Securing a Place at the Table: A Review and Extension of Legitimation Criteria for the Conduct of Mixed Research

American Behavioral Scientist

Volumn 56, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 849-865

  Collins, Kathleen M T ^a   Onwuegbuzie, Anthony J ^b   Johnson, R Burke ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS   (United States)

^b Sam Houston State University   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH ALABAMA   (United States)

Author keywords

legitimation; mixed methods research; mixed research; standards; validity

Indexed keywords

EID: 84860751703     PISSN: 00027642     EISSN: 15523381     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0002764211433799     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Standards for reporting on empirical social science research in AERA publications.Educational Researcher. 2006;35 (6): 33-40.
2. Standards for reporting on humanities-oriented research in AERA publications.Educational Researcher. 2009;38:481-486.
3. Bryman A.Paradigm peace and the implications for quality.International Journal Social Science Methodology. 2006;9:111-126.
4. Caracelli V. J.,Riggin L. J. C.Mixed-method evaluation: Developing quality criteria through concept mapping.Evaluation Practice. 1994;15:139-152.
5. Creswell J. W.,Plano Clark V. L.Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2007:.
6. Dellinger A. B.,Leech N. L.Toward a unified validation framework in mixed methods research.Journal of Mixed Methods Research. 2007;1:309-332.
7. Denscombe M.Communities of practice: A research paradigm for the mixed methods approach.Journal of Mixed Methods Research. 2008;2:270-283.
8. Greene J. C.Toward a methodology of mixed methods social inquiry.Research in the Schools. 2006;13 (1): 93-98.
9. Greene J. C.Mixed methods in social inquiry. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2007:.
10. Greene J. C.Is mixed methods social inquiry a distinctive methodology?.Journal of Mixed Methods Research. 2008;2:7-22.
11. Hall B.,Howard K.A synergistic approach: Conducting mixed methods research with typological and systemic design considerations.Journal of Mixed Methods Research. 2008;2:248-269.
12. Johnson R. B.Hesse-Biber S. J.Dialectical pluralism: A metaparadigm to help us hear and "combine" our valued differences. Plenary conducted at the meeting of Seventh International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry; 2011University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; 2011.
13. Johnson R. B.,Gray R.Sage handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. 2010). A history of philosophical and theoretical issues for mixed methods research. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 69-94). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Tashakkori A.Teddlie C., ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2010:69-94.
14. Johnson R. B.,Onwuegbuzie A. J.Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come.Educational Researcher. 2004;33 (7): 14-26.
15. Johnson R. B.,Onwuegbuzie A. J.,Turner L. A.Toward a definition of mixed methods research.Journal of Mixed Methods Research. 2007;1:112-133.
16. Johnson R. B.,Turner L. A.Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Tashakkori A.Teddlie C., ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2003:297-319.
17. Lather P.Issues of validity in openly ideological research: Between a rock and a soft place.Interchange. 1986;17:63-84.
18. Morgan D. L.Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: Methodological implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods.Journal of Mixed Methods Research. 2007;1:48-76.
19. O'Cathain A.Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. 2010). Assessing the quality of mixed methods research: Towards a comprehensive framework. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 531-555). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Tashakkori A.Teddlie C., ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2010:531-555.
20. O'Cathain A.,Murphy E.,Nicholl J.The quality of mixed methods studies in health services research.Journal of Health Services Research Policy. 2008;13:92-98.
21. Onwuegbuzie A. J.,Johnson R. B.The validity issue in mixed research.Research in the Schools. 2006;13 (1): 48-63.
22. Onwuegbuzie A. J.,Johnson R. B.,Collins K. M. T.A framework for assessing legitimation in mixed research.Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology. 2011;45:1253-1271.
23. Patton M. Q.Qualitative research and evaluation metho. 2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2002:.
24. Sale J. E. M.,Brazil K.A strategy to identify critical appraisal criteria for primary mixed method studies.Quality and Quantity. 2004;38:351-365.
25. Tashakkori A.,Teddlie C.Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Tashakkori A.Teddlie C., ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2003a:ix-xv.
26. Tashakkori A.,Teddlie C.Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Tashakkori A.Teddlie C., ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2003b:671-701.
27. Tashakkori A.,Teddlie C.Advances in mixed methods research: Theories and applications. Bergman M., ed. London: SAGE; 2008:101-119.
28. Teddlie C.,Tashakkori A.Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2009:.