Developing the Meta-Inference in Mixed Methods Research through Successive Integration of Claims

Mixed methods research (the combined use of quantitative and qualitative methods within a single study) has developed rapidly in the last few years. This methodological approach is becoming increasingly articulated, attached to research practice and recognized, along with qualitative research and quantitative research, as the third major research approach (Johnson, Onwuegbuzie, & Turner, 2007).The scientific fields with more tradition in using and developing mixed methods research are Education, Sociology, Psychology and Health Sciences. This methodological approach is championed by methodologists from these fields such as John Creswell, Abbas Tashakkori, Burke Johnson, Anthony Onwuegbuzie, Jennifer Greene, Charles Teddlie and David Morgan (Denscombe, 2008). Books specifically focused on mixed methods research are being published in these fields (Andrew & Halcomb, 2009; Bergman, 2008; Brewer & Hunter, 2006; Creswell & Plano Clark, 2007, 2011; Greene, 2007; Morse & Niehaus, 2009; Niglas, 2004; Ridenour & Newman, 2008; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2003, 2010; Teddlie & Tashakkori, 2009).In January 2007 the first issue of a journal solely devoted to mixed methods research (Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Sage Publications) was published. The two founding co-editors, John Creswell and Abbas Tashakkori, are researchers in the field of Education. Other methodological journals that publish mixed methods studies include this journal (International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, also launched in 2007), along with Quality and Quantity, Field Methods and the International Journal of Social Research Methodology. Empirical articles that employ a mixed methods approach using this distinct name in the title are also published in Education, Sociology, Psychology and Health Sciences, and literature reviews that analyze the prevalence and application of mixed methods are carried out. An annual conference devoted to mixed methods is organized by schools and researchers from these fields (in 2011 the 7th International Mixed Methods Conference was hosted by the School of Healthcare in the University of Leeds, UK). Moreover, a Special Interest Group on Mixed Methods Research was formed in the American Educational Research Association in 2005. In summary, as noted by Creswell and Plano Clark (2007), mixed methods research has only been carefully used and examined in a handful of disciplines.In the case of Business and Management, our fields of inquiry have not embraced this methodological approach as enthusiastically as the fields described. Although there are calls for using mixed methods research in Business and Management fields (Cameron, 2011, Currall & Towler, 2003; Jick, 1979; Molina-Azorin, 2007), the acceptance and attention devoted to mixed methods research is very low in relation to other fields. There is not any specific book on mixed methods research in Business and Management. To date and to the best knowledge of the two special issue editors, a special issue on mixed methods has not yet been published in any Business and Management journal. Moreover, Creswell and Tashakkori (2007) make the pertinent point that the literature base about mixed methods research may not be well known to individuals in specific fields. Cameron and Molina-Azorin (2011) and Molina-Azorin (2011) confirm this issue in the case of Business and Management studies.In addition, in contrast to studies in the fields of Education, Sociology, Psychology and Health Sciences, the term 'mixed methods' is not usually used in the title of mixed methods studies in Business and Management. Furthermore, in the journal Organizational Research Methods, the main methodological journal in our field, the term 'mixed methods' is not a listed keyword. This issue also occurs in other business and management discipline journals.On the basis of such broad scanning evidence it seems likely that the advantages, possibilities, purposes, designs and potential of mixed methods research may be yet still unknown to many researchers in Business and Management. …

The aim of this study is to evaluate the teaching practice course according to the views of the teaching staff, practice teachers and physical education teacher candidates who took the teaching practice course. As the program evaluation model, Stufflebeam's Context, Input, Process and Product Evaluation Model (CIPP) was used. Mixed research method, in which quantitative and qualitative research methods are used together, was used in the research. The quantitative data collection group of the research consists of physical education teacher candidates (n:63) who took the Teaching Practice course at Hatay Mustafa Kemal University Physical Education and Sports School in the 2021-2022 academic year. The qualitative data consisted of 7 instructors and 7 practice teachers who provided consultancy to the pre-service teachers participating in the study. The data collection tools of the research are the Teaching Practice Evaluation Questionnaire and Semi-Structured Interview Form developed by Aslan and Sağlam (2017). In the study, data were collected in two stages: In the first stage, quantitative data were collected and in the second stage, semi-structured interviews were conducted to explain the quantitative data in more detail. The SPSS package program was used in the analysis of the quantitative data obtained in the study, and the mean and standard deviation values for each item were included. In the analysis of qualitative data, descriptive analysis technique was used. As a result of the study, while there were some failing points in the context, input and process dimensions, the findings obtained in the product dimension indicated that the physical education teacher candidates considered the teaching practice to be effective at a sufficient level. When the data obtained from the interviews were examined, it was observed that all three stakeholders of the course made the same or similar statements on some issues, and while it was observed that their views were compatible with each other, the statements of the stakeholders were different from each other in some items. Depending on the results, suggestions can be made such as providing the necessary conditions in the practice schools, providing the necessary materials to the teacher candidates in order for the teaching practice to be efficient, and regularly giving the two-hour seminar courses given at the school by the practice instructors.

The main aim of this article is to discuss the factors a researcher should take into account when selecting the appropriate research design or method (i.e. qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods). The article also discusses sample size determination and sampling procedures in qualitative and quantitative research. Further, the paper has provided an examination of qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis methods. The study used online desk research to collect data from online public access scholarly databases such as Google Scholar, ResearchGate, Academia, and many more freely accessible electronic books in research methods. Search terms that were used included, among many, the following: qualitative research, quantitative research, mixed-methods, qualitative and quantitative data collection, qualitative and quantitative data analysis; descriptive and inferential statistics. A wealth of relevant and timely scholarly literature was downloaded, read, and used to write this paper, and draw the conclusion provided. Keywords: Qualitative Research; Quantitative Research; Mixed-Methods Research; Qualitative Data Collection Techniques; Quantitative Data Collection Techniques; Qualitative Data Analysis Techniques; Quantitative Analysis Techniques; Descriptive Statistics; Inferential Statistics. DOI: 10.7176/JMCR/87-06 Publication date: November 30 th 2022

Mixed methods research is defined as the collection, analysis, and integration of both quantitative data (e.g., outcome of a randomized trial, such as decrease in depression score) and qualitative data (e.g., observations or interviews about the experience of persons with depression) to provide a more comprehensive understanding of a research problem than might be obtained through quantitative or qualitative approaches alone. Because mixed methods research designs place high value on the stories behind the numbers– both in exploratory designs where the experiences and insights of the community under study inform the quantitative investigation, and in explanatory designs where they illuminate the quantitative data– mixed methods are especially appropriate in studying the problems of older adults and caregivers. The goal of this chapter is to introduce the concept of mixed methods as an approach for research in Geriatrics and Gerontology. We will discuss (1) why an investigator might consider using mixed methods; (2) basic and complex mixed methods designs; (3) examples of mixed methods projects, drawing upon our own research; and, (4) challenges in carrying out mixed methods research.

Triangulation is a measurement technique often used by surveyors to locate an object in space by relying on two known points in order to ‘‘triangulate’’ on an unknown fixed point in that same space. Early on, social scientists borrowed the concept of triangulation to argue for its use in the validation process in assessing the veracity of social science research results. There are alternative perspectives on the use of triangulation that argue for its usefulness as a ‘‘dialectical’’ process whose goals seek a more in-depth nuanced understanding of research findings and clarifying disparate results by placing them in dialogue with one another. This special issue of the Journal of Mixed Methods Research (JMMR) analyzes and explores the variety of ways triangulation is used in mixed methods research and the range of issues and controversies surrounding triangulation praxis. To date, there are few scholarly in-depth discussions of its deployment in mixed methods research. The choice of triangulation as the topic for this first special issue of JMMR is based on the claims made by many scholars in the field that triangulation provides a justification for the use of mixed methods. The contributors to this volume raise many questions about the meaning of triangulation, its philosophical positioning in the mixed methods community, and strategies for using triangulation in the design of mixed methods studies, analysis and interpretation of data, and making visible subjugated voices. They take provocative positions, suggesting that qualitative, constructivist, and interpretive pathways provide greater potential for research to address the social good than has been possible using mixed methods approaches that are more closely aligned with the postpositivist paradigm. They revisit the ‘‘paradigm wars’’ and ask this question: Are we still stuck with the incompatibility thesis that paralyzed advances in mixed methods in past decades? They explore and critique the potential of alternative methodologies for harnessing the synergy that is said to lie in the application of mixed methods research designs by asking another set of questions: Have members of the mixed methods community done an injustice to pragmatism as a philosophical frame for mixed methods? Is qualitatively framed mixed methods the way forward? Is it possible that qualitatively framed mixed methods are better suited to the ability of mixed methods researchers to demonstrate a causal relationship between variables? How and when should triangulation be brought into mixed methods research to obtain a more nuanced

BackgroundMixed methods research designs in engineering education often frame the “mixed” aspect of the design from the perspective of data collection. However, intentional mixing throughout the research design—particularly during data analysis—may enable richer meta‐inferences about a phenomenon.PurposeThis paper provides examples of strategies for mixing during data analysis in mixed methods program evaluation in engineering education. Although the context is program evaluation, the procedures are applicable in engineering education research more broadly.Scope/MethodThis review presents examples of mixed methods analysis strategies in the context of a data set with qualitative and quantitative data from a global engineering program at a large Mid‐Atlantic university. The structure of the examples presents mixed research questions, pragmatic purposes for such studies, and examples of different mixing strategies for the analysis stage. The mixing strategies highlighted include extreme case sampling, converting, creating a blended variable, blending variables and themes across strands, and cross‐case comparison.ConclusionsThis review of mixed methods in program evaluation prompted a reflection of processes in the design of studies, how the designs are described beyond the usual taxonomies in the mixed methods literature, and implications for the greater community of engineering education researchers. Five mixed methods designs were formulated around the mixing strategies.

The aim of this research is to examine the effects of web 2.0 tools used in online astronomy education on the conceptual achievement of 5th grade secondary school students. For this purpose, the Sun, Earth and Moon unit was processed online using web 2.0 tools. The study was implemented in a public secondary school over a period of 6 weeks. Mixed research method, which combines qualitative and quantitative research methods, was used in the study. An easily accessible sample model was used to determine the study group. The sample of the study consists of 12 students (7 girls, 5 boys) in the 10-11 age group. The “Sun, Earth and Moon Achievement Test” developed by Sontay & Karamustafaoğlu (2020) was used as a quantitative data collection tool in the study. Qualitative data collection tool “Semi-Structured Telephone Interview on the Concepts of the Sun, Earth and Moon” was used. SPSS program was used in the analysis of quantitative data. Content analysis method was used in the analysis of qualitative data. As a result of the study, it was seen that online education supported by web 2.0 tools within the scope of the Sun, Earth and Moon unit had a positive effect on students’ conceptual success.

This research, which aims to determine the perceptions of elementary pre-service teacher towards the teaching practice process, was developed in accordance with the sequential explanatory design from mixed research methods. The sample of the research consists of the 4th grade students from department of elemantary teacher of a public university in 2018-2019 academic year. “Field Experience Instrument for Elementary Pre-service Teachers” was applied to 84 elemantary pre-service teachers and among them, focus group interview was held with seven participants. SPSS23 package program was used in the analysis of quantitative data and descriptive analysis was used in the analysis of qualitative data. Descriptive data obtained according to the results obtained from quantitative findings revealed that pre-service teachers were generally evaluated positively process. In addition, a meaningful difference was found between whether the instructor came to school or not and the instructor sub-dimension scores. The findings from the qualitative part supporting this situation were also reached. On the other hand, it was concluded that different dimensions appeared in the qualitative part of the research that didn’t appear in the quantitative findings. In this section, it has been concluded that pre-service teachers have positive and negative evaluations towards practice teachers and school administration.

SummaryMixed methods research is the use of quantitative and qualitative methods in a single study or series of studies. It is an emergent methodology which is increasingly used by health researchers, especially within health services research. There is a growing literature on the theory, design and critical appraisal of mixed methods research. However, there are few papers that summarize this methodological approach for health practitioners who wish to conduct or critically engage with mixed methods studies. The objective of this paper is to provide an accessible introduction to mixed methods for clinicians and researchers unfamiliar with this approach. We present a synthesis of key methodological literature on mixed methods research, with examples from our own work and that of others, to illustrate the practical applications of this approach within health research. We summarize definitions of mixed methods research, the value of this approach, key aspects of study design and analysis, and discuss the potential challenges of combining quantitative and qualitative methods and data. One of the key challenges within mixed methods research is the successful integration of quantitative and qualitative data during analysis and interpretation. However, the integration of different types of data can generate insights into a research question, resulting in enriched understanding of complex health research problems.

The complexity of social problems addressed by the social work profession makes mixed methods research an essential tool. This literature review examined common quantitative and qualitative techniques used by social work researchers and what mixed methods research may add to social work research. Surveys and in-depth interviews were the most common quantitative and qualitative data collection methods, respectively. The t-test was the most frequently used quantitative data analysis method. Although thematic analysis was the most common qualitative data analysis method, 12% of the qualitative data analysis techniques were not specified. Mixed methods research adds three important elements to social work research: voices of participants, comprehensive analyses of phenomena, and enhanced validity of findings. For these reasons, the teaching and use of mixed methods research remain integral to social work.

Living with nuclear energy: A systematic review of the psychological consequences of nuclear power

Qualitative and mixed methods research in trials

Despite criticisms questioning its raison d'être (e.g., Giddings & Grant, ), mixed methods research has been welcomed in social research as a methodology in its own right (Greene, ). Recently, it has also been acknowledged and advocated in applied linguistics (Dörnyei, ; Hashemi, ). In an attempt to investigate the status of this relatively new trend in applied linguistics, the current study examines the nature of the integration of qualitative and quantitative methods in terms of research designs, sampling designs, and quality of interpretations. Content analysis of 205 research articles published in seven comprehensive international peer reviewed applied linguistics journals between 1995 and 2008 reveals that concurrent designs are more prevalent than sequential designs and that studies make limited use of mixed designs that are detailed in the mixed methods literature. Moreover, although a considerable number of articles used both qualitative and quantitative methods, only a small number achieved high degrees of integration at various stages of the study as a quality standard for mixed research. The study concludes with several implications for making more effective use of mixed methods research in applied linguistics and calls for a more systematic treatment of this trend as a versatile research methodology.

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to analyse the skills required by lecturers to be able to support research data management effectively; assess the research data management literacy levels amongst lecturers at Strathmore University; and suggest how research data management capacity can be strengthened to mitigate the knowledge gaps identified.Design/methodology/approachThis study was conducted as a mixed methods research. Explanatory sequential mixed methods approach was used to collect, analyse and interpret quantitative and qualitative data from lecturers at Strathmore University in Nairobi, Kenya. Quantitative data was collected using questionnaires while qualitative data was collected through focus group discussions. Quantitative data was analysed using SPSS while qualitative data was analysed thematically.FindingsThe findings of this study indicate varied levels of research data management literacy amongst lecturers at Strathmore University. Lecturers understand the need of having literacy skills in managing research data. They also participate in data creation, collection, processing, validation, dissemination, sharing and archiving. This is a clear indication of good research data management. However, the study also revealed gaps in research data management skills amongst the lecturers in areas such as sharing of research data on open access journals, data legislation and securing research data.Research limitations/implicationsThe study has been conducted in one university in Kenya. However, the findings have been contextualised in the global landscape through suitable references.Practical implicationsThe findings of this study may be used to attract the attention of lecturers and librarians to research data management. The findings may also be used to develop institutional policies on research data management at Strathmore University and beyond. The suggested ways of research data capacity strengthening can be adopted or adapted by other universities to enhance research data management.Originality/valueThis is an original study.

Mixed methods research commonly uses video as a tool for collecting data and capturing reflections from participants, but it is less common to use video as a means for disseminating results. However, video can be a powerful way to share research findings with a broad audience especially when combining the traditions of ethnography, documentary filmmaking, and storytelling. Our literature review focused on aspects relating to video within mixed methods research that applied to the perspective presented within this paper: the history, affordances and constraints of using video in research, the application of video within mixed methods design, and the traditions of research as storytelling. We constructed a Mind Map of the current literature to reveal convergent and divergent themes and found that current research focuses on four main properties in regards to video: video as a tool for storytelling/research, properties of the camera/video itself, how video impacts the person/researcher, and methods by which the researcher/viewer consumes video. Through this process, we found that little has been written about how video could be used as a vehicle to present findings of a study. From this contextual framework and through examples from our own research, we present current and potential roles of video storytelling in mixed methods research. With digital technologies, video can be used within the context of research not only as data and a tool for analysis, but also to present findings and results in an engaging way. In conclusion, previous research has focused on using video as a tool for data collection and analysis, but there are emerging opportunities for video to play an increased role in mixed methods research as a tool for the presentation of findings. By leveraging storytelling techniques used in documentary film, while staying true to the analytical methods of the research design, researchers can use video to effectively communicate implications of their work to an audience beyond academics and use video storytelling to disseminate findings to the public.