IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication Jan 2000

Toward a document evaluation methodology: what does research tell us about the validity and reliability of evaluation methods?

M. de Jong ; P.J. Schellens

Abstract

Although the usefulness of evaluating documents has become generally accepted among communication professionals, the supporting research that puts evaluation practices empirically to the test is only beginning to emerge. This article presents an overview of the available research on troubleshooting evaluation methods. Four lines of research are distinguished concerning the validity of evaluation methods, sample composition, sample size, and the implementation of evaluation results during revision.

Journal
IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
Published
2000-01-01
DOI
10.1109/47.867941
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
Closed
Topics
revision assessment
Export
BibTeX RIS

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (5)

  1. Campbell et al. (2020)
    Hard or Soft Sell? Understanding White Papers as Content Marketing
    IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  2. Haaksma et al. (2018)
    Users’ Personal Conceptions of Usability and User Experience of Electronic and …
    IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  3. Cooke (2010)
    Assessing Concurrent Think-Aloud Protocol as a Usability Test Method: A Technic…
    IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  4. Spyridakis et al. (2005)
    Internet-Based Research: Providing a Foundation for Web-Design Guidelines
    IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  5. Krahmer (2004)
    Thinking About Thinking Aloud: A Comparison of TwoVerbal Protocols for Usabilit…
    IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication

Cites in this index (10)

  1. SCHELLENS et al. (1997)
    Revision of Public Information Brochures on the Basis of Reader Feedback
    Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  2. SIENOT (1997)
    Pretesting Web Sites
    Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  3. ELLING (1997)
    Revising Safety Instructions with Focus Groups
    Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  4. DEJONG et al. (1997)
    Reader-Focused Text Evaluation
    Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  5. Lentz et al. (1997)
    The evaluation of text quality: expert-focused and reader-focused methods compared
    IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
Show all 10 →
  1. Jong et al. (1996)
    Expert Judgments versus Reader Feedback: A Comparison of Text Evaluation Techniques
    Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  2. SCHRIVER (1992)
    Teaching Writers to Anticipate Readers' Needs
    Written Communication
  3. Jansen et al. (1992)
    Forms as a Source of Communication Problems
    Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  4. Schriver (1989)
    Evaluating text quality: the continuum from text-focused to reader-focused methods
    IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  5. Wenger et al. (1989)
    The relevance of reliability and validity to usability testing
    IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
Also cites 31 works outside this index ↓
  1. 10.1007/BF02300326
     ↗
  2. 10.2307/357381
     ↗
  3. 10.1007/BF02299759
     ↗
  4. 10.1287/mksc.12.3.280
     ↗
  5. lewis (1994)
    sample sizes for usability studies: additional considerations
    Human Factors  ↗
  6. 10.1080/014492900118777
     ↗
  7. 10.1023/A:1003073923764
     ↗
  8. 10.1080/014492997120002
     ↗
  9. virzi (1992)
    refining the test phase of usability evaluation: how many subjects is enough?
    Human Factors  ↗
  10. 10.1007/978-1-4020-2739-0_16
     ↗
  11. 10.1007/BF02298151
     ↗
  12. 10.1080/00140139508925248
     ↗
  13. 10.1007/BF00121231
     ↗
  14. 10.1080/01449299408914597
     ↗
  15. 10.1006/ijhc.1994.1065
     ↗
  16. 10.1016/B978-0-12-223260-2.50019-0
     ↗
  17. baker (1970)
    generalizability of rules for empirical revision
    AV Commun Rev  ↗
  18. kandaswamy (1976)
    learner verification and revision: an experimental comparison of two methods
    AV Commun Rev  ↗
  19. 10.1037//0022-0663.74.5.733
     ↗
  20. 10.1002/pfi.4150220505
     ↗
  21. 10.1002/pfi.4150220509
     ↗
  22. 10.1080/014492997119789
     ↗
  23. 10.1080/014492997119824
     ↗
  24. 10.1007/BF01326548
     ↗
  25. 10.1207/s15327051hci1303_2
     ↗
  26. 10.1207/s15327051hci1303_3
     ↗
  27. 10.1207/s15327051hci1303_4
     ↗
  28. 10.2307/270979
     ↗
  29. hunt (1982)
    the pretest in survey research: issues and preliminary findings
    J Market Res  ↗
  30. 10.1108/03090569810216091
     ↗
  31. diamantopoulos (1994)
    pretesting in questionnaire design: the impact of respondent characteristics on error detection
    J Market Res Soc  ↗
CrossRef global citation count: 36 View in citation network → Build reading path →

Related Articles

  1. Written Communication Feb 2026
    Reading Medium and Communicative Purpose in Writing: Effects on Pausing Behaviour and Text Quality, Controlling for Reading Comprehension and Executive Functions ↗
    Ángel Valenzuela; Cristian A. Rojas-Barahona; Ramón D. Castillo; Ladislao Salmerón
    discourse analysis curriculum design revision assessment
  2. Assessing Writing Jan 2026
    The effects of online resource use on L2 learners’ computer-mediated writing processes and written products ↗
    Honglan Wang; Jookyoung Jung
    revision argument assessment digital rhetoric multilingual writers grammar and mechanics affect and writing
  3. Journal of Writing Research Jun 2025
    The KLiCKe corpus: Keystroke logging in compositions for knowledge evaluation ↗
    Yu Tian; Scott Crossley; Luuk Van Waes
    revision assessment multilingual writers
  4. Computers and Composition Jun 2025
    Peer and AI Review + Reflection (PAIRR): A human-centered approach to formative assessment ↗
    Lisa Sperber; Marit MacArthur; Sophia Minnillo; Nicholas Stillman; Carl Whithaus
    revision assessment empirical research literacy studies race and writing
  5. Computers and Composition Dec 2024
    Transformative transmediation: Eliciting student self-evaluation of academic writing through the video essay assignment ↗
    Angela Frattarola; Hyejeong Ahn; Ian Dixon
    revision assessment multimodality