The Need for Evaluative Criteria:

Argumentative English writing is an important touchstone of Chinese advanced English learners' English competence. Herbert Paul Grice's "cooperative principles" (including maxims of quantity, quality, relation and manner), as "lubricant" of human communication, would help build up harmonious and friendly atmosphere for the communication between the Chinese writers and their target readers, thereby providing them, as well as their instructors, with feasible evaluative criteria for judging the effectiveness of their argumentative English writing.

Download Full-text

Conclusion

10.1093/oso/9780198815976.003.0008 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Rachel Crossland

Keyword(s):

Literature And Science ◽

Evaluative Criteria ◽

Specific Potential ◽

The Creation ◽

The Moment ◽

Further Development

The conclusion returns to some of the ideas raised in the Introduction, specifically Gillian Beer’s suggestion that literature and science ‘share the moment’s discourse’. It argues for the relevance of this model to different periods and disciplines, while also suggesting some specific potential areas for further development in relation to the present study, including generalist periodicals. It also considers some of the evaluative criteria that have previously been suggested for studies in the field of literature and science, and raises some questions as to the direction in which that field of research should now move. The study concludes finally by suggesting that literature and science, as well as a range of other disciplines, some of which are included here, do more than share the moment’s discourse—they share in the creation, development, and modification of that discourse because they share the moment itself.

Download Full-text

Not the ‘from the editors’: On guarding ‘topness’

Organization ◽

10.1177/1350508420972091 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 135050842097209

Author(s):

Hugh Willmott

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Value Orientations ◽

Conventional Wisdom ◽

Ethical Principles ◽

Management Review ◽

Evaluative Criteria ◽

Specific Focus

The paper reflects on the experience of preparing a ‘From the Editors’ (FTE) editorial for The Academy of Management Review that went through a process of editorial evaluation prior to its rejection. It provides a detailed example of an encounter between orthodox and heterodox forms of scholarship, illuminating their distinctive value-orientations and forms of engagement. Its specific focus is upon evaluative criteria applied, accountability of decision-making and the mobilization of scholarly aspirations and ethical principles in the preparation and assessment of the FTE. Its intent is to stimulate debate on what it means to ‘challenge conventional wisdom’ – an aim that is broadly shared by ‘top’ journals in the field of management and organization.

Download Full-text

Scoping review: Development and assessment of evaluation frameworks of mobile health apps for recommendations to consumers

Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association ◽

10.1093/jamia/ocab041 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Martin Hensher ◽

Paul Cooper ◽

Sithara Wanni Arachchige Dona ◽

Mary Rose Angeles ◽

Dieu Nguyen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Full Range ◽

Evaluation Framework ◽

Bibliographic Databases ◽

Health Organizations ◽

Health Apps ◽

Search Terms ◽

Evaluative Criteria ◽

Mobile Health Apps ◽

Threshold Filter ◽

Individual Clinician

Abstract Objective The study sought to review the different assessment items that have been used within existing health app evaluation frameworks aimed at individual, clinician, or organizational users, and to analyze the scoring and evaluation methods used in these frameworks. Materials and Methods We searched multiple bibliographic databases and conducted backward searches of reference lists, using search terms that were synonyms of “health apps,” “evaluation,” and “frameworks.” The review covered publications from 2011 to April 2020. Studies on health app evaluation frameworks and studies that elaborated on the scaling and scoring mechanisms applied in such frameworks were included. Results Ten common domains were identified across general health app evaluation frameworks. A list of 430 assessment criteria was compiled across 97 identified studies. The most frequently used scaling mechanism was a 5-point Likert scale. Most studies have adopted summary statistics to generate the total scoring of each app, and the most popular approach taken was the calculation of mean or average scores. Other frameworks did not use any scaling or scoring mechanism and adopted criteria-based, pictorial, or descriptive approaches, or “threshold” filter. Discussion There is wide variance in the approaches to evaluating health apps within published frameworks, and this variance leads to ongoing uncertainty in how to evaluate health apps. Conclusions A new evaluation framework is needed that can integrate the full range of evaluative criteria within one structure, and provide summative guidance on health app rating, to support individual app users, clinicians, and health organizations in choosing or recommending the best health app.

Download Full-text

Defining and Measuring News Media Quality: Comparing the Content Perspective and the Audience Perspective

The International Journal of Press/Politics ◽

10.1177/1940161221999666 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 194016122199966

Author(s):

Philipp Bachmann ◽

Mark Eisenegger ◽

Diana Ingenhoff

Keyword(s):

News Media ◽

Social Scientists ◽

Content Quality ◽

Media System ◽

Evaluative Criteria ◽

Political Implications ◽

Multimethod Approach ◽

Media Systems ◽

Measurement Approach

High-quality news is important, not only for its own sake but also for its political implications. However, defining, operationalizing, and measuring news media quality is difficult, because evaluative criteria depend upon beliefs about the ideal society, which are inherently contested. This conceptual and methodological paper outlines important considerations for defining news media quality before developing and applying a multimethod approach to measure it. We refer to Giddens' notion of double hermeneutics, which reveals that the ways social scientists understand constructs inevitably interact with the meanings of these constructs shared by people in society. Reflecting the two-way relationship between society and social sciences enables us to recognize news media quality as a dynamic, contingent, and contested construct and, at the same time, to reason our understanding of news media quality, which we derive from Habermas' ideal of deliberative democracy. Moreover, we investigate the Swiss media system to showcase our measurement approach in a repeated data collection from 2017 to 2020. We assess the content quality of fifty news media outlets using four criteria derived from the deliberative ideal ( N = 20,931 and 18,559 news articles and broadcasting items, respectively) and compare the results with those from two representative online surveys ( N = 2,169 and 2,159 respondents). The high correlations between both methods show that a deliberative understanding of news media quality is anchored in Swiss society and shared by audiences. This paper shall serve as a showcase to reflect and measure news media quality across other countries and media systems.

Download Full-text

CONFRONTING THE “GRAY ZONES” OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT: EVALUATING GENETIC TESTING SERVICES FOR PUBLIC INSURANCE COVERAGE IN CANADA

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care ◽

10.1017/s0266462303000278 ◽

2003 ◽

Vol 19 (2) ◽

pp. 301-316 ◽

Cited By ~ 24

Author(s):

Mita Giacomini ◽

Fiona Miller ◽

George Browman

Keyword(s):

New Technologies ◽

Evaluation Model ◽

Insurance Coverage ◽

Unit Cost ◽

Evaluation Criteria ◽

Public Insurance ◽

Evaluative Criteria ◽

Predictive Genetic Tests ◽

Decision Making Processes ◽

Coverage Policy

We describe an evaluation model to guide public coverage of new predictive genetic tests in Ontario, Canada. The model confronts common “gray zones” in evaluation and coverage policy for challenging new technologies. Analysis addresses three domains of the evaluation picture. The first specifies evaluative criteria (purpose, effectiveness, additional effects, unit cost, demand, cost-effectiveness). The second induces or deduces acceptable cutoffs for each criterion. The third domain addresses the need to make decisions under uncertainty and to respond to “gray” evaluations with conditional-coverage decisions. The evaluation criteria should be applied within sound decision-making processes.

Download Full-text