Table 5. The sufficiency of the...

Table 5.

The sufficiency of the dimensions for the confidence in selection

	Confident in the selection					Not confident in the selection
Configurations	1a	1b	1c	2	3	4a	4b	5
Taxonomy dimension
Design phase	●	●	●	●	×○	×○	×○	×○
Participant		•	•	⊗	●	⊗	•	●
Duration	•	•	•	●	●	×○	×○	•
Time dependency	●	●	●	●	●	•	⊗	×○
Evaluation type	⊗		⊗	●	•		⊗	•
Setting	×○	×○		•	●	×○	×○	•
Consistency	0.94	0.96	0.92	0.91	0.95	0.95	0.98	0.97
Raw coverage	0.36	0.38	0.38	0.25	0.2	0.31	0.25	0.21
Unique coverage	0.02	0.04	0.02	0.03	0.04	0.14	0.04	0.04
Overall solution consistency			0.91				0.96
Overall solution coverage			0.53				0.43

	Confident in the selection					Not confident in the selection
Configurations	1a	1b	1c	2	3	4a	4b	5
Taxonomy dimension
Design phase	●	●	●	●	×○	×○	×○	×○
Participant		•	•	⊗	●	⊗	•	●
Duration	•	•	•	●	●	×○	×○	•
Time dependency	●	●	●	●	●	•	⊗	×○
Evaluation type	⊗		⊗	●	•		⊗	•
Setting	×○	×○		•	●	×○	×○	•
Consistency	0.94	0.96	0.92	0.91	0.95	0.95	0.98	0.97
Raw coverage	0.36	0.38	0.38	0.25	0.2	0.31	0.25	0.21
Unique coverage	0.02	0.04	0.02	0.03	0.04	0.14	0.04	0.04
Overall solution consistency			0.91				0.96
Overall solution coverage			0.53				0.43

Notes:

“●” represents the presence of central conditions; “×○” represents the absence of the central conditions; “•” represents the presence of peripheral conditions; and “⊗” represents the absence of the peripheral conditions

Source: Authors’ own creation

[ViewLarge]

Sharing Unavailable