Skip Navigation


Health Promotion International Advance Access originally published online on June 21, 2005
Health Promotion International 2005 20(4):391-397; doi:10.1093/heapro/dai013
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
20/4/391    most recent
dai013v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Abma, T. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Abma, T. A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


© The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

DEBATE

Responsive evaluation in health promotion: its value for ambiguous contexts

Tineke A. Abma

Healthcare Ethics and Philosophy, University of Maastricht, The Netherlands

Address for correspondence: Ms T. A. Abma, University of Maastricht, Healthcare Ethics and Philosophy, PO Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands, E-mail: t.abma{at}zw.unimaas.nl

Responsive evaluation offers a perspective in which evaluation is reframed from the assessment of program interventions on the basis of policymakers' goals to an engagement with all stakeholders about the value and meaning of their practice. This article argues for this perspective both generally and more particularly in relation to health promotion. Responsive evaluation is especially appropriate in health promotion contexts characterized by a high degree of ambiguity. Ambiguity refers to the absence of or contradictory interpretations about what needs to, can and should be done, when and where. Ambiguity is high in the case of non-routine programs, lack of knowledge about success indicators, collaborative and communitybased programs and the absence of consensus among stakeholders. In health promotion contexts marked by a low degree of ambiguity random controlled trials (RCTs) and quantitative methods are to be considered. This implies the evaluators should assess the degree of ambiguity of a situation before deciding about an appropriate design.

Key words: ambiguity; health promotion; responsive evaluation


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.