ChelimskyE. (2014). Public-interest values and program sustainability some implications for evaluation practice. American Journal of Evaluation, 35, 527–542.
2.
Dahler-LarsenP. (2011). The evaluation society. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
3.
JulnesG. (2012a). Managing valuation. In JulnesG. (Ed.), Promoting valuation in the public interest: Informing policies for judging value in evaluation. New directions for evaluation (Vol. 133, pp. 3–16). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
4.
JulnesG. (2012b). Developing policies to support valuing in the public interest. In JulnesG. (Ed.), Promoting valuation in the public interest: Informing policies for judging value in evaluation. New directions for evaluation (Vol. 133, pp. 109–130). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
5.
JulnesG. (2015). Managing evaluation theories, practices, and communities: Reflections on Dahler-Larsen’s The Evaluation Society. American Journal of Evaluation, 36(4), 584–600.
6.
KahnemanD. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York: Farrar, Strauss and Giroux.
7.
MarkM. M.HenryG. T. (2004). The mechanisms and outcomes of evaluation influence. Evaluation, 10, 35–57.
ShadishW. R.CookT. D.LevitonL. C. (1991). Foundations of program evaluation: Theories of practice. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
10.
StakeR.MigotskyC.DavisR.CisnerosE. J.DepaulG.DunbarC.…ChavesI. (1997). The evolving syntheses of program value. American Journal of Evaluation, 18, 89–103.
11.
SunsteinC. R. (2001). Cognition and cost-benefit analysis. In AdlerM. D.PosnerE. A. (Eds.), Cost-benefit analysis: Legal, economic, and philosophical perspectives (pp. 223–267). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
12.
TimotijevicL.RaatsM. M. (2007). Evaluation of two methods of deliberative participation of older people in food-policy development. Health Policy, 82, 302–319.
13.
WilsonT.SchoolerJ. (1991). Thinking too much: Introspection can reduce the quality of preferences and decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 191–192.
