This article presents the rationale and procedures for conducting a process analysis in
evaluation research. Such an analysis attempts to identify the process that mediates the
effects of some treatment, by estimating the parameters of a causal chain between the
treatment and some outcome variable. Two different procedures for estimating mediation
are discussed. In addition we present procedures for examining whether a treatment exerts
its effects, in part, by altering the mediating process that produces the outcome. Finally,
the benefits of process analysis in evaluation research are underlined.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Blalock, H.M. (1967) "Path coefficients versus regression coefficients ." Amer. J. of Sociology72: 675-676.
2.
Boruch, R.F. and H. Gomez (1979) "Sensitivity, bias, and theory in impact evaluation ," in L. Sechrest et al. (eds.) Evaluation Studies Review Annual, Volume 4. Beverly Hills : Sage.
3.
Campbell, D.T. and A. Erlebacher (1970) "How regression in quasi-experimental evaluation can mistakenly make compensatory education harmful," in J. Hellmuth (ed.) The Disadvantaged Child, Volume III: Compensatory Education: A National Debate. New York: Brunner-Mazel.
4.
Cohen, J. and P. Cohen (1975) Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
5.
Cronbach, L.J. and L. Furby (1970) "How we should measure 'change'—or should we?" Psych. Bull.74: 68-80.
6.
Duncan, O.D. (1975) Introduction to Structural Equation Models. New York: Academic Press.
7.
James, L.R. and B.K. Singh (1978) "An introduction to the logic, assumptions and basic analytic procedures of two stage least squares." Psych. Bull.85: 1104-1123.
8.
Joereskog, K.G. and D. Soerbom (1979) Advances in Factor Analysis. Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates.
9.
——— (1978) LISREL: Analysis of Linear Structural Relationships by the Method of Maximum Likelihood. Chicago: National Educational Resources.
10.
Judd, C.M. and D.A. Kenny (1981) Estimating the Effects of Social Interventions . New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.
11.
Judd, C.M. and M.A. Milburn (1980) "The structure of attitude systems in the general public: comparisons of a structural equation model." Amer. Soc. Rev.45: 627-643.
12.
Kenny, D.A. (1975) "A quasi-experimental approach to assessing treatment effects in the nonequivalent control group design." Psych. Bull.82: 345-362.
13.
——— (1979) Correlation and Causality. New York: Wiley-Interscience.
14.
Long, J.S. (1976) "Estimation and hypothesis testing in linear models containing measurement error." Soc. Methods and Research5: 157-206.
15.
Maccoby, N. and J.W. Farquhar (1975) "Communication for health: unselling heart disease ." J. of Commumcation25: 114-126.
16.
Milburn, M.A. (1978) "Process analysis of mass media campaigns." Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University.
17.
Soerbom, D. (1975) "Detection of correlated errors in longitudinal data." British J. of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology28: 138-151.
18.
Wheaton, B., B. Muthen, D.F. Alwin, and G.F. Summers (1977) "Assessing reliability and stability in panel models," in D. R. Heise (ed.) Sociological Methodology 1977. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
19.
Wholey, J.S., J.N. Nay, J.W. Scanlon, and R.E. Schmidt (1975) "Evaluation : when is it really needed?" Evaluation Magazine2: 89-93.
