Question 1
Which statement correctly describes axial coding in qualitative analysis?
Correct Answer:
It links codes into broader categories and themes
Explanation:
Axial coding is about linking codes into broader categories and themes by mapping how different concepts relate to each other. After the initial pass of breaking the data into concepts (open coding), axial coding reassembles those pieces by examining relationships among subcategories and connecting them around a central phenomenon. It looks at the conditions that influence things, the context in which they occur, the actions or interactions people take, and the consequences that follow. This creates a coherent structure that turns disparate codes into a clearer, more organized understanding or theory. For example, if you first identify codes like “fear of stigma,” “seeking support,” and “trust in professionals,” axial coding would group these into a broader category such as “help-seeking in stigmatized contexts,” outlining how context and interactions shape outcomes. Other options don’t fit because identifying initial concepts occurs in open coding, not axial; testing hypotheses statistically is a quantitative method; and validating measurement instruments is about instrument validity, not about organizing qualitative codes into themes.
Question 2
Which design compares changes over time in the program area to changes in a similar area without the program?
Correct Answer:
Difference-in-differences design
Explanation:
When you can’t randomize who gets the program, you can still estimate its impact by looking at how outcomes change over time in the area with the program compared to a similar area without it. This approach uses the difference of changes: you measure how the outcome moves from before to after in the program area and subtract how it moved in the nonprogram area. The idea is that anything that affects both areas similarly over time (like broader economic shifts) gets canceled out, leaving the net effect attributable to the program. This works best if the two areas would have followed parallel trends if the program hadn’t been implemented. A randomized trial would assign the program at random, which is often not feasible and doesn’t inherently require comparing changes over time with a nonprogram area. A cross-sectional design only looks at one point in time, missing the before-versus-after comparison. A case series describes outcomes in a group without a comparator, so it can’t isolate the program’s effect.
Question 3
Do you need IRB approval before proceeding with an evaluation in the given scenario?
Correct Answer:
No
Explanation:
IRB review focuses on protecting people when you’re doing research that aims to generate generalizable knowledge and involves human subjects. If the evaluation is strictly for internal program improvement and is not designed to produce findings intended for broad dissemination, many institutions consider it not to be research requiring IRB oversight. In that case you can proceed without IRB approval, as long as you still protect participant privacy and welfare. The decision would change if you plan to publish or generalize the results beyond the program, or if you are collecting identifiable information in a way that creates risk. Funding or whether minors are involved does not by itself determine the need for IRB review; what matters is whether the activity is being conducted as research with the potential for generalizable conclusions. So, for a typical internal evaluation aimed solely at improving a program, IRB approval is not required before starting.
Question 4
What are the three overarching purposes of process evaluation?
Correct Answer:
Program description; program monitoring; quality assurance
Explanation:
Process evaluation looks at how a program is carried out, focusing on the delivery rather than the outcomes. The three overarching purposes are to document the program itself (program description), to track how the program is actually implemented in practice (program monitoring), and to safeguard and improve how it’s delivered by ensuring standards and quality (quality assurance). Documenting the program describes its components, intended activities, and who’s supposed to receive them, so everyone understands what’s supposed to happen. Monitoring assesses delivery in real time—fidelity to the design, the extent of implementation (dose), reach to the target audience, and any adaptations that occur. Quality assurance uses the data from monitoring to identify problems, standardize practices, provide feedback, and support continuous improvement to maintain or raise quality. Other options focus on planning before implementation or on results (outputs, outcomes, impact), which are more about what the program aims to achieve or how it was conceived, rather than how it is actually delivered and improved during implementation.
Question 5
A program is evaluated during a period of a major external event that could influence outcomes. This creates vulnerability to which threat to internal validity?
Correct Answer:
History
Explanation:
When a study takes place during a period dominated by a major external event, outcomes can change because of that event rather than because of the program being evaluated. This is known as a history threat to internal validity. The key idea is that something happening outside the study setting—like a policy shift, economic crisis, or natural disaster—can influence participants' results across the board, making it hard to tell whether observed changes are due to the program or the event. This differs from maturation, which are natural changes that occur over time within participants; from selection bias, which arises when groups aren’t comparable at the start; and from instrumentation, which involves changes in measurement tools or procedures. In the scenario described, the critical factor is the external event occurring during the evaluation period, which can confound the program’s true effect. Mitigation strategies include using a concurrent control group or employing designs that track outcomes across multiple time points to separate the program impact from the event’s influence.
Question 1
Exam overview

About this Exam

Prepare with the Research and Evaluation Practice Test practice quiz. This question bank includes 10 questions covering program, evaluation, changes, area, and outcomes. Use it to review important concepts, identify knowledge gaps, and build confidence for the related exam, course, or assessment.

More details

Additional Information

Research and Evaluation Practice Test

This practice set contains 10 questions from the matching question bank and focuses on program, evaluation, changes, area, and outcomes. Work through each question carefully, review the provided solutions, and revisit topics that need more study before your next attempt.

This is an independent study resource intended for practice and review; it is not an official examination or an endorsement by any organization named in the title.

Quiz information

Frequently Asked Questions

The complete question count is available after full access is unlocked.
No fixed duration is currently configured for this quiz.
Question explanations are included where they are available in the quiz content, helping you review the reasoning after answering.
Yes. You can retake the practice test again as you continue studying during your available access period.
After your access is confirmed, you can continue into the complete practice exam from this quiz flow.
Unless explicitly stated otherwise, this page provides independent practice material for study and exam preparation and is not the official examination itself.
Keep studying

Related Questions