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
Autor*in: |
Michael J. Williams [verfasserIn] |
---|
Format: |
E-Artikel |
---|---|
Sprache: |
Deutsch ; Englisch ; Französisch |
Erschienen: |
2022 |
---|
Schlagwörter: |
---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
In: Journal for Deradicalization - Daniel Koehler, 2015, (2022), 30, Seite 262-274 |
---|---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
year:2022 ; number:30 ; pages:262-274 |
Links: |
---|
Katalog-ID: |
DOAJ04898132X |
---|
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 |
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 |