound P/CVE program management decision-making. Consequently, without exception, good P/CVE-related research, or evaluation projects—those that are scientifically grounded—must include at least some element(s) of process evaluation. This research methods brief describes the fundamental components of process evaluations, common pitfalls and means to avoid those pitfalls, within the context of P/CVE program design and evaluation.
650		4	\|a preventing violent extremism
650		4	\|a pve
650		4	\|a countering violent extremism
650		4	\|a cve
650		4	\|a p/cve
650		4	\|a design
650		4	\|a evaluation
650		4	\|a process evaluation
653		0	\|a Political science
653		0	\|a J
653		0	\|a Political science (General)
773	0	8	\|i In \|t Journal for Deradicalization \|d Daniel Koehler, 2015 \|g (2022), 30, Seite 262-274 \|w (DE-627)881149764 \|w (DE-600)2886119-X \|x 23639849 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g year:2022 \|g number:30 \|g pages:262-274
856	4	0	\|u https://doaj.org/article/2884a06fbe5a4167b50451e26592fb18 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://journals.sfu.ca/jd/index.php/jd/article/view/583 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/2363-9849 \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_DOAJ
912			\|a GBV_ILN_11
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_31
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_70
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_74
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_206
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_370
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2086
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4326
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4335
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|j 2022 \|e 30 \|h 262-274

Indexfelder

author_variant	m j w mjw
matchkey_str	article:23639849:2022----::eerhehdbifntmopoesv
hierarchy_sort_str	2022
callnumber-subject-code	JA
publishDate	2022
allfields	(DE-627)DOAJ04898132X (DE-599)DOAJ2884a06fbe5a4167b50451e26592fb18 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb ger eng fre JA1-92 Michael J. Williams verfasserin aut Research Methods Brief: Anatomy of Process Evaluations for P/CVE 2022 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Process Evaluations are evaluations focused on understanding how a program is implemented. This also can include evaluating the extent to which a program is implemented according to plan (i.e., evaluating its “program fidelity”). In short, process evaluations seek to identify a program’s “moving parts” to assess the extent to which they are functioning as intended. Ideally, that includes uncovering the theoretical mechanisms—the reasons “why”—a program’s outputs or outcomes are (or are not) achieved. Understanding why a program is (or is not) working as well as expected is the backbone of evidence-based P/CVE program design and evaluation, and is essential to informing sound P/CVE program management decision-making. Consequently, without exception, good P/CVE-related research, or evaluation projects—those that are scientifically grounded—must include at least some element(s) of process evaluation. This research methods brief describes the fundamental components of process evaluations, common pitfalls and means to avoid those pitfalls, within the context of P/CVE program design and evaluation. preventing violent extremism pve countering violent extremism cve p/cve design evaluation process evaluation Political science J Political science (General) In Journal for Deradicalization Daniel Koehler, 2015 (2022), 30, Seite 262-274 (DE-627)881149764 (DE-600)2886119-X 23639849 nnns year:2022 number:30 pages:262-274 https://doaj.org/article/2884a06fbe5a4167b50451e26592fb18 kostenfrei https://journals.sfu.ca/jd/index.php/jd/article/view/583 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2363-9849 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 2022 30 262-274
spelling	(DE-627)DOAJ04898132X (DE-599)DOAJ2884a06fbe5a4167b50451e26592fb18 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb ger eng fre JA1-92 Michael J. Williams verfasserin aut Research Methods Brief: Anatomy of Process Evaluations for P/CVE 2022 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Process Evaluations are evaluations focused on understanding how a program is implemented. This also can include evaluating the extent to which a program is implemented according to plan (i.e., evaluating its “program fidelity”). In short, process evaluations seek to identify a program’s “moving parts” to assess the extent to which they are functioning as intended. Ideally, that includes uncovering the theoretical mechanisms—the reasons “why”—a program’s outputs or outcomes are (or are not) achieved. Understanding why a program is (or is not) working as well as expected is the backbone of evidence-based P/CVE program design and evaluation, and is essential to informing sound P/CVE program management decision-making. Consequently, without exception, good P/CVE-related research, or evaluation projects—those that are scientifically grounded—must include at least some element(s) of process evaluation. This research methods brief describes the fundamental components of process evaluations, common pitfalls and means to avoid those pitfalls, within the context of P/CVE program design and evaluation. preventing violent extremism pve countering violent extremism cve p/cve design evaluation process evaluation Political science J Political science (General) In Journal for Deradicalization Daniel Koehler, 2015 (2022), 30, Seite 262-274 (DE-627)881149764 (DE-600)2886119-X 23639849 nnns year:2022 number:30 pages:262-274 https://doaj.org/article/2884a06fbe5a4167b50451e26592fb18 kostenfrei https://journals.sfu.ca/jd/index.php/jd/article/view/583 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2363-9849 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 2022 30 262-274
allfields_unstemmed	(DE-627)DOAJ04898132X (DE-599)DOAJ2884a06fbe5a4167b50451e26592fb18 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb ger eng fre JA1-92 Michael J. Williams verfasserin aut Research Methods Brief: Anatomy of Process Evaluations for P/CVE 2022 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Process Evaluations are evaluations focused on understanding how a program is implemented. This also can include evaluating the extent to which a program is implemented according to plan (i.e., evaluating its “program fidelity”). In short, process evaluations seek to identify a program’s “moving parts” to assess the extent to which they are functioning as intended. Ideally, that includes uncovering the theoretical mechanisms—the reasons “why”—a program’s outputs or outcomes are (or are not) achieved. Understanding why a program is (or is not) working as well as expected is the backbone of evidence-based P/CVE program design and evaluation, and is essential to informing sound P/CVE program management decision-making. Consequently, without exception, good P/CVE-related research, or evaluation projects—those that are scientifically grounded—must include at least some element(s) of process evaluation. This research methods brief describes the fundamental components of process evaluations, common pitfalls and means to avoid those pitfalls, within the context of P/CVE program design and evaluation. preventing violent extremism pve countering violent extremism cve p/cve design evaluation process evaluation Political science J Political science (General) In Journal for Deradicalization Daniel Koehler, 2015 (2022), 30, Seite 262-274 (DE-627)881149764 (DE-600)2886119-X 23639849 nnns year:2022 number:30 pages:262-274 https://doaj.org/article/2884a06fbe5a4167b50451e26592fb18 kostenfrei https://journals.sfu.ca/jd/index.php/jd/article/view/583 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2363-9849 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 2022 30 262-274
allfieldsGer	(DE-627)DOAJ04898132X (DE-599)DOAJ2884a06fbe5a4167b50451e26592fb18 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb ger eng fre JA1-92 Michael J. Williams verfasserin aut Research Methods Brief: Anatomy of Process Evaluations for P/CVE 2022 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Process Evaluations are evaluations focused on understanding how a program is implemented. This also can include evaluating the extent to which a program is implemented according to plan (i.e., evaluating its “program fidelity”). In short, process evaluations seek to identify a program’s “moving parts” to assess the extent to which they are functioning as intended. Ideally, that includes uncovering the theoretical mechanisms—the reasons “why”—a program’s outputs or outcomes are (or are not) achieved. Understanding why a program is (or is not) working as well as expected is the backbone of evidence-based P/CVE program design and evaluation, and is essential to informing sound P/CVE program management decision-making. Consequently, without exception, good P/CVE-related research, or evaluation projects—those that are scientifically grounded—must include at least some element(s) of process evaluation. This research methods brief describes the fundamental components of process evaluations, common pitfalls and means to avoid those pitfalls, within the context of P/CVE program design and evaluation. preventing violent extremism pve countering violent extremism cve p/cve design evaluation process evaluation Political science J Political science (General) In Journal for Deradicalization Daniel Koehler, 2015 (2022), 30, Seite 262-274 (DE-627)881149764 (DE-600)2886119-X 23639849 nnns year:2022 number:30 pages:262-274 https://doaj.org/article/2884a06fbe5a4167b50451e26592fb18 kostenfrei https://journals.sfu.ca/jd/index.php/jd/article/view/583 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2363-9849 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 2022 30 262-274
allfieldsSound	(DE-627)DOAJ04898132X (DE-599)DOAJ2884a06fbe5a4167b50451e26592fb18 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb ger eng fre JA1-92 Michael J. Williams verfasserin aut Research Methods Brief: Anatomy of Process Evaluations for P/CVE 2022 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Process Evaluations are evaluations focused on understanding how a program is implemented. This also can include evaluating the extent to which a program is implemented according to plan (i.e., evaluating its “program fidelity”). In short, process evaluations seek to identify a program’s “moving parts” to assess the extent to which they are functioning as intended. Ideally, that includes uncovering the theoretical mechanisms—the reasons “why”—a program’s outputs or outcomes are (or are not) achieved. Understanding why a program is (or is not) working as well as expected is the backbone of evidence-based P/CVE program design and evaluation, and is essential to informing sound P/CVE program management decision-making. Consequently, without exception, good P/CVE-related research, or evaluation projects—those that are scientifically grounded—must include at least some element(s) of process evaluation. This research methods brief describes the fundamental components of process evaluations, common pitfalls and means to avoid those pitfalls, within the context of P/CVE program design and evaluation. preventing violent extremism pve countering violent extremism cve p/cve design evaluation process evaluation Political science J Political science (General) In Journal for Deradicalization Daniel Koehler, 2015 (2022), 30, Seite 262-274 (DE-627)881149764 (DE-600)2886119-X 23639849 nnns year:2022 number:30 pages:262-274 https://doaj.org/article/2884a06fbe5a4167b50451e26592fb18 kostenfrei https://journals.sfu.ca/jd/index.php/jd/article/view/583 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2363-9849 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 2022 30 262-274
language	German English French
source	In Journal for Deradicalization (2022), 30, Seite 262-274 year:2022 number:30 pages:262-274
sourceStr	In Journal for Deradicalization (2022), 30, Seite 262-274 year:2022 number:30 pages:262-274
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	preventing violent extremism pve countering violent extremism cve p/cve design evaluation process evaluation Political science J Political science (General)
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	Journal for Deradicalization
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Michael J. Williams @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2022-01-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	881149764
id	DOAJ04898132X
language_de	deutsch englisch franzoesisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ04898132X</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230308140931.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230227s2022 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|ger c</controlfield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ04898132X</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ2884a06fbe5a4167b50451e26592fb18</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ger</subfield><subfield code="a">eng</subfield><subfield code="a">fre</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">JA1-92</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Michael J. Williams</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Research Methods Brief: Anatomy of Process Evaluations for P/CVE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2022</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Process Evaluations are evaluations focused on understanding how a program is implemented. This also can include evaluating the extent to which a program is implemented according to plan (i.e., evaluating its “program fidelity”). In short, process evaluations seek to identify a program’s “moving parts” to assess the extent to which they are functioning as intended. Ideally, that includes uncovering the theoretical mechanisms—the reasons “why”—a program’s outputs or outcomes are (or are not) achieved. Understanding why a program is (or is not) working as well as expected is the backbone of evidence-based P/CVE program design and evaluation, and is essential to informing sound P/CVE program management decision-making. Consequently, without exception, good P/CVE-related research, or evaluation projects—those that are scientifically grounded—must include at least some element(s) of process evaluation. This research methods brief describes the fundamental components of process evaluations, common pitfalls and means to avoid those pitfalls, within the context of P/CVE program design and evaluation.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">preventing violent extremism</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">pve</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">countering violent extremism</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">cve</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">p/cve</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">design</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">evaluation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">process evaluation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Political science</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">J</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Political science (General)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Journal for Deradicalization</subfield><subfield code="d">Daniel Koehler, 2015</subfield><subfield code="g">(2022), 30, Seite 262-274</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)881149764</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2886119-X</subfield><subfield code="x">23639849</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">year:2022</subfield><subfield code="g">number:30</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:262-274</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/2884a06fbe5a4167b50451e26592fb18</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://journals.sfu.ca/jd/index.php/jd/article/view/583</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2363-9849</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2086</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="j">2022</subfield><subfield code="e">30</subfield><subfield code="h">262-274</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
callnumber-first	J - Political Science
author	Michael J. Williams
spellingShingle	Michael J. Williams misc JA1-92 misc preventing violent extremism misc pve misc countering violent extremism misc cve misc p/cve misc design misc evaluation misc process evaluation misc Political science misc J misc Political science (General) Research Methods Brief: Anatomy of Process Evaluations for P/CVE
authorStr	Michael J. Williams
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)881149764
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut
collection	DOAJ
remote_str	true
callnumber-label	JA1-92
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	23639849
topic_title	JA1-92 Research Methods Brief: Anatomy of Process Evaluations for P/CVE preventing violent extremism pve countering violent extremism cve p/cve design evaluation process evaluation
topic	misc JA1-92 misc preventing violent extremism misc pve misc countering violent extremism misc cve misc p/cve misc design misc evaluation misc process evaluation misc Political science misc J misc Political science (General)
topic_unstemmed	misc JA1-92 misc preventing violent extremism misc pve misc countering violent extremism misc cve misc p/cve misc design misc evaluation misc process evaluation misc Political science misc J misc Political science (General)
topic_browse	misc JA1-92 misc preventing violent extremism misc pve misc countering violent extremism misc cve misc p/cve misc design misc evaluation misc process evaluation misc Political science misc J misc Political science (General)
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	Journal for Deradicalization
hierarchy_parent_id	881149764
hierarchy_top_title	Journal for Deradicalization
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)881149764 (DE-600)2886119-X
title	Research Methods Brief: Anatomy of Process Evaluations for P/CVE
ctrlnum	(DE-627)DOAJ04898132X (DE-599)DOAJ2884a06fbe5a4167b50451e26592fb18
title_full	Research Methods Brief: Anatomy of Process Evaluations for P/CVE
author_sort	Michael J. Williams
journal	Journal for Deradicalization
journalStr	Journal for Deradicalization
callnumber-first-code	J
lang_code	ger eng fre
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2022
contenttype_str_mv	txt
container_start_page	262
author_browse	Michael J. Williams
class	JA1-92
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Michael J. Williams
title_sort	research methods brief: anatomy of process evaluations for p/cve
callnumber	JA1-92
title_auth	Research Methods Brief: Anatomy of Process Evaluations for P/CVE
abstract	Process Evaluations are evaluations focused on understanding how a program is implemented. This also can include evaluating the extent to which a program is implemented according to plan (i.e., evaluating its “program fidelity”). In short, process evaluations seek to identify a program’s “moving parts” to assess the extent to which they are functioning as intended. Ideally, that includes uncovering the theoretical mechanisms—the reasons “why”—a program’s outputs or outcomes are (or are not) achieved. Understanding why a program is (or is not) working as well as expected is the backbone of evidence-based P/CVE program design and evaluation, and is essential to informing sound P/CVE program management decision-making. Consequently, without exception, good P/CVE-related research, or evaluation projects—those that are scientifically grounded—must include at least some element(s) of process evaluation. This research methods brief describes the fundamental components of process evaluations, common pitfalls and means to avoid those pitfalls, within the context of P/CVE program design and evaluation.
abstractGer	Process Evaluations are evaluations focused on understanding how a program is implemented. This also can include evaluating the extent to which a program is implemented according to plan (i.e., evaluating its “program fidelity”). In short, process evaluations seek to identify a program’s “moving parts” to assess the extent to which they are functioning as intended. Ideally, that includes uncovering the theoretical mechanisms—the reasons “why”—a program’s outputs or outcomes are (or are not) achieved. Understanding why a program is (or is not) working as well as expected is the backbone of evidence-based P/CVE program design and evaluation, and is essential to informing sound P/CVE program management decision-making. Consequently, without exception, good P/CVE-related research, or evaluation projects—those that are scientifically grounded—must include at least some element(s) of process evaluation. This research methods brief describes the fundamental components of process evaluations, common pitfalls and means to avoid those pitfalls, within the context of P/CVE program design and evaluation.
abstract_unstemmed	Process Evaluations are evaluations focused on understanding how a program is implemented. This also can include evaluating the extent to which a program is implemented according to plan (i.e., evaluating its “program fidelity”). In short, process evaluations seek to identify a program’s “moving parts” to assess the extent to which they are functioning as intended. Ideally, that includes uncovering the theoretical mechanisms—the reasons “why”—a program’s outputs or outcomes are (or are not) achieved. Understanding why a program is (or is not) working as well as expected is the backbone of evidence-based P/CVE program design and evaluation, and is essential to informing sound P/CVE program management decision-making. Consequently, without exception, good P/CVE-related research, or evaluation projects—those that are scientifically grounded—must include at least some element(s) of process evaluation. This research methods brief describes the fundamental components of process evaluations, common pitfalls and means to avoid those pitfalls, within the context of P/CVE program design and evaluation.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
container_issue	30
title_short	Research Methods Brief: Anatomy of Process Evaluations for P/CVE
url	https://doaj.org/article/2884a06fbe5a4167b50451e26592fb18 https://journals.sfu.ca/jd/index.php/jd/article/view/583 https://doaj.org/toc/2363-9849
remote_bool	true
ppnlink	881149764
callnumber-subject	JA - Political Science
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
callnumber-a	JA1-92
up_date	2024-07-03T20:44:10.026Z
_version_	1803592086354657281
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ04898132X</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230308140931.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230227s2022 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|ger c</controlfield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ04898132X</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ2884a06fbe5a4167b50451e26592fb18</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ger</subfield><subfield code="a">eng</subfield><subfield code="a">fre</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">JA1-92</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Michael J. Williams</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Research Methods Brief: Anatomy of Process Evaluations for P/CVE</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2022</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Process Evaluations are evaluations focused on understanding how a program is implemented. This also can include evaluating the extent to which a program is implemented according to plan (i.e., evaluating its “program fidelity”). In short, process evaluations seek to identify a program’s “moving parts” to assess the extent to which they are functioning as intended. Ideally, that includes uncovering the theoretical mechanisms—the reasons “why”—a program’s outputs or outcomes are (or are not) achieved. Understanding why a program is (or is not) working as well as expected is the backbone of evidence-based P/CVE program design and evaluation, and is essential to informing sound P/CVE program management decision-making. Consequently, without exception, good P/CVE-related research, or evaluation projects—those that are scientifically grounded—must include at least some element(s) of process evaluation. This research methods brief describes the fundamental components of process evaluations, common pitfalls and means to avoid those pitfalls, within the context of P/CVE program design and evaluation.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">preventing violent extremism</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">pve</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">countering violent extremism</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">cve</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">p/cve</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">design</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">evaluation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">process evaluation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Political science</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">J</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Political science (General)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Journal for Deradicalization</subfield><subfield code="d">Daniel Koehler, 2015</subfield><subfield code="g">(2022), 30, Seite 262-274</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)881149764</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2886119-X</subfield><subfield code="x">23639849</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">year:2022</subfield><subfield code="g">number:30</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:262-274</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/2884a06fbe5a4167b50451e26592fb18</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://journals.sfu.ca/jd/index.php/jd/article/view/583</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2363-9849</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2086</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="j">2022</subfield><subfield code="e">30</subfield><subfield code="h">262-274</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.400692

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Research Methods Brief: Anatomy of Process Evaluations for P/CVE

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?