mixed-methods-research-methodologies-1pcgwec2nb
mixed-methods-research-methodologies-1pcgwec2nb
mixed-methods-research-methodologies-1pcgwec2nb
1-1-2012
Part of the Quantitative, Qualitative, Comparative, and Historical Methodologies Commons, and the
Social Statistics Commons
This How To Article is brought to you for free and open access by the The Qualitative Report at NSUWorks. It has
been accepted for inclusion in The Qualitative Report by an authorized administrator of NSUWorks. For more
information, please contact [email protected].
Mixed-Methods Research Methodologies
Abstract
Mixed-Method studies have emerged from the paradigm wars between qualitative and quantitative
research approaches to become a widely used mode of inquiry. Depending on choices made across four
dimensions, mixed-methods can provide an investigator with many design choices which involve a range
of sequential and concurrent strategies. Defining features of these designs are reported along with quality
control methods, and ethical concerns. Useful resources and exemplary study references are shared.
Keywords
Mixed-Methods Studies, Quantitative Research, Qualitative Research, Concurrent Strategies, and
Sequential Strategies
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 License.
Many major authors and researchers felt that quantitative and qualitative
research methodologies are compatible.
Many social-scientists now believe there is no major problem area that should
be studied exclusively with one research method.
Priority of strategy
Equal
Qualitative
Quantitative
Quantitative Qualitative
Primary focus is to explain quantitative results by exploring certain results in more detail or
helping explain unexpected results (e.g., using follow-up interviews to better understand the
results of a quantitative study).
Strengths: relatively straight forward due to clear, distinct stages and easier to describe than
concurrent strategies.
Weakness: very time consuming especially when both phases are given equal consideration
and priority.
Qualitative Quantitative
Equal priority is given to the two phases but priority can be given to either.
Strength: relatively straight forward due to clear, distinct stages and easier to describe than
concurrent strategies.
Weakness: very time consuming especially when both phases are given equal consideration
and priority.
Qualitative Quantitative
Quantitative Qualitative
Primarily purpose is to “employ the methods that will best serve the theoretical perspective of the
researcher… (it) maybe be able to give voice to diverse perspectives, to better advocate for
participants or to better understand a phenomenon or process that is changing as a result of being
studied” (Creswell, 2003, p. 216).
Weakness: time consuming. Little guidance due to the relative lack of literature on the
transformative nature of moving from the first phase of data collection to the second.
Quantitative + Qualitative
Quantitative Qualitative
Data Collection Data Collection
Quantitative Qualitative
Data Analysis Data Analysis
Data Results Compared
Data are integrated during interpretation phase. The interpretation notes either a lack of
convergence or convergence that strengthens knowledge claims. Data integration can also occur
during analysis.
Strengths: Familiar to many researchers. Shorter data collection time when compared to
sequential methods. Offsets weaknesses inherent to one design by using both.
Weaknesses: Requires a great deal of expertise and effort to study the phenomenon under
consideration using two different methods. It may be difficult to compare two types of data as
well as resolve discrepancies if they arise.
Qualitative Quantitative
Quantitative Qualitative
Priority is given to the primary data collection approach with less emphasis placed on the nested
approach.
Primarily purpose is for gaining a broader perspective than could be gained from using only the
predominant data collection method.
Secondary purpose is use of embedded method to address different research questions or garner
information from different groups or levels within an organization.
Strengths: able to collect two types of data simultaneously; can collect both quantitative and
qualitative data allowing for perspectives from each; provides advantages of both methods.
Weaknesses: data need to be transformed to allow integration during analysis, this may lead to
issues in resolving discrepancies that occur between different data types; there is little literature in
this area; results may be bias by differing priorities assigned to research design results.
Quantitative
Quantitative + Qualitative
Vision, Advocacy,
Ideology, Framework
Is guided by a specific theoretical perspective (e.g., critical theory, advocacy, participatory research
or theoretical framework).
Like the sequential model, the purpose is to allow the researcher to employ methods that will best
serve their theoretical perspectives.
Strengths: can collect both quantitative and qualitative data simultaneously allowing for
perspectives from each; provides advantages of both methods. Familiar to many researchers.
Shorter data collection time when compared to sequential methods. Offsets weaknesses inherent
to one design by using both.
Weaknesses: data need to be transformed to allow integration during analysis, this may lead to
issues in resolving discrepancies that occur between different data types. Requires a great deal of
expertise and effort to study the phenomenon under consideration using two different methods.
Uses sequential, concurrent and transformative inquiry strategies. These combine into
six commonly accepted mixed-methods designs.
Combines both quantitative and qualitative methods (e.g., open- and closed-ended
questions, quantitative and qualitative data, etc).
“Mixed methods are inherently neither more nor less valid than
specific approaches to research. As with any research, validity
stems more from the appropriateness, thoroughness and
effectiveness with which those methods are applied and the care
given to thoughtful weighing of the evidence than from the
application of a particular set of rules or adherence to an
established tradition.” (Bazely, 2004)
Clark, V. & Creswell, J. (2008). The mixed methods reader. Los Angeles: SAGE.
Creswell, J. (2003). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Gay, L., Mills, G. & Airasian, P. (2008). Educational research: competencies for analysis and application (9th ed.).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
Johnson, R. B. & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed-methods research: a research paradigm whose time has come.
Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26.
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2008). Introduction to mixed method and mixed model studies in the social and
behavioral science. In V.L. Plano-Clark & J. W. Creswell (Eds.), The mixed methods reader, (pp. 7-26).
Idler, E. L., Hudson, S.V., & Leventhal, H. (1999). The meanings of self-ratings of health: A qualitative and
quantitative approach. Research on Aging, 21(3), 458-476.
Luzzo, D.A. (1995). Gender differences in college students’ career maturity and perceived barriers in career
development. Journal of Counseling and Development, 73, 319-322.
Messer, L., Steckler, A., & Dignan, M. (1999). Early detection of cervical cancer among Native American
women: A qualitative supplement to a quantitative study. Health Education & Behavior, 8(26), 547-562.
Milton, J., Watkins, K.E., Studdard, S.S., & Burch, M. (2003). The ever widening gyre: Factors affecting change
in adult education graduate programs in the United States. Adult Education Quarterly, 54(1), 23-41.
Richter, K. (1997). Child care choice in urban Thailand: Qualitative and quantitative evidence of the decision-
making process. Journal of Family Issues, 18(2), 174-204.
Thøersen-Ntoumani, C., & Fox, K.R. (2005). Physical activity and mental well-being typologies in corporate
employees: A mixed methods approach. Work & Stress, 19(1), 50-67.
Victor, C. R., Ross, F., & Axford, J.(2004). Capturing lay perspectives in a randomized control trial of a health
promotion intervention for people with osteoarthritis of the knee. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice,
10(1), 63-70.
Way, N., Stauber, H.&., Nakkula, M.J., & London, P. (1994). Depression and substance use of two divergent
high school cultures: A quantitative and qualitative analysis. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 23(3),
331-357.