The bricoleur with a computer: Piecing together qualitative and quantitative data

Qualitative Health Research

Volumn 9, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 279-287

  Bazeley, Pat ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0040480636     PISSN: 10497323     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/104973299129121749     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Barbour, R. S. (1998). Mixing qualitative methods: Quality assurance or qualitative quagmire? Qualitative Health Research, 8(3), 352-361.
2. Blasius, J., & Thiessen, V. (1998, July 28). Assessing the meaning of response alternatives through multiple correspondence analysis. Paper presented at the 14th World Congress of the International Sociological Association, Montreal.
3. Caracelli, V. J., & Greene, J. C. (1997). Crafting mixed-method evaluation designs. In J. C. Greene & V. J. Caracelli (Eds.), Advances in mixed-method evaluation: The challenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms (pp. 19-32). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
4. Creswell, J. W. (1994). Research design: Qualitative & quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
5. Datta, L. (1997). A pragmatic basis for mixed-method designs. In J. C. Greene & V. J. Caracelli (Eds.), Advances in mixed-method evaluation: The challenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms (pp. 53-70). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
6. Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
7. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
8. Greene, J. C., & Caracelli, V. J. (1997). Defining and describing the paradigm issues in mixed-method evaluation. In J. C. Greene & V. J. Caracelli (Eds.), Advances in mixed-method evaluation: The challenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms (pp. 5-18). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
9. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105-117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10. Kuckartz, U. (1997). winMAX: Software for qualitative data analysis [Computer software]. Berlin: BSS.
11. Latour, B. (1987). Science in action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
12. Lynch, M. (1993). Scientific practice and ordinary action. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
13. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
14. Morgan, D. L. (1998). Practical strategies for combining qualitative and quantitative methods: Applications to health research. Qualitative Health Research, 8(3), 362-376.
15. Morse, J. M. (1991). Approaches to qualitative-quantitative methodological triangulation. Nursing Research, 40, 120-123.
16. Patton, M. Q. (1989). Utilization-focused evaluation (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
17. Qualitative Solutions and Research. (1997). Non-numerical unstructured data indexing searching and theorizing, Revision 4 (NUD*IST 4) [Computer software], Melbourne: Author.
18. Ragin, C. C. (1995). Using qualitative comparative analysis to study configurations. In U. Kelle (Ed.), Computer-aided qualitative data analysis: Theory, methods and practice (pp. 177-189). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19. Richards, T., & Richards, L. (1995). Using hierarchical categories in qualitative data analysis. In U. Kelle (Ed.), Computer-aided qualitative data analysis: Theory, methods and practice (pp. 80-95). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
20. Webb, E. J., Campbell, D. T., Schwartz, R. D., & Sechrest, L. (1966). Unobtrusive measures: Nonreactive research in the social sciences. Chicago: Rand McNally.