The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Discovering Process Use
Abstract
Trying to figure out what’s really going on is, of course, a core function of evaluation. Part of such reality testing at a conference includes sorting out what our profession has become and is becoming, what our core disciplines are, and what issues deserve our attention. I have spent a good part of my evaluation career reflecting on these concerns, particularly from the point of view of use; for example, how to work with intended users to achieve intended uses, and how to distinguish the general community of stakeholders from primary users so as to work with them. In all of that work, and indeed through the first two editions of Utilization-Focused Evaluation (a period spanning 20 years), I have been engaging in evaluations with a focus on enhancing utility, both the amount and quality of use. However, when I went to prepare the third edition of the book (Patton, 1997), and was trying to sort out what had happened in the field in the 10 years since the last edition, it occurred to me that I had missed something. I was struck by something which my own myopia had not allowed me to see before. When I have followed up my own evaluations over the years, I have asked intended
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
Cited by
The utilisation of health research in policy-making: concepts, examples and methods of assessment
Hanney, S. R., Gonzalez-Block, M. A., Buxton, M. J., & Kogan, M. (2003) · Health Research Policy and Systems · doi:10.1186/1478-4505-1-2 · Cited by 678
Reconceptualizing evaluation use: An integrated theory of influence
Kirkhart, K. E. (2000) · New Directions for Evaluation · doi:10.1002/ev.1188 · Cited by 300
Creating a culture of data use for continuous improvement: A case study of an Edison Project school
Sutherland, S. (2004) · American Journal of Evaluation · doi:10.1177/109821400402500302 · Cited by 106
Metadata
- Authors
- Patton, M. Q.
- Venue
- Evaluation
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1998-04
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 225-233
- ISSN
- 1356-3890 (ISSN-L)
- 1461-7153
- OpenAlex
- W1971315722
- Cited by
- 218
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.58
- 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: Discovering Process Use. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/13563899822208437
- The paper
- Patton, M. Q. (1998). Discovering Process Use. Evaluation. https://doi.org/10.1177/13563899822208437
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.