How the novice researcher can make sense of mixed methods designs

International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches

Volumn 3, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 34-46

  Niglas, Katrin ^a  

^a TALLINN UNIVERSITY   (Estonia)

Author keywords

Empirical research; Mixed methods designs; Research methods

Indexed keywords

EID: 67650165695     PISSN: 18340806     EISSN: 18340814     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5172/mra.455.3.1.34     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Brannen J (1992) Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches: an overview. In Brannen J (ed.) Mixing Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Research. Aldershot: Avebury.
2. Brewer J and Hunter A (1989) Multimethod Research: A Synthesis ofStyles. Newbury Park CA: Sage.
3. Brown S, Riddell S and Duffield J (1996). Possibilities and problems of small-scale studies to unpack the findings of large-scale studies of school effectiveness. In Gray J, Reynolds D, Fitz-Gibon C and Jesson D (eds) Merging traditions: The future of research on school effectiveness and school improvement. London: Cassell.
4. Bryman A (1988) Quantity and Quality in Social Research. London: Unwin Hyman.
5. Bryman A (2007) The Research Question in Social Research: What is its Role? International Journal of Social Research Methodology 10(1): 5-20.
6. Campbell DT and Fiske DW (1959) Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-mul-timethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin 65: 81-105.
7. Campbell DT and Stanley JC (1963) Experimental and Quasi-experimental Designs for Research on Teaching. In Gage NL (ed.) Handbook of Research on Teaching, Chicago: Rand McNally.
8. Campbell DT (1957) Factors relevant to the validity of experiments in social settings. Psychological Bulletin 54(4): 297-312.
9. Carey JW (1993) Linking qualitative and quantitative methods: Integrating cultural factors into public health. Qualitative Health Research 3: 298-318.
10. Creswell JW (1995) Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.
11. Creswell JW and Plano Clark VL (2007) Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
12. Earley MA (2007) Developing a Syllabus for a Mixed-Methods Research Course. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 10(2): 145-162.
13. Eckeberg DL and Hill L (1980) The Paradigm Concept and Sociology: A Critical Review. In Guttin G (ed.) Paradigm and Revolutions. Apprisals and Applications of Thomas Kuhns Philosophy of Science. Notre Dame, London: University of Notre Dame Press.
14. Edelson DC (2002) Design Research: What We Learn When We Engage in Design. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 11(1): 105-121.
15. Guba EG and Lincoln YS (1989) Fourth Generation Evaluation. London: Sage.
16. Guba EG and Lincoln YS (1994) Competing Paradigms in Qualitative Research. In Denzin NK and Lincoln YS (eds) Handbook of Qualitative Research. London: Sage, pp. 105-117.
17. Hammersley M (1992) What’s Wrong with Ethnography? Methodological Explorations. London: Routlege.
18. Howe K (1988) Against the Quantitative-qualitative Incompatibility Thesis or Dogmas die Hard. Educational Researcher 17(8): 10-16.
19. Lincoln YS and Guba EG (1985) Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills CA: Sage.
20. Mark MM and Shotland RL (1987) Alternative models for the use of multiple methods. In Mark MM and Shotland RL (eds) Multiple methods in program evaluation: New Directions for Program Evaluation 35. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, pp. 95-100.
21. Maxwell JA and Loomis DM (2003) Mixed Methods Design: An Alternative Approach. In Tashakkori A and Teddlie C (eds) Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioural research. Thousand Oaks: SAGE, pp. 209-240.
22. Maxwell JA, Bashook PG and Sandlow CJ (1986) Combining ethnographic and experimental methods in educational evaluation. In Fetterman DM and Pitman MA (eds) Educational evaluation: Ethnography in theory, practice, and politics. Beverly Hills CA: Sage.
23. McNamara DR (1979) Paradigm Lost: Thomas Kuhn and Educational Research. British Educational Research Journal 5(2): 167-173.
24. Niglas K (1999a) Quantitative and Qualitative Inquiry in Educational Research: is there a paradigmatic difference between them? Masters Thesis. Cambridge University, Faculty of Education.
25. Niglas K (1999b) Quantitative and Qualitative Inquiry in Educational Research: is there a paradigmatic difference between them? Paper given at ECER99, Lahti, 22-25 September 1999; Education Line. Available at http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/.
26. Niglas K (2004) The Combined Use of Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Educational Research. Tallinna Pedagoogikaulikooli Sotsiaal-teaduste Dissertatsioonid. Tallinn:TPU Kirjastus. Available at http://www.tlulib.ee/files/arts/24/niglaf737ff0eb699f90626303a2ef1fa930f.pdf
27. Niglas K (2007). Introducing the quantitative-qualitative continuum: An alternative view on teaching research methods courses. In Murtonen M, Rautopuro J and Vaisanen P (eds) Learning and teaching of research methods at university pp. 185-203, Turku: Finnish Educational Research Association, Painosalama OY. Available at Education Line http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol
28. Onwuegbuzie AJ, Slate JR, Leech NL, Collins KM (2007) Conducting mixed analyses: A general typology. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches 1(1): 4-17.
29. Patton MQ (1980) Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park CA: Sage.
30. Reichardt CS and Cook TD (1979) Beyond Qualitative versus Quantitative Methods. In Cook TD and Reichardt CS (eds) Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Evaluation Research. Beverly Hills CA: Sage, pp. 7-32.
31. Smith JK and Heshusius L (1986) Closing Down the Conversation: the End of the Quantitative-Qualitative Debate among Educational Inquirers. Educational Researcher 15(1): 4-12.
32. Smith JK (1983) Quantitative versus Qualitative Research: An Attempt to Clarify the Issue. Educational Researcher 12(3): 6-13.
33. Smith JK (1989) The Nature of Social and Educational Inquiry. Norwood NJ: Ablex.
34. Tashakkori A and Teddlie C (1998) Mixed Methodology: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.
35. Tashakkori A and Teddlie C (2003a) Major Issues and Controversies in the Use of Mixed Methods in the Social and Behavioural Sciences. In Tashakkori A and Teddlie C (eds) Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioural research. Thousand Oaks: SAGE, pp. 3-50.
36. Tashakkori A and Teddlie C (2003b) The Past and Future of Mixed Methods Research: From Data Triangulation to Mixed Model Designs. In Tashakkori A and Teddlie C (eds) Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioural research. Thousand Oaks: SAGE, pp. 671-702.
37. Tashakkori A and Teddlie C (eds) (2003) Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioural research. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
38. Tooley J (1998) Educational Research: a Critique: a Survey of Published Educational Research. London: Office for Standards in Education.