A sequential mixed model research design: Design, analytical and display issues
Roslyn Cameron
School of Commerce and Management, Southern Cross University, Tweed Gold Coast Campus, Tweed Heads, NSW, Australia
PP: 140 - 152
Abstract
A new era in research methods is emerging and has been quietly lauded by several emerging authorities in the field of mixed methods research. Like the mythology of the phoenix, mixed methods research has arisen out of the ashes of the paradigm wars to become the third methodological movement (Cameron & Miller 2007). The fields of applied social science and evaluation are among those which have shown the greatest popularity and uptake of mixed methods research designs.
This article provides a brief overview of the rise of mixed methods research, its usage in business and management fields and its relationship to the philosophy of pragmatism.
Typologies of mixed methods research designs are discussed and a case study of a sequential mixed model research design in the human resource development (HRD) field is presented. Issues related to design, analytical processes and display arising from utilising this particular mixed method research design are discussed. As a consequence, the article contains several Tables and Figures which exemplify display options that may assist those researchers who are considering utilising a mixed method research design.
Keywords
mixed methods, qualitative research, quantitative research, research designs, triangulation
Article Text
The Paradigm Wars
The debates surrounding research paradigms have a long history and were particularly active in the 1980s. Some commentaries on the debate contend that the struggle for primacy of one paradigm over others is irrelevant as each paradigm is an alternate offering with its own merits (Guba 1990: 27). Creswell (1994: 176) identifies several schools of thought in the paradigm debate or so-called ‘paradigm wars'. At one end of the debate are the ‘purists' who assert paradigms and methods should not be mixed. Another school of thought is identified as the ‘situationalists' who contend that certain methods can be used in specific situations. In direct opposition to the ‘purists' are the pragmatists who argued against a false dichotomy between the qualitative and quantitative research paradigms and advocate for the efficient use of both approaches.
Proponents of mixed methods research have been linked to those whom identify with the pragmatic paradigm. Historically, pragmatism can be traced to an early period from 1860-1930 and the neopragmatic era from 1960 to present (Maxcy 2003). Many mixed methods researchers and theorists draw strong associations with mixed methodology and pragmatism (Bazeley 2003; Greene & Caracelli 1997; Johnson & Onwuegbuzie 2004; Maxcy 2003; Tashakkori & Teddlie 2003). Johnson and Onwuegbuzie (2004: 17) summarise the philosophical position of mixed method researchers when they say:
We agree with others in the mixed methods research movement that consideration and discussion of pragmatism by research methodologists and empirical researchers will be productive because it offers an immediate and useful middle position philosophically and methodologically; it offers a practical and outcome-orientated method of inquiry that is based on action and leads, iteratively, to further action and the elimination of doubt; and it offers a method for selecting methodological mixes that can help researchers better answer many of their research questions.
Pragmatism has a strong philosophical foothold in the mixed methods or methodological pluralism camps. This paper now looks more closely at the mixing of qualitative and quantitative research methods.
... continues ...
References
Bazeley P (2003) Teaching mixed methods, Qualitative Research Journal 3: 117-126.
Bergman MM (2008) Mixed Methods Research. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.
Brady H and Collier D (Eds) (2004) Rethinking Social Inquiry Diverse Tools, Shared Standards, Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.
Buchanan D and Bryman A (2007) Contextualizing methods choice in organizational research, Organizational Research Methods 10(3): 483-501.
Cameron R (2008) Mixed Methods in Management Research, in Proceedings of the 22nd ANZAM Conference, Australian & New Zealand Academy of Management, Auckland, December 2008.
Cameron R and Miller P (2007) Mixed methods research: Phoenix of the paradigm wars, in Proceedings of the 21st ANZAM Conference, Australian & New Zealand Academy of Management, Sydney, December 2007.
Caracelli J and Greene V (1997) 'Crafting Mixed- Method Evaluation designs' in Advances in Mixed-Method Evaluation: The Challenges and Benefits of Integrating Diverse Paradigms, Greene J and Caracelli V (Eds) San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Caulley D (1994) Notes on the basic characteristics of postpositivist interpretive inquiry, in Neville, Willis and Edwards (Eds) Qualitative Research in Adult Education: a colloquium on theory, practice, supervision and assessment, Centre for Research in Education & Work, Adelaide: University of South Australia.
Cohen L and Manion L (1989) Research Methods in Education (3rd edn). London: Routledge.
Creswell J (1994) Research Design: Qualitative & Quantitative Approaches. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.
Creswell J (2003) Research design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.
Creswell J and Plano Clark V (2007) Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.
Denzin N and Lincoln Y (Eds) (2005) Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry (2nd edn). Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.
Earley M (2007) Developing a syllabus for a mixed-methods research course, International Journal of Social Research Methodology 10(2): 145-162.
Eberle T and Elliker F (2005) A cartography of qualitative research in Switzerland, Forum: Qualitative Social Research 6(3): Art 24 September.
Greene JC (2007) Mixed Methods in Social Inquiry. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Greene J and Caracelli V (Eds) (1997) Advances in Mixed-Method Evaluation: The Challenges and Benefits of Integrating Diverse Paradigms. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Guba E (1990) The Paradigm Dialog. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.
Guba E and Lincoln Y (2005) 'Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions and emerging confluences' in The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rd edn). Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.
Hanson W, Creswell J, Clark V, Petska K and Creswell J (2005) Mixed methods research designs in Counselling Psychology, Journal of Counselling Psychology 52(2): 224-235.
Hurmerinta-Peltomaki L and Nummela N (2006) Mixed methods in International Business Research: A Value-added Perspective, Management International Review 46(4): 439-459.
Johnson RB and Onwuegbuzie AJ (2004) Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come, Educational Researchers 33(7): 14-26.
King G, Keohane R and Verba S (1994) Designing Social Inquiry, Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.
Maxcy S (2003) 'Pragmatic threads in mixed methods research in the social sciences: The search for multiple modes of inquiry and the end of the philosophy of formalism' in Tashakkori A and Teddlie C (Eds) Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.
McMillan J and Schumacher S (2006) Research in Education: Evidence-Based Inquiry (6th edn). Boston: Pearson.
Mertens D (2005) Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods (2nd edn). Boston: Sage.
Miles M and Huberman A (1994) Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd edn). Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.
Mingers J (1997) 'Multi-paradigm multimethodolgy' in Mingers J and Gill A (Eds) Multimethodology: The theory and practice of combining management science methodologies. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons.
Mingers J (2003) The paucity of multi-method research: a review of the information systems literature, Information Systems Journal 13: 233-249.
Mingers J and Gill A (Eds) (1997) Multimethodology: The theory and practice of combining management science methodologies. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons.
Morgan D (1998) Practical strategies for combining qualitative and quantitative methods: Applications to health research, Qualitative Health Research 8: 362-376.
Morse J (2003) 'Principles of mixed methods and multimethod research design' in Tashakkori A and Teddlie C (Eds) Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.
Neuman W (2006) Social Research Methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (6th edn). Boston: Pearson.
Plano Clark V and Creswell J (Eds) (2007) The Mixed Methods Reader. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.
Ragin C (1987) The Comparative Method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. California: University of California Press.
Ragin C (1994) Constructing Social Research: The unity and diversity of method. Thousand Oaks CA: Pine Forge Press.
Ragin C and Becker HS (1992) What is a Case? Exploring the Foundations of Social Inquiry. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Rihoux B (2006) Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Related Systematic Comparative Methods: Recent Advances and Remaining Challenges for Social Science Research, International Sociology 21(5): 679-706.
Rihoux B and Grimm H (2006) Innovative Comparative Methods for Policy Analysis: Beyond the Quantitative- Qualitative Divide. New York: Springer.
Tashakkori A and Teddlie C (Eds) (2003) Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.
Teddlie C and Tashakkori A (2003) 'Major Issues and Controversies in the use of Mixed Methods in the Social and Behavioral Sciences' in Tashakkori A and Teddlie C (Eds) Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.
Teddlie C and Tashakkori A (2008) Foundations of Mixed Methods Research. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.
Thomas RM (2003) Blending Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methods in Theses and Dissertations. Thousand Oaks CA: Corwin Press.
eContent Home
