Evaluation Review

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Register here to gain access to SAGE's 500+ Journals Online

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Boyer, J. F.
Right arrow Articles by Langbein, L. I.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Boyer, J. F.
Right arrow Articles by Langbein, L. I.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Evaluation Review, Vol. 15, No. 5, 507-532 (1991)
DOI: 10.1177/0193841X9101500501

Factors Influencing the Use of Health Evaluation Research in Congress

John F. Boyer

Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affaires)

Laura I. Langbein

American University

This study explores relationships between the use of evaluation research in the legislative setting and a group of factors commonly cited in the literature as influences on use. The study focuses on the health policy area, and data were collected by telephone interviews with 100 congres sional staff members who deal with health policy issues. Although General Accounting Office (GAO) studies were identified more frequently, respondents did not indicate that they were used any more extensively than were other studies. Moreover, GAO studies were not perceived to be any more timely, methodologically credible, relevant, and so on than other studies. Multiple regression analysis demonstrated that the amount of policy conflict and the relevance of the report to Congress had no independent effect on reported use. The same analysis also indicated that proper timing of a report consistently had a significant effect on the amount of reported use. Clarity also influenced use by members of Congress but not use by staffers themselves. However, methodological credibility independently affected staff use but not use by the members.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Administration & SocietyHome page
W. T. Gormley Jr.
Counterbureaucracies in Theory and Practice
Administration Society, November 1, 1996; 28(3): 275 - 298.
[Abstract]


Home page
Eval RevHome page
R. B. Johnson
Estimating an Evaluation Utilization Model Using Conjoint Measurement and Analysis
Eval Rev, June 1, 1995; 19(3): 313 - 338.
[Abstract] [PDF]