A Practical Guide to Mixed Research Methodology: For research students, supervisors, and academic authors

By Farhad Daneshgar PhD

This book offers a practical guide to mixed method research highlighting aspects of research design, execution, and analysis under various perspectives and research traditions. These are provided in clear and readable prose with a strong focus on practicality, and at the same time, without resorting to oversimplification.
In creating this book the author has used many research papers in various disciplines that had focused on both practical and theoretical aspects of MMR. During the quiet two years of Covid era and subsequent refreshment follow up year, the author managed to identify relevant articles and many case studies that reveal various theoretical and practical aspects of the MMR with the aim of helping post graduate students and supervisors to manage their research projects. Among the explored themes were several categories of MMR topics that satisfy both practicality and comprehensiveness requirements of the book. These categories in turn guided the author towards identifying relevant and useful case studies that complement the theoretical side of the book. These case studies are expected to help the reader in better understanding of various contexts that the MMR methodology has been used in the near past.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Xlibris AU
• Release date: Jan 29, 2024
• ISBN: 9798369494790

Book preview

Copyright © 2024 by Farhad Daneshgar, PhD.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the copyright owner.

Any people depicted in stock imagery provided by Getty Images are models, and such images are being used for illustrative purposes only.

Certain stock imagery © Getty Images.

Rev. date: 01/04/2024

Xlibris

AU TFN: 1 800 844 927 (Toll Free inside Australia)

AU Local: [phone] ([phone] from outside Australia)

www.Xlibris.com.au

857191

CONTENTS

Introduction

Background

Chapter 1Philosophical Perspectives of Mixed Method Research (MMR)

Chapter 2Interpretive Quantitative Methodological Perspective

Chapter 3Positivist Qualitative Perspective

Chapter 4Dialectical Pluralism MMR and Introduction to MMR Design

Chapter 5MMR Design Part 1 – Data Collection, Analysis and Sampling Methods

Chapter 6MMR Design Part 2 – Strategies and Theorizing Across Disciplines

Chapter 7Pragmatic Grounded Theory (PGT)

Chapter 8Mixed Method Action Research

Chapter 9Triangulation

Chapter 10Writing MMR PhD Proposal

Chapter 11Literature Review: Basics

Chapter 12Literature Review as Research Methodology

Chapter 13Rigor and Quality in Literature Review

Chapter 14Publishing in Academic Journals

Chapter 15Refereeing Scientific Journal Article and Report

About This Book

INTRODUCTION

Epistemological differences between positivists and interpretivists, and methodological divisions between quantitative and qualitative scholars have created a binary world of qualitative-quantitative research perspectives. The time is over for living in such a binary world and we researchers in all fields of study need to refresh our understanding and appreciation of the power and value of Mixed Method Research (MMR). MMR is now a major requirement of today’s societies and academic institutions at the PhD level. The pragmatic research perspective of the MMR incorporates operational design decisions based on ‘what methods will work best for my research (or my community)’ rather than ‘what methods I am allowed to adopt under my research paradigm’.

This book provides an overview of various concepts and practical aspects of MMR by focusing on MMR design and execution processes, MMR methods, and practical implications of MMR in real-world situations. The assumption is that the readers of this book already have some understanding of either qualitative or qualitative research or both and seek to enhance their knowledge of research methodology to the level that today’s world is expecting from a researcher; that is, being philosophical neutral, pragmatic, and adopting MMR projects when there is a favorable opportunity to do so. For this reason, the materials are provided in clear and understandable prose with strong focus on practicality without resorting to oversimplification.

The sharp focus on the practical aspects of MMR is the outcome of the author’s decades of publishing in high-ranking journals, successfully managing a dozen research students, and teaching/learning research methodologies and methods. Such focus on practicality also means deviation from the formality of the traditional research methodology textbook format and providing practical guidance. This is achieved by insertion of many embedded references, large number of real-world cases, examples, links, do and don’t do notes, and sharing personal experiences. Many explicit and implicit examples cover the range of basic to advanced MMR concepts with additional references provided for more specialist readers.

The typical readers of the Practical Guide to Mixed Method Research Methodology include postgraduate research students, research supervisors, early-career researchers, potential referees of academic journal articles, and potential applicants of research grants. The book consists of 15 Chapters each corresponding to one major research threshold concept that the author has witnessed both as a research student, a lecturer, a supervisor, and as a referee of several academic journals for over 35 years.

Farhad Daneshgar, PhD

Victoria University Sydney,

December 2023

BACKGROUND

Recently, Mixed Methods Research (MMR) has emerged as a viable third community of research, pursuing a pragmatic approach to research endeavors through integrating qualitative and quantitative procedures in a single study design. MMR seeks to capitalize on the strengths of quantitative and qualitative research traditions by combining these approaches into a complementary research design (Creswell 2009; Teddlie and Tashakkori 2009). This is demonstrated in Table 0.1. For reasons that will be discussed later, the MMR is now becoming a de-facto standard for PhD research projects in many universities globally.

Table 0.1 - Qualitative, Mixed Methods, and Quantitative attributes (adopted from Teddlie & Tashakkori, 2009; and Gelo, Braakmann, and Benetka,2008)

If both research questions and hypotheses are desirable the current duality of quantitative/qualitative research would not be able to address the research problem appropriately. The reason is that while quantitative methodology explains observable and measurable facts, qualitative procedures attempt to comprehend; that is, to reconstruct how someone else has established connections between facts through the regularities they observe (Gelo, Braakmann, & Benetka, 2008, p. 271). In many situations neither method alone is sufficient to provide a comprehensive understanding of the phenomena to be investigated. In such complex situations it can be useful to plan a comprehensive research strategy using MMR methodology.

The above arguments can help us to appreciate the increasing emphases on the MMR as the third research community. The remaining parts of the book are centered around various aspects pf MMR including MMR philosophical underpinning, strategies, designs, methods, ????, and ?????.

REFERENCES:

Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of Mixed Methods Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Creswell, J.W. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Gelo, O., Braakmann, D., & Benetka, G. (2008). Quantitative and qualitative research: Beyond the debate. Integrative psychological and behavioral science, 42, 266-290.

1

Philosophical Perspectives of Mixed Method Research (MMR)

Quantitative researchers pay more attention to the range of hypotheses that qualitative research have generated; and qualitative researchers spend more time exploring the range of phenomena/concepts that quantitative researchers are starving to know about before testing validity of those variables. Korstjens & Moser (2018)

Historically, mixed-method research emerged in the early 20th century as writers discussed multiple forms of social science fieldwork. Several years later, the discussion continued in the form of combining fieldwork, a term used to denote in-depth case studies (qualitative research) coupled with surveys (quantitative research). Siebert (1973) discussed this new style of research and advocated the integration of research techniques within a single study, suggesting that such a combination opened enormous opportunities for mutual advantages in each of three major phases: design, data collection, and analysis (Ibid).

It is a general agreement among MM researchers that currently three major design paradigms exist for MMR including pragmatic perspective (mixing two methodological perspectives) discussed in 1.1, interpretive quantitative perspective that is briefly discussed in 1.2 and expanded in Chapter2, and positivist qualitative perspective briefly discussed in 1.4 and further expanded in Chapter 3. A recent variation of pragmatic paradigm called dialectical pluralism is also presented in 1.4 and expanded in Chapter 4.

Section 2 provides another classification of MMR design paradigms with many overlaps with the above four paradigms and are presented in this Chapter to show an alternative view on the matter.

1. Pragmatic Design Perspective: Mixing two Traditional Paradigms

The root of pragmatic research paradigm goes back to Kant’s critique of pure reason, but among the most prominent contributors, we can mention Charles Peirce and Karl Popper. Peirce was focused on the logic of discovery, while the main interest of Popper was the logic of proof. Both approaches are complementary: the first one explains how knowledge and hypotheses are constructed, the second suggests how to verify them.

Pragmatic research perspective is a new paradigm for MMR and the biggest shift within the scientific research community in recent decades. Pragmatism in research designs incorporates operational decisions based on ‘what methods will work best for my research’ rather than ‘what methods I am allowed to adopt under my research paradigm’ to find answers for my research questions. Pragmatism enables the researcher to conduct research in innovative and dynamic ways to find solutions to research problems. More specifically, in relation to the MMR, pragmatism provides new options for addressing methodological issues as shown in column 3 of Table 1 and further explained below:

Table 1 - Pragmatic Research Perspective for Mixed Method Research (adopted from Morgan, 2007)

1.1 Abductive Reasoning (Epistemology): the only time that we pretend our research is either purely inductive or purely deductive is when we write up our work for publication. During the actual design, collection, and analysis of data, however it is impossible to operate in either an exclusively theory-driven (theory building) or qualitative, or data-driven (theory testing) or quantitative fashion; and instead, we move back and forth on this road. That is, we convert observations into (building the) theories and then assess those theories through action (testing those theories) and then back to the observation. This is called abductive reasoning.

According to Korstjens & Moser (2018) the movement back and forth between theory and data can go beyond the kind of data. A more interesting option is to explore working back and forth between the kinds of knowledge that can be produced by qualitative and quantitative research. For example, quantitative researchers pay more attention to the range of hypotheses that qualitative research have generated; and qualitative researchers spend more time exploring the range of phenomena/concepts that quantitative researchers are starving to know about before testing validity of those variables. Rather than each camp dismissing the other’s work, we may search for useful points of connection; and this is the unique opportunity that a pragmatic approach can offer (Ibid).

Evaluation Research: As a final note on abductive epistemology, according to Levin-Rozalis (2000), evaluation is negatively affected by several ethical and methodological problems. One major problem is the difficulty that evaluation has in proving itself as an independent, autonomous research discipline. A quick answer to these problems is to resort to th e more structured field of research (that is, purely quantitative or purely qualitative), even though the logic of such extreme research and its criteria are not suitable for most work in which evaluation as a discipline is required. A possible solution for this dilemma can be found in the work of the American philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce. According to Peirce, the decision to adopt a new hypothesis by a scientist, researcher, or evaluator is a mix of deduction and induction. Peirce calls this process ‘abduction’.

1.2 Inter-subjectivity (Ontology): research is neither purely objective nor purely subjective in nature. It contains characteristics of both subjectivity and stances called inter-subjectivity. In pragmatic research, inter-subjectivity is an agreement among scientists via communication and sharing of meanings regarding the research and research contexts. In future Chapters several examples and cases will be discussed.

Once again, it is only for the classroom purposes that we can discuss being either completely subjective or objective. Any practicing researcher must work back and forth between various frames of reference*, and the classic pragmatic emphasis that captures this duality.

*Example of Frame of Reference: Suppose you are sitting on a train that is moving at a constant speed of 50 kilometers per hour. To you, inside the train, everything appears to be stationary, including the seats, the windows, and the other passengers. However, to someone standing outside the train, watching it pass by everything inside the train appears to be moving at a speed of say 50 kilometers per hour in the direction the train is traveling. In this example, there are two different frames of reference: one inside the train and one outside the train. From each frame of reference, the motion of the objects appears different.

Under a pragmatic approach, we can easily assert that there is a single real world and that all individuals have their own unique interpretations of that world (post-positivism philosophy). In particular, the pragmatist emphasis on creating knowledge through action also includes "joint actions or projects" that different people or groups can accomplish together**.

**Example of pragmatist creating knowledge through action: pragmatist might approach learning a new skill, such as playing an instrument, by creating knowledge through action. Rather than spending a lot of time studying music theory or reading about the history of the instrument, the pragmatist would focus on playing the instrument and experimenting with different techniques. Through this process of trial and error, the pragmatist would create knowledge about playing the guitar that is based on their own actions and experiences. This approach emphasizes the importance of practical experience and experimentation in the process of learning, rather than relying solely on theoretical or abstract knowledge.

From a methodological point of view, this suggests a "reflexive" orientation where we pay more attention to the social processes that produce both consensus and conflict within our field. Such consensus and conflict are reached by asking the following questions: ‘Which aspects of our beliefs about research are in contention and which are widely shared, and how do issues make the transition back and forth between these states’ (Ibid). This brings us to the next topic: Reflexive integration, as a methodological tool that can facilitate the explicit integration of quantitative or qualitative elements in an MMR.

Inter-subjectivity (agreement) is necessary because it enables various researchers with opposite research methodological beliefs communicate together to develop a new theory abductively.

Research is neither purely objective nor purely subjective in nature. It contains characteristics of both epistemological stances of intersubjectivity. In other words, any practicing researcher must work back and forth between various frames of reference, and the classic pragmatic emphasis (inter-subjectivity) captures this duality.

1.3 Reflexive Integration of Research Elements (RIRE): The most common quality criteria for all types of qualitative research are credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability. In pragmatic research however, reflexivity is considered an additional integral part of the (qualitative part of) research that ensures transparency of that qualitative research. Reflexivity is often regarded as a useful tool for ensuring the standard of qualitative research. It provides transparent information about the positionality and personal values of the researcher that could affect data collection and analysis. RIRE goes beyond the researcher’s attitude and reflections towards the phenomena and/or researcher’s decisions during the research; it also involves reflections on the outcome of the research, as well as effects on the others. In short, RIRE is a mechanism that can facilitate explicit integration of quantitative or qualitative elements in MMR that aims to enhance depth of inquiry and transparency of the steps involved in MMR (Olaghere, 2022).

Kelly (2009) uses a toolbox as a metaphor for methodology that contains all the available and epistemologically appropriate tools for each research tradition to examine some reality to generate knowledge. MMR methodology is the design framework that includes research journey as well as the research elements