Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Melvin M. Mark is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Melvin M. Mark.


Health Psychology | 1995

Effects of psychosocial interventions with adult cancer patients: A meta-analysis of randomized experiments.

Thomas J. Meyer; Melvin M. Mark

Meta-analytic methods were used to synthesize the results of published randomized, controlled-outcome studies of psychosocial interventions with adult cancer patients. Forty-five studies reporting 62 treatment-control comparisons were identified. Samples were predominantly White, female, and from the United States. Beneficial effect size ds were .24 for emotional adjustment measures, .19 for functional adjustment measures, .26 for measures of treatment- and disease-related symptoms, and .28 for compound and global measures. The effect size of .17 found for medical measures was not statistically significant for the few reporting studies. Effect sizes for treatment-control comparisons did not significantly differ among several categories of treatment: behavioral interventions, nonbehavioral counseling and therapy, informational and educational methods, organized social support provided by other patients, and other nonhospice interventions.


American Journal of Evaluation | 2003

Beyond Use: Understanding Evaluation’s Influence on Attitudes and Actions

Gary T. Henry; Melvin M. Mark

Although use is a core construct in the field of evaluation, neither the change processes through which evaluation affects attitudes, beliefs, and actions, nor the interim outcomes that lie between the evaluation and its ultimate goal—social betterment—have been sufficiently developed. We draw a number of these change mechanisms, such as justification, persuasion, and policy diffusion, from the social science research literature, and organize them into a framework that has three levels: individual, interpersonal, and collective. We illustrate how these change processes can be linked together to form “pathways” or working hypotheses that link evaluation processes to outcomes that move us along the road toward the goal of social betterment. In addition, we join with Kirkhart (2000) in moving beyond use, to focus our thinking on evaluation influence. Influence, combined with the set of mechanisms and interim outcomes presented here, offers a better way for thinking about, communicating, and adding to the evidence base about the consequences of evaluation and the relationship of evaluation to social betterment.


Evaluation | 2004

The Mechanisms and Outcomes of Evaluation Influence

Melvin M. Mark; Gary T. Henry

Past literature has identified several putative precursors of use, as well as alternative forms of use. However, important shortcomings still exist in previous work on use. In particular, inadequate attention has been given to the underlying processes that may mediate the effects of evaluation on attitude and action. In essence, a key part of the theory of change for evaluation itself is missing. To help fill this gap, we describe a framework designed to capture key mechanisms through which evaluation may have its effects. The framework includes change processes that have been validated in various social science literatures. It identifies three levels of analysis (individual, interpersonal and collective), each with four kinds of processes (general influence, attitudinal, motivational and behavioral). With a more comprehensive view of the mechanisms underlying evaluation’s influence, the field can move forward in relation to its understanding and facilitation of evaluation’s role in the service of social betterment.


Cognition & Emotion | 1995

The effects of mood state on judgemental accuracy: Processing strategy as a mechanism

Robert C. Sinclair; Melvin M. Mark

Abstract Under commonly observed conditions, happy subjects appear to process information in a relatively passive or nonsystematic, less detailed manner and rely on peripheral cues and heuristics in judgement, whereas sad subjects appear to process in a more active or systematic, more detailed manner. Happy subjects should therefore display less accuracy on judgements that have a relatively objective accuracy criterion. Three studies were conducted to test this hypothesis. In Study 1, subjects who had training in statistics were exposed to a happy, neutral, or sad mood induction procedure. Subjects then judged the magnitude and direction of correlation coefficients associated with each of nine scatterplots. Happy subjects were least accurate and used fewest digits in their correlation estimates; sad subjects were most accurate and used most digits. In Study 2, subjects exposed to orthogonal affect and arousal mood inductions completed the correlation estimation task. To address process further, subjects p...


Evaluation Review | 1985

Stakeholder-Based Evaluation and Value Judgments

Melvin M. Mark; R. Lance Shotland

The nature of values in stakeholder-based evaluations is discussed. One key value judgment involves the selection of stakeholder groups for participation. In the first major section of this article, the role of values in such selection is emphasized by considering two dimensions on which stakeholder groups may vary—power and legitimacy. It is shown that the selection of stakeholder groups can be based on a rationale for stakeholder-based evaluation; however, the choice of a rationale for stakeholder participation is itself a value judgment, implicitly or explicitly. Further, in implementing a rationale, value judgments are required, particularly if the rationale involves empowerment and democratization. In a second section, the consequences of stakeholder par ticipation are discussed. Although numerous commentaries imply positive effects, much is not known, such as the type or level of stakeholder involvement required for effective participation. Further, stakeholder participation may serve as a means of preempting criticism by stakeholders, or may be a form of pseudoempowerment. Ironically, the evaluator may autocratically designate which groups participate in a process meant to empower democratically. Finally, some suggestions are made about how evaluators might better deal with the value judgments inherent in stakeholder-based evaluations, and, more generally, how stakeholder-based approaches to evaluation might be improved.


American Journal of Community Psychology | 1992

Drug prevention in a community setting: A longitudinal study of the relative effectiveness of a three-year primary prevention program in boys & girls clubs across the nation

Tena L. St. Pierre; D. Lynne Kaltreider; Melvin M. Mark

Tested the effectiveness of a youth drug prevention program in a community setting. Boys & Girls Clubs of Americas Stay SMART program, adapted from a school-based personal and social competence drug prevention program, was offered, with and without a 2-year booster program, to 13-year-old members of Boys & Girls Clubs. Over 27 months, (a) 5 Boys & Girls Clubs offered the Stay SMART program, (b) 5 Boys & Girls Clubs offered the Stay SMART program with the booster programs, and (c) 4 Boys & Girls Clubs served as a control group. The Stay SMART program alone and the Stay SMART program with the booster programs showed effects for marijuana-related behavior, cigarette-related behavior, alcohol-related behavior, overall drug-related behavior, and knowledge concerning drug use. The Stay SMART program with the booster programs produced additional effects for alcohol attitudes and marijuana attitudes after each year of booster programs. Results suggest that a school-based personal and social competence program can be adapted effectively to a community setting and that booster programs might enhance program effects. Implications for alternative community models of prevention are discussed.


Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin | 2003

Mood as Information in Making Attributions to Discrimination

Gretchen B. Sechrist; Janet K. Swim; Melvin M. Mark

Previous research demonstrates that people use their mood as information when making a variety of judgments. The present research examines the extent to which people use their current mood as information when making attributions to discrimination. Women were given a positive or negative mood induction and either provided with an external attribution for their current mood state or not. They then reported on discrimination occurring to themselves and other women. When an external attribution for induced mood was not provided, women in positive moods were less likely to report discrimination across three measures than were women in negative moods. When an external attribution was provided, mood had no effect. Implications for understanding the effects of context and individual differences in the perception and reporting of experiences with discrimination are discussed.


Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin | 1991

Mood and the Endorsement of Egalitarian Macrojustice Versus Equity-Based Microjustice Principles

Robert C. Sinclair; Melvin M. Mark

Prior research has shown that mood state affects liking for others, categorization breadth, and processing strategy. Proceeding from such work, it was hypothesized that mood state would affect the relative endorsement of egalitarian macrojustice and equity based microjustice principles. Male and female subjects were assigned to one of three mood inductions (elation, neutral, and depression). In an apparently unrelated second study, subjects indicated their level of endorsement of microjustice and macro justice principles. As predicted, elated subjects showed more endorsement of egalitarian macrojustice principles than depressed subjects. Further, elated subjects differentiated least between equity-based microjustice and egalitarian macrojustice principles; depressed subjects differentiated most. Results are discussed in terms of a model of the processes through which mood influences perceived justice.


American Journal of Evaluation | 1999

Toward an Integrative Framework for Evaluation Practice.

Melvin M. Mark; Gary T. Henry; George Julnes

Evaluation has been beset with serious divisions, including the paradigm wars and the seeming segmentation of evaluation practice into distinct evaluation theories and approaches. In this paper, we describe key aspects of an integrative framework that may help evaluators move beyond such divisions. We offer a new scheme for categorizing evaluation methods within four inquiry modes, which are “families” or clusters of methods: description, classification, causal analysis, and values inquiry. In addition, we briefly describe a set of alternative evaluation purposes. We argue that, together with a form of realist philosophy, the framework of inquiry modes and evaluation purposes (1) provides a common lexicon for evaluators, which may help the field in moving beyond past divisions, and (2) offers a useful approach to evaluation planning.


Family Relations | 1995

A 27-Month Evaluation of a Sexual Activity Prevention Program in Boys & Girls Clubs across the Nation

Tena L. St. Pierre; Melvin M. Mark; D. Lynne Kaltreider

This study evaluated an abstinence-only sexual activity prevention programs part of multifocus program Stay SMART also aimed at preventing drug use among Boys & Girls Club youths. No effects were observed for virgins. Desired effects for sexual behavior and attitudes toward sexual activity were found for nonvirgins who participated in only stay SMART. No effects were found for nonvirgins who participated in stay SMART followed by a two-year booster program. (authors)

Collaboration


Dive into the Melvin M. Mark's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Robert C. Sinclair

Pennsylvania State University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

R. Lance Shotland

Pennsylvania State University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Jean A. King

University of Minnesota

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

D. Lynne Kaltreider

Pennsylvania State University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Lawrence J. Sanna

Washington State University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Steven Mellor

Pennsylvania State University

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge