Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The realist approach can now be said to be part of the repertoire of evaluation methods. There has been a corresponding shift in methodological focus. Polemical thrust and counter-thrust about the realist contribution as compared to that of other evaluative approaches such as randomized trials and meta-analysis has given way to closer examination of its practice ‘on the ground’. This article seeks to make a contribution to the literature on how to conduct realist inquiry through a constructive critique of recently published ‘realist evaluations’.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pawson et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: