Skip to main content

Interpretation and Expert Panels

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Varieties of Qualitative Research Methods

Part of the book series: Springer Texts in Education ((SPTE))

Abstract

Expert and Interpretation Panels, together with other consensus methods, like the Electronic Delphi, originated in the 1950s and 1960s and were used primarily by military and in science and technology forecasting. In different forms and variations, Expert and Interpretation Panels have expanded into many areas of study. In this chapter we will use the terms Expert and Interpretation Panels interchangeably. In some cases, those being asked to interpret are experts in the traditional and formal sense; however, it may be that the so-called experts arise not out of technical expertise or education but rather those invited to Panels may be experts in experience or implementation. So, the notion of experts is wide-ranging. So, too, is the “interpretation” adjective. It may be that the Interpretation Panel is invited to help researcher into a mixed methods approach to uncover initial insights from gathered data or at later stages of analyses or coding. Sometimes the Expert and Interpretation Panel are co-analyzers with the researcher and/or their deliberations may become additional data and contribute directly to the findings of a study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, J. C., Rungtusanatham, M., & Schroeder, R. G. (1994). A theory of quality management underlying the Deming management method. Academy of Management Review, 19, 472–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bitz, B. P. (2001). Teacher perceptions of opportunity-to-learn in two schools. Unpublished M.Ed. Thesis, University of Saskatchewan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Sustainability and Environment. (2005). Book 3: The Engagement Toolkit. Effective Engagement: Building relationships with community and other stakeholders. The Community Engagement Network Resource and Regional Services Division Victorian Government Department of Sustainability and Environment. Retrieved (2014) from http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/105825/Book_3_-_The_Engagement_Toolkit.pdf

  • Dunn, M., Norby, R., Coutnoyer, P., Hudec, S., O’Donnell, J., Snider, M., et al. (1995). Expert panel method for nurse staffing and resource management. The Journal of Nursing Administration, 25(10), 61–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hotvedt, R., Lassius, H., Kristiansen, I., Steen, P., Soreide, E., & Forde, O. (2003). Are expert panel judgments of medical benefits reliable? An evaluation of emergency medical service programs. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 19(1), 158–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laidlaw, J. (2014). Expert panel. Retrieved November 20th, 2019. https://www.betterevaluation.org/en/evaluation-options/expert_panel

  • Lopez-Martin, I., et al. (2014). Qualitative study of college tutoring through the expert panel method. High Learning Resolution Community, 4(1), 82–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noonan, B. (2002). Interpretation panels and collaborative research. Brock Education, 12(1), 89–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pérez, C. (2000). Deben estar las técnicas de consenso incluidas entre las técnicas de investigación cualitativa? [Should consensus techniques be included among qualitative research methods?] Revista Española de Salud Pública, 74, 319–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • Victorian Government Department of Sustainability and Environment. (2005). Effective engagement: building relationships with community and other stakeholders—Book 3: The Engagement Toolkit, pp. 36. https://www.water.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0025/409732/Book_3_-_The_Engagement_Toolkit.pdf

  • Wu, Y. H., & Lu, Y. C. (2014). Qualitative research on the importance and need for home-based telecare services for elderly people. Journal of Gerontology & Geriatrics, 5, 105–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Keith D. Walker .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Walker, K.D. (2023). Interpretation and Expert Panels. In: Okoko, J.M., Tunison, S., Walker, K.D. (eds) Varieties of Qualitative Research Methods. Springer Texts in Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04394-9_39

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04394-9_39

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-04396-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-04394-9

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics