Putting the human back in "human research methodology": The researcher in mixed methods research

Journal of Mixed Methods Research

Volumn 4, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 271-277

  Tashakkori, Abbas ^a   Teddlie, Charles ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS   (United States)

^b LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77956799041     PISSN: 15586898     EISSN: 15586901     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1558689810382532     Document Type: Editorial

References (24)

1. Bamberger, M., Rao, V., & Woolcock, M. (2010). Using mixed methods in monitoring and evaluation: Experiences from international development. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 613-641). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
2. Biesta, G. (2010). Pragmatism and the philosophical foundations of mixed methods research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 95-117). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
3. Christ, T. (2010). Teaching mixed methods and action research: Pedagogical, practical, and evaluative considerations. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 643-676). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
4. Creswell, J.W. (2010). Mapping the developing landscape of mixed methods research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 45-68). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
5. Fabes, R.A., Martin, C.L., Hanish, L.D., & Updegraff, K.A. (2000). Criteria for evaluating the significance of developmental research in the twenty-first century: Force and counterforce. Child Development, 71, 212-221.
6. Gergen, K.J. (1973). Social psychology as history. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 26, 309-320.
7. Greene, J.C. (2008). Is mixed methods social inquiry a distinctive methodology? Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 2(1), 7-22.
8. Howe, K.R. (1988). Against the quantitative-qualitative incompatibility thesis or dogmas die hard. Educational Researcher, 17, 10-16.
9. Jang, E.E., McDougall, D.E., Pollon, D., Herbert, M., & Russell, P. (2008). Integrative mixed methods data analytic strategies in research on school success in challenging circumstances. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 2(2), 221-247.
10. Johnson, R.B., & Gray, R. (2010). A history of philosophical and theoretical issues for mixed methods research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 69-94). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
11. Kerlinger, R.N. & Lee, H.B. (2000). Foundations of behavioral research. Orlando, FL: Harcourt.
12. Lieber, E., & Weisner, T.S. (2010). Meeting the practical challenges of mixed methods research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 559-579). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
13. Mertens, D.M. (2010). Divergence and mixed methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(1), 3-5.
14. Niglas, K. (2010). The multidimensional model of research methodology: An integrated set of continua. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 215-236). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
15. Plano Clark, V.L., & Badiee, M. (2010). Research questions in mixed methods research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 275-304). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
16. Sammons, P. (2010). The contribution of mixed methods to recent research on educational effectiveness. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 697-723). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
17. Shulha, L., & Wilson, R. (2003). Collaborative mixed methods research. In A.Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 639-670). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
18. Song, M., Sandelowski, M., & Happ, M.B. (2010). Current practices and emerging trends in conducting mixed methods intervention studies. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 725-747). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
19. Sternberg, R.J., Forsythe, G.B., Hedlund, J., Horvarth, J.A., Wagner, R.K., Williams, W.M.,. . . Grigorenko, E.L. (2000). Practical intelligence in everyday life. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
20. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining the qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
21. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2003). The past and future of mixed methods research: From data triangulation to mixed model designs. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 671-702). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
22. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (Eds.). (2010). Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
23. Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2009). The foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative techniques in the social and behavioral sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
24. Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2010). Overview of contemporary issues in mixed methods research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 1-41). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.