Excessive Evaluation Anxiety (XEA): The Last Two Decades
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56645/jmde.v19i45.701Keywords:
excessive evaluation anxiety, resistance to evaluation, program evaluation, evaluator-stakeholder relationshipsAbstract
Background: Excessive evaluation anxiety (XEA) refers to disproportionate or increased evaluation anxiety among those affected by evaluation (e.g., stakeholders) characterized by the sole presence of negative consequences. It can compromise evaluator-stakeholder relationships, presenting as a barrier for program evaluation. Moreover, XEA can both cause and be caused by resistance to evaluation, which is an interrelated topic that shares many common causes, characteristics, and mitigation strategies. The participatory and interactive nature of modern evaluation approaches can exacerbate the presence of XEA. However, researchers have not explored the current state of literature on XEA.
Purpose: To explore the current state of the literature on XEA over the past 20 years.
Setting: Not applicable.
Intervention: Not applicable.
Research Design: Literature review.
Data Collection and Analysis: We conducted a literature search of Academic Search Complete, Web of Science, and Scopus. We complemented the database search by a journal search of the American Journal of Evaluation, Evaluation, and the Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation. We then conducted a thematic analysis of the articles that met the inclusion criteria.
Findings: Upon review of the articles, we identified four main themes in the literature related to XEA. Specifically, XEA: leads to poor evaluator-stakeholder relationships; is influenced by cultural factors; can be mitigated through the development of interpersonal skills; and can be mitigated through a systematic and evidence-based approach to evaluation.
Keywords: Excessive evaluation anxiety, resistance to evaluation, program evaluation, evaluator-stakeholder relationships
Downloads
References
Abma, T. A. & Widdershoven, G. A. M. (2008). Evaluation and/as social relation. Evaluation, 14(2), 209–225. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389007087540 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389007087540
Andrews, A. B. (2004). Start at the end: Empowerment evaluation product planning. Evaluation and Program Planning, 27(3), 275–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2004.04.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2004.04.002
Bechar, S. & Mero-Jaffe, I. (2013). Who is afraid of evaluation? Ethics in evaluation research as a way to cope with excessive evaluation anxiety: Insights from a case study. American Journal of Evaluation, 35(3), 364–376. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214013512555
Carleton-Hug, A. & Hug, J. W. (2010). Challenges and opportunities for evaluating environmental education programs. Evaluation and Program Planning, 33(2), 159–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2009.07.005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2009.07.005
Chaudhary, A. K., Diaz, J., Jayaratne, K. S. U., & Assan, E. (2020). Evaluation capacity building in the nonformal education context: Challenges and strategies. Evaluation and Program Planning, 79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2019.101768 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2019.101768
Conner, R. (2010). Reflections over 25 years: Evaluation then, now and into the future. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 25(3), 125–136. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.0025.014
Davy, D. (2016). Anti-human trafficking interventions: How do we know if they are working? American Journal of Evaluation, 37(4), 486–504. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214016630615 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214016630615
Donaldson, S. I. (2002). Theory-driven program evaluation in the new millennium. In S. I. Donaldson & M. Scriven (Eds.), Evaluating social programs and problems: Visions for the new millennium (1st ed., pp. 105–136). Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410606556
Donaldson, S. I., & Gooler, L. E. (2003). Theory-driven evaluation in action: Lessons from a $20 million statewide Work and Health Initiative. Evaluation and Program Planning, 26(4), 355–366. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-7189(03)00052-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-7189(03)00052-1
Donaldson, S. I., Gooler, L. E., & Scriven, M. (2002). Strategies for managing evaluation anxiety: Toward a psychology of program evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 23(3), 261–273. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/109821400202300303
Galport, N. & Azzam, T. (2016). Evaluator training needs and competencies: A gap analysis. American Journal of Evaluation, 38(1), 80–100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214016643183
Hanberger, A. (2011). The real functions of evaluation and response systems. Evaluation, 17(4), 327–349. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389011421697 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389011421697
Le Menestrel, S. M., Walahoski, J. S., & Mielke, M. B. (2013). A partnership model for evaluation: Considering an alternate approach to the internal–external evaluation debate. American Journal of Evaluation, 35(1), 61–72. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214013506600 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214013506600
Levin, G. (2003). Commentary: Roles, rewards, research, and realistic expectations. American Journal of Evaluation, 24(3), 413–418. https://doi.org/10.1177/109821400302400311 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ameval.2003.09.005
Leviton, L. C. (2013). Some underexamined aspects of evaluation capacity building. American Journal of Evaluation, 35(1), 90–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214013502844 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214013502844
Lonsdale, J. (2008). Balancing independence and responsiveness: A practitioner perspective on the relationships shaping performance audit. Evaluation, 14(2), 227–248. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389007087541 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389007087541
Mermet, L., Billé, R., & Leroy, M. (2010). Concern-focused evaluation for ambiguous and conflicting policies: An approach from the environmental field. American Journal of Evaluation, 31(2), 180–198. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214010366047 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214010366047
Mihalache, R. (2009). Evaluation networking in Romania. Evaluation, 15(4), 473–482. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389009345447 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389009345447
Mihalache, R. (2010). A developing evaluation culture in Romania: Myths, gaps and triggers. Evaluation, 16(3), 323–332. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389010373019 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389010373019
Miller, R. L., McNall, M. A., & The Oral History Project Team. (2016). The oral history of evaluation: The professional development of William D. Crano. American Journal of Evaluation, 39(4), 596–611. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214016673903 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214016673903
Patton, M. Q. (2002). A vision of evaluation that strengthens democracy. Evaluation, 8(1), 125–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/1358902002008001740 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1358902002008001740
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Evaluation in the field: The need for site visit standards. American Journal of Evaluation, 36(4), 444–460. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214015600785 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214015600785
Perrin, B. (2001). Commentary: Making yourself—and evaluation—useful. The American Journal of Evaluation, 22(2), 252–259. https://doi.org/10.1177/109821400102200209 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/109821400102200209
Persaud, N. & Dagher, R. (2019). Evaluations in the English-speaking Commonwealth Caribbean region: Lessons from the field. American Journal of Evaluation, 41(2), 255–276. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214019866260
Petrosino, A. (2000) Answering the why question in evaluation: The causal-model approach. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 15(1), 1–24. https://www.utpjournals.press/doi/pdf/10.3138/cjpe.015.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.015.001
Raimondo, E. (2018). The power and dysfunctions of evaluation systems in international organizations. Evaluation, 24(1), 26–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389017749068 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389017749068
Schewarz, C. & Struhkamp, G. (2007). Does evaluation build or destroy trust? Insights from case studies on evaluation in higher education reform. Evaluation, 13(3), 323–339. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389007078625 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389007078625
Schwandt, T. & Dahler-Larsen, P. (2006). When evaluation meets the ‘rough ground’ in communities. Evaluation, 12(4), 496–505. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389006073745
Scriven, M. (2016). Roadblocks to recognition and revolution. American Journal of Evaluation, 37(1), 27–44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214015617847
Seasons, M. (2002). Evaluation and municipal urban planning: Practice and prospects. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 17(1), 43–71. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234741545_Evaluation_and_Municipal_Urban_Planning_Practice_and_Prospects DOI: https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.017.003
Taut, S. M. & Alkin, M. C. (2003). Program staff perceptions of barriers to evaluation implementation. American Journal of Evaluation, 24(2), 213–226. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/109821400302400205
Taut, S. & Brauns, D. (2003). Resistance to evaluation: A psychological perspective. Evaluation, 9(3), 247–264. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/249743683_Resistance_to_Evaluation_A_Psychological_Perspective DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/13563890030093002
Trevisan, M. S. (2002). Evaluation capacity in K–12 school counseling programs. American Journal of Evaluation, 23(3), 291–305. https://doi.org/10.1177/109821400202300305 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1098-2140(02)00207-2
Wasserman, D. L. (2010). Using a systems orientation and foundational theory to enhance theory-driven human service program evaluations. Evaluation and Program Planning, 33(2), 67–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2009.06.005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2009.06.005
Whitehall, A. K., Hill, L. G., & Koehler, C. R. (2012). A comparison of participant and practitioner beliefs about evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 33(2), 208–220. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1098214011423803 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214011423803
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Nia Seunghye Kang, Katherine Moreau
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright and Permissions
Authors retain full copyright for articles published in JMDE. JMDE publishes under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY - NC 4.0). Users are allowed to copy, distribute, and transmit the work in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes, provided that the original authors and source are credited accurately and appropriately. Only the original authors may distribute the article for commercial or compensatory purposes. To view a copy of this license, visit creativecommons.org
