The DOI matches its Crossref record; 23 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Interface between Evaluation and Public Policy
Abstract
Evaluation has much to offer to policy makers, but policy makers rarely base new policies directly on evaluation results. Partly this is because of the compedting pressures of interests, ideologies, other information and institutional constraints. Partly it is because many policies take shape over time through the actions of many officials in many offices, each of which does its job without conscious reflection. Despite the seeming neglect of evaluation, scholars in many countries have found that evaluation has real consequences: it challenges old ideas, provides new perspectives and helps to re-order the policy agenda. This kind of 'enlightenment' is difficult to see, and it works best when it receives support from policy champions. Many channels bring evaluation results to the attention of policy makers, and they listen not only because they want direction but also to justify policies, to show their knowledge and modernity, and as a counterweight to other information. Openness of the political system and a thriving evaluation community tend to make some nations more attuned to evaluation-than others.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Policy Change and Learning: An Advocacy Coalition Approach
Roberts, A., Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins-Smith, H. C. (1994) · Canadian Public Policy / Analyse de Politiques · doi:10.2307/3551961 · Cited by 3,628
Information in Organizations as Signal and Symbol
Feldman, M. S., & March, J. G. (1981) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392467 · Cited by 1,721
The New American Political System
Smith, G., & King, A. (1979) · Foreign Affairs · doi:10.2307/20040234 · Cited by 1,175
Knowledge Creep and Decision Accretion
Weiss, C. H. (1980) · Knowledge · doi:10.1177/107554708000100303 · Cited by 669
Self-citationSocial Science Research and Decision-Making.
Conklin, G. H., Weiss, C. H., & Bucuvalas, M. J. (1982) · Social Forces · doi:10.2307/2578408 · Cited by 532
Self-citationThe role of knowledge in the policy process
Radaelli, C. M. (1995) · Journal of European Public Policy · doi:10.1080/13501769508406981 · Cited by 489
Social Science and Social Policy.
Freeman, H. E., Shotland, R. L., & Mark, M. M. (1986) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2070103 · Cited by 300
Inquiry and Change: The Troubled Attempt to Understand and Shape Society, by Charles E. Lindblom
Schultze, C. L. (1991) · Political Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2152270 · Cited by 288
Inquiry and change: the troubled attempt to understand and shape society
(1991) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.28-4564 · Cited by 284
Order Without Design: Information Production and Policy Making
Feldman, M. S. (1989) · Stanford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1515/9781503621732 · Cited by 264
Cited by
Settings' based health promotion: a review
Whitelaw, S. (2001) · Health Promotion International · doi:10.1093/heapro/16.4.339 · Cited by 381
Getting Evidence into Practice: Perspectives on Rationality
Sanderson, I. (2004) · Evaluation · doi:10.1177/1356389004048283 · Cited by 313
Lehtonen, M., Sébastien, L., & Bauler, T. (2016) · Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability · doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2015.05.009 · Cited by 118
Towards experimental standardization for AI governance in the EU
Prifti, K., & Fosch-Villaronga, E. (2024) · Computer Law & Security Review · doi:10.1016/j.clsr.2024.105959 · Cited by 12
Metadata
- Authors
- Weiss, C. H.
- Venue
- Evaluation
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1999-10
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 468-486
- ISSN
- 1356-3890 (ISSN-L)
- 1461-7153
- OpenAlex
- W1993562114
- Cited by
- 349
- References
- 23
- FWCI
- 5.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Interface between Evaluation and Public Policy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/135638909900500408
- The paper
- Weiss, C. H. (1999). The Interface between Evaluation and Public Policy. Evaluation. https://doi.org/10.1177/135638909900500408
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.