Cited by 579Delphi Technique in ResearchMulti-Criteria Decision MakingReliability and Agreement in Measurement

The Delphi method: Substance, context, a critique and an annotated bibliography

Open access
Pill, Juri·1971·Socio-Economic Planning Sciences

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0038-0121(71)90041-3

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 45 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pill, J.
Affiliations
Case Western Reserve University (US)
Corresponding author
Pill, Juri
Venue
Socio-Economic Planning Sciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1971-02
Volume
5
Issue
1
Pages
57-71
ISSN
0038-0121 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1968468300
Cited by
579
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 31 · 2014: 29 · 2013: 27 · 2012: 10
FWCI
26.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Socio-Economic Planning Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Scholarly Commons @ Case Western Reserve University (submittedVersion, public-domain)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Delphi Technique in Research
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Multi-Criteria Decision Making
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Reliability and Agreement in Measurement
Keywords
Delphi method, consensus building, expert panel, subjective scaling, uncertainty, historical development, evaluation methodology, annotated bibliography

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review