Feminist Approaches to Triangulation: Uncovering Subjugated Knowledge and Fostering Social Change in Mixed Methods Research

Journal of Mixed Methods Research

Volumn 6, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 137-146

  Hesse Biber, Sharlene ^a  

^a BOSTON COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

case studies; feminist research; mixed methods; triangulation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84861848314     PISSN: 15586898     EISSN: 15586901     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1558689812437184     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Allen D.From boundary concept to boundary object: The practice and politics of care pathway development.Social Science & Medicine. 2009;69:354-361.
2. Bahl S.,Milne G. R.Handbook of qualitative research methods in marketing. Belk R. W., ed. Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar; 2006:198-218.
3. Bryman A.Advances in mixed methods research. Bergman M. M., ed. London, England: SAGE; 2008:89-100.
4. Campbell D. T.,Fiske D. W.Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix.Psychological Bulletin. 1959;56:81-105.
5. Creswell J. W.,Plano Clark V. I.,Gutmann M.,Hanson W.Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Tashakkori A.Teddlie C., ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2003:209-240.
6. Denzin N. K.The research act in sociology: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. Denzin N. K., ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 1970:297-313.
7. Denzin N. K.The research act: A theoretical introduction. 1989). The research act: A theoretical introduction (3rd ed.). Englewood cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Englewood cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1989:.
8. Eichler M.,Lapointe J.On the treatment of the sexes in research. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada; 1985:.
9. Flick U.Triangulation revisited: Strategy of validation or alternative?.Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour. 1992;22:175-197.
10. Giddings L. S.Mixed methods research: Positivism dressed in drag?.Journal of Research in Nursing. 2006;11:195-203.
11. Greene J. C.,Caracelli V. J.,Graham W. F.Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 1989;11:255-74.
12. Haraway D.Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective.Feminist Studies. 1988;14:575-599.
13. Harding S.Whose science? Whose knowledge? Thinking from women's lives. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press; 1991:.
14. Hesse-Biber S. N.Handbook of feminist research: Theory and praxis. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2007:.
15. Hesse-Biber S. N.Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. 2010a). Feminist approaches to mixed methods research: Linking theory and praxis. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 169-192). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Tashakkori A.Teddlie C., ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2010a:169-192.
16. Hesse-Biber S. N.New York, NY: Guilford Press; 2010b:.
17. Löwy I.The strength of loose concepts-boundary concepts, federative experimental strategies and disciplinary growth: The case of immunology.History of Science. 1992;30:371-396.
18. Miller S. I.,Gatta J. L.The use of mixed methods models and designs in the human sciences: Problems and prospects.Quality & Quantity. 2006;40:595-610.
19. Nightingale A.A feminist in the forest: Situated knowledges and mixing methods in natural resource management.ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies. 2003;2 (1): 77-90.
20. Nightingale A.Nature-society and development: Social, cultural and ecological change in Nepal.Geoforum. 2003;34 (4): 525-540.
21. Nightingale A.The nature of gender: Work, gender, and environment.Society and Space. 2006;24:165-185.
22. Perlesz A.,Lindsay J.Methodological triangulation in researching families: Making sense of dissonant data.International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 2003;6 (1): 25-40.
23. Sale J. E. M.,Lohfeld L. H.,Brazil K.Revisiting the quantitative-qualitative debate: Implications for mixed-methods research.Quality & Quantity. 2002;36:43-53.
24. Sandelowski M.,Volis C. I.,Knafl G.On quantizing.Journal of Mixed Methods Research. 2009;3 (3): 208-222.
25. Seale C.The quality of qualitative research. London, England: SAGE; 1999:.
26. Sherif C. W.Feminism and methodology. Harding S., ed. Bloomington: Indiana University Press; 1987:37-56.
27. Tuana N.The weaker the seed: The sexist bias of reproductive theory.Hypatia. 1988;3:147-171.
28. Vikström L.Different sources, different answers: Aspects of women's work in Sundvall, Sweden, 1860-1893.Interchange. 2003;34:241-259.
29. Vikström L.Identifying dissonant and complementary data on women through the triangulation of historical sources.International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 2010;13:211-221.