Editors’ afterword: Toward evidence-based guidelines for reviewing mixed methods research manuscripts submitted to journals

International Journal of Qualitative Methods

Volumn 2016, Issue , 2016, Pages

  Onwuegbuzie, Anthony J ^a   Poth, Cheryl ^b  

^a SAM HOUSTON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84978288973     PISSN: None     EISSN: 16094069     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1609406916628986     Document Type: Editorial

References (58)

1. Alborz, A., & McNally, R. (2004). Developing methods for systematic reviewing in health services delivery and organization: An example from a review of access to health care for people with learning disabilities. Part 2. Evaluation of the literature—A practical guide. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 21, 227-236. doi:10.1111/j.1471-1842.2004.00543.x
2. American Educational Research Association. (2006). Standards for reporting on empirical social science research in AERA publications. Educational Researcher, 35, 33-40. doi:10.3102/0013189X035006033.
3. American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
4. Björk, B.-C., Roos, A., & Lauri, M. (2009). Scientific journal publishing: Yearly volume and open access availability. Information Research, 14, 391. Retrieved from http://InformationR.net/ir/14-1/paper391.html
5. Bryman, A., Becker, S., & Sempik, J. (2008). Quality criteria for quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods research: A view from social policy. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 11, 261-276. doi:10.1080/13645570701401644.
6. Caracelli, V., & Riggin, L. (1994). Mixed-method evaluation: Developing quality criteria through concept mapping. Evaluation Practice, 15, 139-152. doi:10.1016/0886-1633(94)90005-1.
7. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
8. Collins, K. M. T., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Jiao, Q. G. (2007). A mixed methods investigation of mixed methods sampling designs in social and health science research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1, 267-294. doi:10.1177/1558689807299526.
9. Constas, M. A. (1992). Qualitative data analysis as a public event: The documentation of category development procedures. American Educational Research Journal, 29, 253-266. doi:10.3102/00028312029002253.
10. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
11. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
12. Dellinger, A. B., & Leech, N. L. (2007). Toward a unified validation framework in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1, 309-332. doi:10.1177/1558689807306147.
13. Dyba, T., Dingsøyr, T., & Hanssen, G. K. (2007). Applying systematic reviews to diverse study types: An experience report. In Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (pp. 225-234). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society.
14. Fischer, C. C. (2011, January). A value-added role for reviewers in enhancing the quality of published research. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 226-237. doi:10.3138/jsp.42.2.226.
15. Gazni, A. (2011). Are the abstracts of high impact articles more readable? Investigating the evidence from top research institutions in the word. Journal of Information Science, 37, 273-281. doi:10.1177/0165551511401658.
16. Gilliland, S. W., & Cortina, J. M. (1997). Reviewer and editor decision making in the journal review process. Personnel Psychology, 50, 427-452. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1997.tb00914.x
17. Glaser, B. G. (1965). The constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. Social Problems, 12, 436-445. doi:10.1525/sp.1965.12.4.03a00070.
18. Glogoff, S. (1988). Reviewing the gatekeepers: A survey of referees of library journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 39, 400-407. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(198811)39:6<400::AID-ASI3>3.0.CO;2-Q
19. Greene, J. C. (2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
20. Hacking, I. (1983). Representing and intervening: Introductory topics in the philosophy of natural science. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
21. Heyvaert, M., Hannes, K., Maes, B., & Onghena, P. (2013). Critical appraisal of mixed methods studies. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 7, 302-327. doi:10.1177/1558689813479449.
22. Jinha, A. (2010). Article 50 million: An estimate of the number of scholarly articles in existence. Learned Publishing, 23, 258-263. doi:10.1087/20100308.
23. Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33, 14-26. doi:10.3102/0013189X033007014.
24. Kemper, E. A., Stringfield, S., & Teddlie, C. (2003). Mixed methods sampling strategies in social science research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 273-296). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
25. Lu, Y. (2012). Learning to be confident and capable journal reviewers: An Australian perspective. Learned Publishing, 25, 56-61. doi:10.1087/20120108.
26. Metoyer-Duran, C. (1993). The readability of published, accepted, and rejected papers appearing in college & research libraries. College & Research Libraries, 54, 517-526. doi:10.5860/crl_54_06_517.
27. Michailidis, G. (2007). Correspondence analysis. In N. J. Salkind (Ed.), Encyclopedia of measurement and statistics (pp. 191-194). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
28. Miles, M., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
29. Nastasi, B. K., Hitchcock, J. H., & Brown, L. M. (2010). An inclusive framework for conceptualizing mixed methods design typologies: Moving toward fully integrated synesrgistic research models. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 305-338). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
30. Newman, I., Ridenour, C. S., Newman, C., & DeMarco, G. M. P. (2003). A typology of research purposes and its relationship to mixed methods. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 167-188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
31. O’Cathain, A., Murphy, E., & Nicholl, J. (2008). The quality of mixed methods studies in health services research. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 13, 92-98. doi:10.1258/jhsrp.2007.007074.
32. Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2015). Mixed methods case study research. Unpublished manuscript, Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, TX.
33. Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2016). The missing link: The use of link words and phrases as a link to manuscript quality. Manuscript submitted for publication.
34. Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Collins, K. M. T. (2007). A typology of mixed methods sampling designs in social science research. The Qualitative Report, 12, 281-316. Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR12-2/onwuegbuzie2.pdf
35. Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Combs, J. P. (2010). Emergent data analysis techniques in mixed method research: A synthesis. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 397-430). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
36. Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Frels, R. K. (2016). Seven steps to a comprehensive literature review: A multimodal and cultural approach. London, England: Sage.
37. Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Frels, R. K., & Slate, J. R. (2010). Editorial: Evidence-based guidelines for avoiding the most prevalent and serious APA error in journal article submissions—The citation error. Research in the Schools, 17, i-xxiv. Retrieved from http://www.msera.org/download/RITS_17_2_Citations.pdf
38. Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Hwang, E., Frels, R. K., & Slate, J. R. (2011). Editorial: Evidence-based guidelines for avoiding reference list errors in manuscripts submitted to journals for review for publication. Research in the Schools, 18, i-xli.
39. Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Johnson, R. B. (2006). The validity issue in mixed research. Research in the Schools, 13, 48-63.
40. Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2006). Linking research questions to mixed methods data analysis procedures. The Qualitative Report, 11, 474-498. Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR113/Onwuegbuzie.pdf
41. Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Leech, N. L., Dickinson, W. B., & Zoran, A. G. (2010). Toward more rigor in focus group research in stress and coping and beyond: A new mixed research framework for collecting and analyzing focus group data. In G. S. Gates, W. H. Gmelch, &M.Wolverton, (Series Eds.) K.M. T. Collins, A. J. Onwuegbuzie, &Q. G. Jiao (Vol. Eds.), Toward a broader understanding of stress and coping: Mixed methods approaches (pp. 243-285). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
42. Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Mallette, M. H., Hwang, E., & Slate, J. R. (2013). Editorial: Evidence-based guidelines for avoiding poor readability in manuscripts submitted to journals for review for publication. Research in the Schools, 20, i-xi.
43. Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Teddlie, C. (2003). A framework for analyzing data in mixed methods research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 351-383). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
44. Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Waytowich, V. L., & Jiao, Q. G. (2006, December). Bibliographic errors in articles submitted to scholarly journals: The case for Research in the Schools. Academic Exchange Extra. Retrieved from http://asstudents.unco.edu/students/AEExtra/2006/12/index.html
45. Plano Clark, V. L., & Badiee, M. (2010). Research questions in mixed methods research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 275-304). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
46. Pluye, P., Gagnon, M. P., Griffiths, F., & Johnson-Lafleur, J. (2009, November). A proposal for concomitantly appraising qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods primary studies included in systematic mixed studies reviews. Paper presented at the 37th Annual Meeting of the North American Primary Care Research Group, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
47. Pluye, P., Grad, R. M., Dunikowski, L., & Stephenson, R. (2005). Impact of clinical information-retrieval technology on physicians: A literature review of quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods studies. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 74, 745-768. doi:10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2005.05.004.
48. Poth, C. A. (2012). Exploring the role of the mixed methods practitioner within educational research teams: A cross-case comparison of the research planning process. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 6, 313-341.
49. Provalis Research. (2015). QDA Miner (Version 4.1.23) [Computer software]. Montreal, Quebec: Author.
50. Sale, J E.M., & Brazil, K. (2004).Astrategy to identify critical appraisal criteria for primary mixed method studies. Quality & Quantity, 38, 351-365. doi:10.1023/B:QUQU.0000043126.25329.85.
51. Sandelowski, M., Voils, C. I., & Knafl, G. (2009). On quantitizing. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 3, 208-222. doi:10.1177/1558689809334210.
52. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Applied Social Research Methods Series (Vol. 46). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
53. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (Eds.). (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
54. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2010). Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
55. Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
56. Teddlie, C., & Yu, F. (2007). Mixed methods sampling: A typology with examples. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1, 77-100. doi:10.1177/2345678906292430.
57. Ware, M. (2006). Scientific publishing in transition: An overview of current developments. Bristol, England: Mark Ware Consulting. Retrieved from http://www.stm-assoc.org/2006_09_01_Scientific_Publishing_in_Transition_White_Paper.pdf
58. Yu, C. H. (2003). Misconceived relationships between logical positivism and quantitative research. Retrieved from http://creative-wisdom.com/computer/sas/positivism.pdf