Evaluation Review

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click Here for More Information

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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cytrynbaum, S.
Right arrow Articles by Brandt, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Cytrynbaum, S.
Right arrow Articles by Brandt, L.
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. 3, No. 1, 5-40 (1979)
DOI: 10.1177/0193841X7900300102

Goal Attainment Scaling

A Critical Review

Solomon Cytrynbaum

Northwestern University

Yigal Ginath

Talbieh Psychiatric Hospital and Hadassah Medical School

Joel Birdwell

University of Calgary

Lauren Brandt

New York University

Available published and unpublished studies on Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS), cur rently the most popular outcome evaluation technique in the human sciences, were cri tically reviewed. Forty-one of ninety-one initial studies, which met minimal criteria of completeness of information reported and quality of research, were subjected to in-depth review. Conclusions were rather mixed and somewhat discouraging. The proliferation m the use of GAS as an evaluative technique has been accompanied by serious procedural and methodological problems. Despite numerous studies, the reliability and validity of GAS remain questionable. More optimistically, GASprocedures can serve a useful educa tional and intervention function, particularly in mental health settings, and patient in volvement in the goal-setting process as defined by GAS seems to enhance therapeutic effectiveness.


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?