Current validity of the Delphi method in social sciences

By J. Landeta. 2006

1,318 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b23dbd02fe6b760b24c336a5606c103603317798

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Consensus measurement in Delphi studies (2012, methodology): “In total, 414 Delphi-related articles were published in the two major databases “Science Direct” and “ABI/Inform” during 1995 and 1999 [6].”
Using Delphi technique to build consensus in practice (2014, methodology): “Respectively, it is characterized for (i) iteration, which allows participants to reconsider and refine their opinion, (ii) controlled feedback, which provides them with information about the group’s perspectives in order to clarify or change their views and (iii) statistical response, to represent ”
Mapping knowledge structure by keyword co-occurrence: a first look at journal papers in Technology Foresight (2010, methodology): “However, in the ﬁeld of Technology Foresight, the US is no longer the leading country even though US’s Rand Corporation was the ﬁrst-mover back in the 1950s (Landeta 2006; Kaplan et al. 1950).”
Predicting the future of additive manufacturing: A Delphi study on economic and societal implications of 3D printing for 2030 (2017, methodology): “As the additive manufacturing ecosystem is characterized by diverse stakeholder groups, we followed common practice to draw on expert assessments (Landeta, 2006).”
Desirability bias in foresight: Consequences for decision quality based on Delphi results (2011, methodology): “These changes have strong implications for the interpretation of final Delphi results if one keeps in mind that the Delphi method was originally developed to achieve consensus among a group of knowledgeable experts as a way to approach ‘the truth’ [13,84].”
The Delphi Technique in Nursing and Health Research (2011, background): “Panel members may also report negative experience of participating in a Delphi study as a direct result of a lack of understating about the process, time and work commitment required (Hanafin, 2005; Landeta, 2006).”
The role of expert opinion in environmental modelling (2012, neutral): “For a recent critique, see Landeta (2006).”
Validating an innovative real-time Delphi approach - A methodological comparison between real-time and conventional Delphi studies (2011, methodology): “Whilst the method itself has become more prevalent and mature, a number of researchers have focused on improving the procedure and tasks of Delphi [2,4–13] due to critique on the method in the past.”
Charting the New Territory of Adaptive Co-management: A Delphi Study (2007, methodology): “…appropriate means to achieve the goals and objectives of the research because it provides a way to solicit and gain consensus by experts on an emerging issue while ameliorating problematic group processes such as bias and pressure (Hasson et al. 2000, van Zolingen and Klaassen 2003, Landeta 2006).”
CATALISE: A Multinational and Multidisciplinary Delphi Consensus Study. Identifying Language Impairments in Children (2016, background): “Although we have noted the advantages of the Delphi technique over in-person consensus meetings, it is important also to recognise its limitations [120].”