Avoiding type III error in program evaluation
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Unless an evaluation of implementation fidelity is made, it cannot be determined whether a lack of impact is due to poor implementation or inadequacies inherent in the programme itself (Type III error).
“Unless such an evaluation is made, it cannot be determined whether a lack of impact is due to poor implementation or inadequacies inherent in the programme itself, a so-called Type III error [11]”
From A conceptual framework for implementation fidelity (2007) · cites this paper as [11]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A conceptual framework for implementation fidelity
Carroll, C., Patterson, M., Wood, S., Booth, A., Rick, J., & Balain, S. (2007) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-2-40 · Cited by 2,559 · see citing works
Dusenbury, L. (2003) · Health Education Research · doi:10.1093/her/18.2.237 · Cited by 1,671 · see citing works
Damschroder, L. J., Reardon, C. M., Opra Widerquist, M. A., & Lowery, J. (2022) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-021-01181-5 · Cited by 784 · see citing works
Blase, K. A., Van Dyke, M., Fixsen, D. L., & Bailey, F. W. (2012) · Handbook of Implementation Science for Psychology in Education · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139013949.004 · Cited by 395 · see citing works
Mind the theoretical gap: interpreting, using, and developing behavioral theory in HCI research
Hekler, E. B., Klasnja, P., Froehlich, J. E., & Buman, M. P. (2013) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/2470654.2466452 · Cited by 328 · see citing works
The importance of studying the implementation of interventions in school settings
Lendrum, A., & Humphrey, N. (2012) · Oxford Review of Education · doi:10.1080/03054985.2012.734800 · Cited by 162 · see citing works
Rixon, L., Baron, J., McGale, N., Lorencatto, F., Francis, J., & Davies, A. (2016) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1904-6 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
Examining implementer fidelity: conceptualising and measuring adherence and competence
Cross, W., & West, J. (2011) · Journal of Children's Services · doi:10.5042/jcs.2011.0123 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
Mind the Gap: A Systematic Review of Research on Restorative Practices in Schools
Zakszeski, B., & Rutherford, L. (2021) · School Psychology Review · doi:10.1080/2372966x.2020.1852056 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
Avoiding Implementation Errors in Cancer Survivorship Care Plan Effectiveness Studies
Mayer, D. K., Birken, S. A., & Chen, R. C. (2015) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2015.62.6937 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
- Authors
- Dobson, D., & Cook, T. J.
- Affiliations
- Northern Illinois University (US)
- RTI International (US)
- Corresponding author
- Cook, Thomas J.
- Venue
- Evaluation and Program Planning
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1980-01
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 269-276
- ISSN
- 0149-7189 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1494384881
- Cited by
- 266
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 12
- FWCI
- 3.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Evaluation and Program Planning (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Evaluation and Performance Assessment
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
- Social Sciences › Public Administration › Public Policy and Administration Research
- Keywords
- Type III error, program evaluation, service utilization, service receipt, program outcomes, randomized field experiment, client heterogeneity
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
