Using mixed methods to discover emergent patterns of local eDemocracy

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. …

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

Qualitative and mixed methods research in trials

Measurement and sampling error in mixed-methods research for the control of Peste des Petits Ruminants in the Karamoja subregion of Northeastern Uganda: A cautionary tale

Qualitative and Mixed Methods Research in Cross-Cultural Psychology

PurposeThis paper seeks to examine two management doctoral research projects to highlight the advantages in mixed methods as the primary research design.Design/methodology/approachThis paper summarises the methods of data collection and analysis which were used by two doctoral students in their management research. The researchers used mixed methods approaches (quantitative and qualitative) to explore different areas of management.FindingsThe paper supports the view that triangulation of research methods strengthens the findings and inferences made for understanding social phenomena in more depth, compared to using a single method.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper relies excessively on two doctoral research projects which utilise sequential mixed methods. Therefore, arguments made in the paper are specific because other doctoral projects that have used different methods from those employed in the two projects were not considered.Practical implicationsEarly researchers, in particular students commencing doctorate studies, should apply mixed methods research because it develops skills in the two most dominant data collection methods used in management research. This paper is a practical guide on how this could be done effectively.Originality/valueThe paper is drawn from two unique doctoral research projects. The paper's originality and value is in providing experiences and practical insights on how mixed methods research is undertaken.

To address childhood malnutrition, the use of multifaceted methodologies, such as mixed methods research, is required to inform effective and contextual interventions. However, this remains limited in studying malnutrition among school children in a South African context, notwithstanding its persistence. We adopted a convergent parallel mixed methods design to best understand the magnitude of malnutrition through multilevel influences in a rural area. A quantitative survey determined the magnitude of malnutrition and associated factors among school children and their mothers (n = 508), parallel to a qualitative study, which explored mothers' insights into the influences of child growth and nutrition in interviews using seven focus group discussions. Mixed methods integration was achieved through convergence of the quantitative constructs developed from measured variables for malnutrition and related factors with ten emergent qualitative themes using a joint display analysis to compare the findings and generate meta-inferences. Qualitative themes on food unavailability and affordability, poor feeding beliefs and practices, and decision to purchase foods were consistent with the quantified poor socio-demographic status of mothers. Furthermore, the qualitative data explained the high prevalence of undernutrition among children but did not corroborate the high estimated households' food security in the quantitative survey. The misperceptions of mothers on child growth agreed with limited food knowledge as well as lack of knowledge on child growth gathered during the survey. Moreover, mothers believed that their children were growing well despite the high presence of childhood undernutrition. Mothers further overrated the effectiveness of school feeding programmes in providing healthy food to children as compared to their household food. They reported high incidence of food allergies, diarrhea, and vomiting caused by food consumed at school which resulted in children not eating certain foods. This might have impacted on the nutritional status of children since mothers depended on the school feeding program to provide food for their children. The ambiguity of cultural influences in relation to child growth was evident and substantiated during qualitative interview. Mixed methods integration offered a better understanding of malnutrition from empirical findings on interrelated factors at child, maternal, household, and school levels. This study points to a need for multilevel, informed, and contextual multidimensional interventions to contribute towards addressing childhood malnutrition in South Africa.

The planning and reporting of mixed methods studies on the built environment and health

An explanatory mixed methods approach was used to collect data, through questionnaires and online in-depth interviews. This study was conducted from 4 August 2020 to 3 August 2021. The results include 60 PHOs from 60 Primary Care Units in six provinces, with 41 (68.3%) females and an average age of 35.57 years (SD = 11.61). The PHOs' knowledge, understanding, and participation experience aspects were mostly proactive rather than passive. The factors that significantly predicted proactive practical experiences included sex (ORadj = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.04-2.21), age (ORadj = 1.69, 95% CI = 1.16-2.48), married status (ORadj = 1.69, 95% CI = 1.16-2.48), education level (ORadj = 1.50, 95% CI = 1.02-2.20), and position for work (ORadj = 1.69, 95% CI = 1.16-2.48). The results of quantitative method were confirmed by 12 sub-themes of 8 PHOs' experiences from qualitative method. The PHOs' knowledge, understanding, opinion, and participation experiences were significant predictors of practical experience. Primary health care systems should promote proactive experiences in all four aspects to increase proactive practical experiences.

Background: The acute care settings have the potential to facilitate robust epidemiological and public health research necessary for evidence-based system. The methods in emergency research are well suited for mixed methods research. Despite the use of quantitative and qualitative data in emergency settings, mixed methods studies in this field are limited to help researchers to address health care issues. Therefore, we aim to assess the prospects and implications of mixed methods approach in acute care settings. Materials and Methods: We have reviewed the published English literature using the research databases (PubMed, Medline, CINHAL and Google Scholar) related to the implications of mixed methods in emergency research, in order to understand and broaden the scope of patient care in time critical conditions. Results: Basically, there are four mixed method approaches which integrate qualitative and quantitative methods (such as Triangulation, Embedded, Explanatory and Exploratory design) which can be selected depending upon the research question. In a single study, appropriate selection of mixed method approach enables quality research which involves understanding of the different aspects of human interaction and paradigms to characterize complex healthcare systems from societal standpoint. So, the combination approach may answer key issues in emergency settings which enriches and enhances the healthcare practice that may influence patient outcomes. Notably, emergency research has wider range of parameters which not only benefit the patients but also help in overcoming system-related clinical challenges. Of note, the ethical conduct of study is crucial in a complex emergency situation which remains challenging for recruitment and obtaining informed consent from subject or their nest of kin. Another impediment is the lack of trained emergency researcher to support the research activities and data collection in the emergent settings. Conclusion: Application of mixed approach is of great importance in emergency medicine to enhance our understanding of critical care research that may add valuable insight on various aspects of human behavior. Therefore, appropriate planning and integration of study design may help researchers to explore newer avenues to improve patients care in emergency settings.

Mixed method research designs can be extremely useful in extending knowledge in the sales domain. A bevy of mixed method designs are at the disposal of sales researchers seeking to reap the benefits of this combination of research approaches. However, application of mixed methods in sales research has been rather limited, focusing primarily on exploratory sequential designs. The purpose of this article is to provide an exposition of mixed method research in the sales domain and offer avenues of extension that employ underutilized mixed methodological approaches. Accordingly, a definition of mixed methods along with its benefits and drawbacks is espoused followed by guidance in conducting mixed method research. A review of sales-related mixed method studies is then provided and articles containing both quantitative and qualitative methods are analyzed to glean insight on the state of mixed methods research in sales. Future avenues for mixed method research are then provided focusing on best practices and techniques that have yet to be embraced by sales researchers. This article aims to be a resource for sales scholars in expanding the mixed method research paradigm.

Demystifying the complexity and heterogeneity of recycling behavior in organizational settings: A mixed-methods approach.

PurposeThis paper aims to examine mixed methods research (MMR) that appeared in eight tourism and hospitality journals (“Annals of Tourism Research”, “Tourism Management”, “Journal of Travel Research”, “Journal of Sustainable Tourism”, “International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management”, “International Journal of Hospitality Management”, “Journal of Hospitality Marketing and Management” and “Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research”) from 1998 to 2019.Design/methodology/approachThis review paper was a mixed methods design and was conducted in three phases. In the first phase, a content analysis was performed to determine if each article could be classified as non-empirical, qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods. In the second phase, descriptive statistics was used to present the number and characteristics of MMR articles. In the third phase, the contributions of MMR to addressing particular issues in tourism and hospitality studies were investigated.FindingsThis study identified 753 mixed methods articles, wherein 482 articles (64%) were published in the chosen tourism publication outlets and 271 (36%) in the chosen hospitality publication outlets. MMR studies having a dominant focus on specific methods (459 articles; 61%) outnumbered those having an equal focus on the qualitative and quantitative parts (294 articles; 39%). In case one method was dominant, this was typically the quantitative. Sequential data collection was prevalent in most of the cases (94.2%). The contributions of MMR to addressing generic and specific research problems were also analyzed.Originality/valueThis is the first comparison of MMR in major tourism and hospitality journals.

Purpose– Deployment of ICT facilities for teaching and learning in higher education is no longer a new trend, however, assessing the impacts of these deployment on lecturers and students requires more effort. The purpose of this paper is to employ a mixed method design consisting qualitative and quantitative procedures to examine the impact of ICT deployment in teaching and learning at a University in Nigeria. The survey data were drawn from 593 respondents (students and lecturers) and was analyzed using linear regression. For the qualitative part, one-on-one and focus group interviews were conducted among seven students and eight lecturers to seek their varying opinion on ICT impact on teaching and learning. Lecture-room observations were conducted across three classes to see how ICT is integrated. These multiple means findings were triangulated, compared and contrasted to validate the study. Predictors of ICT impact were found to be perception, integration, motivation and challenges. The qualitative interview and observation findings generated four similar themes as the quantitative result which was conceptualized as a model that serves as a framework for researchers on ICT impact assessment.Design/methodology/approach– This study employed a mixed method design consisting qualitative and quantitative procedures to examine the impact of ICT deployment in teaching and learning at a University in Nigeria. The survey data were drawn from 593 respondents (students and lecturers) and was analyzed using linear regression. For the qualitative part, one-on-one and focus group interviews were conducted among seven students and eight lecturers to seek their varying opinion on ICT impact on teaching and learning. Lecture-room observations were conducted across three classes to see how ICT is integrated. These multiple means findings were triangulated, compared and contrasted to validate the study.Findings– Predictors of ICT impact were found to be perception, integration, motivation and challenges. The qualitative interview and observation findings generated four similar themes as the quantitative result which was conceptualized as a model that serves as a framework for researchers on ICT impact assessment.Practical implications– The use of multiple research designs to get rich and diverse view of participants incorporated in this study help to generate solid findings on the impact assessment of technology in education. The conceptual model (Adedokun-Shittu 2011 ICT impact assessment model) generated through a mixed method research design has four components which are substitutable to CIPP and Kirkpatrick models. It also fills a crucial gap left by both models.Originality/value– This study produces a model that is conceived as a conceptual framework for researchers on impact assessment and is made up of the generated themes and named ICT Impact Assessment Model comprising Positive effect, Integration, Incentives and Challenges. This model is represented in a cyclic form because the assessment process can start from any stage and the assessment could be done individually or holistically. This makes it useful for both formative and summative assessment of ICT integration in teaching and learning (Adedokun-Shittuet al.S, 2012). The mixed method approach (survey, interviews and observations) used in the study that generated this model also supports its usefulness in any kind of evaluation (formative or summative).

Recently, there have been a variety of arguments voiced to encourage that more attention be given to the role qualitative methods can play in mixed methods research in public policy and public administration. This article discusses these claims and describes the benefits of qualitative approaches, and how qualitative research methods can be leveraged to strengthen mixed methods research in public administration. We also provide a guide for improving the credibility of mixed methods research through increasing transparency and discussions of all methodological decisions. This study is based on a systematic content analysis of 186 mixed methods studies published in public policy and public administration journals between 2010 and 2018. We found that findings from the quantitative methods dominated the mixed methods studies, little diversity in data collection and analysis methods, and frequent failure to integrate insights from both methods. We also analyzed the 36 qualitative‐dominant studies in the sample, and illuminated seven different ways that authors of qualitative‐dominant studies leveraged the qualitative strand to strengthen mixed methods research. We developed lessons from our analysis of the qualitative‐dominant articles on how to incorporate qualitative methods in a thoughtful manner, articulate a role for each strand, and effectively support findings with one or more strands.