Mixed Methods Approaches Flashcards
FURTHER DEFINITION
CRESWELL ET AL. (2011)
- research questions whereby an understanding of IRL context is required
- use of multiple methods (quantitative/qualitative)
- intentional integration/combination
- mixing can occur at all research stages
- design drawing on strength of methods adopted
- enhance understanding/validity/rigour
- research framed within philosophical/theoretical positions
QUALITATIVE APPROACH
- context/setting
- phenomenology/understanding
- inductive
- theory development
- exploratory
- rich/deep data
- systematic/rigorous
QUANTITATIVE APPROACH
- deductive
- test theories of hypotheses
- measures
- objective
- measurable evidence
- assumes knowable reality
- replication/generalisability
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH: DEVELOPMENT
JOHNSON & ONWUEGBUZIE (2004)
- ie. positivist paradigm
- historical cornerstone of socio-science research
- Purists call researchers to “eliminate biases & remain emotionally detached/uninvolved w/objects of study; tests/empirically justify states hypotheses
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH: DEVELOPMENT
JOHNSON & ONWUEGBUZIE (2004)
- support constructivist/interpretivist paradigm
- contend that:
1) multiple-constructed realities abound
2) time/context free generalisations are neither desirable/possible
3) research = value bound
4) impossible to differentiate fully causes/effects
5) logic flows from specific -> general
6) knower/known cannot be separated as subjective knower is only reality source
CALL TO END PARADIGM CONFRONTATION
- call for “truce” between 2 major paradigms
- many major authors/researchers felt quantitative/qualitative research methodologies = compatible
- many social-scientists now believe there’s no major problem area that should be studied exclusively w/1 research method
- quantitative = if; qualitative = why/how
TASHAKKORI & TEDDLIE (2008) - we should use whatever philosophical/methodological approach that works for particular research issues under study
4 FACTORS
1) THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE
2) PRIORITY OF STRATEGY
3) SEQUENCY OF DATA COLLECTION IMPLEMENTATION
4) POINT AT WHICH DATA ARE INTEGRATED
THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE
EXPLICIT
- based firmly on theory
IMPLICIT
- based indirectly on theory
PRIORITY OF STRATEGY
- equal
- qualitative
- quantitative
SEQUENCE OF DATA COLLECTION IMPLEMENTATION
- qualitative first
- quantitative first
- no sequence
POINT AT WHICH DATA ARE INTEGRATED
- at data collection
- at data analysis
- at data interpretation
- w/some combination
MULTIPLE STUDY EXAMPLE
STUDY 1
- quantitative study w/reported results + …
STUDY 2
- qualitative study w/reported results + …
STUDY 3
- quantitative study w/reported results
MAIN DESIGNS
1) SEQUENTIAL EXPLANATORY METHOD
2) SEQUENTIAL TRANSFORMATIVE STRATEGY
3) CONCURRENT TRIANGULATION STRATEGY
4) CONCURRENT NESTED STRATEGY
5) CONCURRENT TRANSFORMATIVE STRATEGY
SEQUENTIAL EXPLANATORY METHOD
- employs 2 dif data-collection time points:
1) quantitative data collected first
2) qualitative data collected last - equal priority given to both
- primary focus = to explain quantitative results by exploring certain results in more detail/helping explain unexpected results (ie. using follow-up interviews to better understand results of quantitative study)
SEQUENTIAL EXPLANATORY METHOD: EVALUATION
STRENGTH
- relatively straight forward via clear distinct stages
- easier to describe > concurrent strategies
WEAKNESS
- v time consuming esp. when both phases are given equal consideration/priority
SEQUENTIAL TRANSFORMATIVE STRATEGY
CRESWELL (2003)
- 2 distinct data collection phases; either type can be collected first
- priority can be given to either/both data types; data are integrated during interpretation
- primary purpose = employ methods best able to serve theoretical perspective of researcher
- may be able to give vice to diverse perspectives & better advocate for pps/better understand phenomenon/process changing due to being studied
SEQUENTIAL TRANSFORMATIVE STRATEGY: EVALUATION
STRENGTH
- v straight forward in terms of implementation/reporting
WEAKNESS
- time consuming
- little guidance due to relative lit lack on transformative nature of moving from 1st phase of data collection to 2nd
CONCURRENT TRIANGULATION STRATEGY
- 2 concurrent data collection points
- priority should be equal BUT can be given to either approach
- data = integrated during interpretation phase; either lack of convergence/convergence strengthening knowledge claim in interpretation notes
- data integration can also occur during analysis
CONCURRENT TRIANGULATION STRATEGY: EVALUATION
STRENGTHS
- familiar to many researchers
- shorter data collection time in comparison to sequential methods
- offsets weaknesses inherent to 1 design by using both
WEAKNESSES
- requires great deal of expertise/effort to study phenomenon under consideration using 2 dif methods
- may be difficult to compare 2 dif types of data as well as resolve discrepancies (if arisen)
CONCURRENT NESTED STRATEGY
- 2 data collection methods: 1 embedded (nested) within the other
- priority given to primary data collection approach w/less emphasis placed on nested approach
- data mixed during analysis phase
CONCURRENT NESTED STRATEGY: EVALUATION
STRENGTHS
- able to collect 2 types of data simultaneously
- can collect both quantitative/qualitative data allowing for perspectives from each
- provides advantages of both methods
WEAKNESSES
- data need to be transformed to allow integration during analysis; may lead to issues in resolving discrepancies occurring between dif data types
- little lit here; results may be bias by differing priorities assigned to research design results
CONCURRENT TRANSFORMATIVE STRATEGY
- 2 concurrent data collection phases
- priority may be given to either/may be equal
- data = integrated during analysis/interpretation phase (possibly)
- guided by specific theoretical perspective (ie. critical theory/advocacy/participatory research/theoretical framework)
CONCURRENT TRANSFORMATIVE STRATEGY: EVALUATION
STRENGTHS
- can collect both quantitative/qualitative data simultaneously allowing for perspectives from each
- provides advantages of both methods
- familiar to many researchers
- shorter data collection time compared w/sequential methods
- offsets weaknesses inherent to 1 design via both
WEAKNESSES
- data need to be transformed to allow integration during analysis
- may lead to issues resolving discrepancies that occur between dif data types
- requires great deal of expertise/effort to study phenomenon under consideration using 2 dif methods
STRENGTHS
- seen to solve weaknesses that both quantitative/qualitative research suffer from:
QUANTIATIVE - not taking into account context of pps talk
- voices not “heard” in final analysis
QUALITATIVE - potential interference of researcher; heavily involved in coding/interpreting findings
- cannot generalise to wider pop
MIXED METHODS: FIX - researchers have possibility to use wide variety of data collection/analysis; could arguably solve issues
