The effect of controlled opinion feedback on Delphi features: Mixed messages from a real-world Delphi experiment

Technological Forecasting and Social Change

Volumn 103, Issue , 2016, Pages 166-173

  Meijering, Jurian V ^a   Tobi, Hilde ^a  

^a WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Agreement; Controlled opinion feedback; Delphi experiment; Drop out; Feedback perception; Opinion change

Indexed keywords

CONTRACTS; SURVEYS;

DROP-OUT; OPINION CHANGE; PERCEIVED USEFULNESS; REAL-WORLD; SUMMARY STATISTIC; TWO SECTION;

DROPS;

DELPHI ANALYSIS; PERCEPTION; SOCIAL CHANGE; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 84949309362     PISSN: 00401625     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2015.11.008     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Banwell C., Hinde S., Dixon J., Sibthorpe B. Reflections on expert consensus: a case study of the social trends contributing to obesity. Eur. J. Pub. Health 2005, 15:564-568.
2. Bardecki M.J. Participants' response to the Delphi method: an attitudinal perspective. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 1984, 25:281-292.
3. Best R.J. An experiment in Delphi estimation in marketing decision making. J. Mark. Res. 1974, 11:448-452.
4. Boje D.M., Murnighan J.K. Group confidence pressures in iterative decisions. Manag. Sci. 1982, 28:1187-1196.
5. Bolger F., Wright G. Improving the Delphi process: lessons from social psychological research. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2011, 78:1500-1513.
6. Bolger F., Stranieri A., Wright G., Yearwood J. Does the Delphi process lead to increased accuracy in group-based judgmental forecasts or does it simply induce consensus amongst judgmental forecasters?. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2011, 78:1671-1680.
7. Boulkedid R., Abdoul H., Loustau M., Sibony O., Alberti C. Using and reporting the Delphi method for selecting healthcare quality indicators: a systematic review. PLoS One 2011, 6.
8. Brown L.D., Cai T.T., DasGupta A. Interval estimation for a binomial proportion. Stat. Sci. 2001, 16:101-117.
9. Dalkey N.C. The Delphi Method: An Experimental Study of Group Opinion 1969, The Rand Corporation, Santa Monica.
10. Dalkey N., Helmer O. An experimental application of the Delphi method to the use of experts. Manag. Sci. 1963, 9:458-467.
11. Efron B., Tibshirani R.J. An Introduction to the Bootstrap 1993, Chapman & Hall, London.
12. Feinstein A.R., Cicchetti D.V. High agreement but low kappa: I. The problems of two paradoxes. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 1990, 43:543-549.
13. Gowan J.A., McNichols C.W. The effects of alternative forms of knowledge representation on decision-making consensus. Int. J. Man-Mach. Stud. 1993, 38:489-507.
14. Hung H.L., Altschuld J.W., Lee Y.F. Methodological and conceptual issues confronting a cross-country Delphi study of educational program evaluation. Eval. Program Plann. 2008, 31:191-198.
15. Keeney S., Hasson F., McKenna H. Consulting the oracle: ten lessons from using the Delphi technique in nursing research. J. Adv. Nurs. 2006, 53:205-212.
16. Landeta J. Current validity of the Delphi method in social sciences. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2006, 73:467-482.
17. Landeta J., Barrutia J. People consultation to construct the future: a Delphi application. Int. J. Forecast. 2011, 27:134-151.
18. Light R.J. Measures of response agreement for qualitative data - some generalizations and alternatives. Psychol. Bull. 1971, 76:365-377.
19. Linstone H.A., Turoff M. The Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications 1975, Addison-Wesley, Massachusetts.
20. Meijering J.V., Kampen J.K., Tobi H. Quantifying the development of agreement among experts in Delphi studies. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2013, 80:1607-1614.
21. Meijering J.V., Tobi H., van den Brink A., Morris F., Bruns D. Exploring research priorities in landscape architecture: An international Delphi study. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2015, 137:85-94.
22. Murphy M.K., Black N.A., Lamping D.L., McKee C.M., Sanderson C.F., Askham J., Marteau T. Consensus development methods, and their use in clinical guideline development. Health Technology Assessment (Winchester, England) 1998, 2:1-88. i-iv.
23. Newcombe R.G. Two-sided confidence intervals for the single proportion: comparison of seven methods. Stat. Med. 1998, 17:857-872.
24. Pätäri S. Industry- and company-level factors influencing the development of the forest energy business - insights from a Delphi study. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2010, 77:94-109.
25. Powell C. The Delphi technique: myths and realities. J. Adv. Nurs. 2003, 41:376-382.
26. Rowe G., Wright G. The impact of task characteristics on the performance of structured group forecasting techniques. Int. J. Forecast. 1996, 12:73-89.
27. Rowe G., Wright G. The Delphi technique as a forecasting tool: issues and analysis. Int. J. Forecast. 1999, 15:353-375.
28. Rowe G., Wright G., Bolger F. Delphi: a reevaluation of research and theory. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 1991, 39:235-251.
29. Rowe G., Wright G., McColl A. Judgment change during Delphi-like procedures: the role of majority influence, expertise, and confidence. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2005, 72:377-399.
30. Steinert M. A dissensus based online Delphi approach: an explorative research tool. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2009, 76:291-300.
31. van de Linde E., van der Duin P. The Delphi method as early warning: linking global societal trends to future radicalization and terrorism in The Netherlands. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2011, 78:1557-1564.
32. Wilson E.B. Probable inference, the law of succession, and statistical inference. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 1927, 22:209-212.
33. Woudenberg F. An evaluation of Delphi. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 1991, 40:131-150.
34. Yaniv I. Receiving other people's advice: influence and benefit. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 2004, 93:1-13.