Pragmatism, Factor Analysis, and the Conditional Incompatibility Thesis in Mixed Methods Research

Journal of Mixed Methods Research

Volumn 11, Issue 4, 2017, Pages 433-449

  Hathcoat, John D ^a   Meixner, Cara ^a  

^a JAMES MADISON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

conditional incompatibility; incommensurability; incompatibility; latent variables; mixed methods research; pragmatism

Indexed keywords

EID: 85029547505     PISSN: 15586898     EISSN: 15586901     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1558689815622114     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Bagozzi R. P., (2007). On the meaning of formative measurement and how it differs from reflective measurement: Comment on Howell, Breivik, and Wilcox (2007). Psychological Methods, 12, 229-237.
2. Bandalos D. L., Boehm-Kaufman M. R., (2009). Four common misconceptions in exploratory factor analysis. In Lance C. E., Vandenberg R. J., (Eds.), Statistical and methodological myths and urban legends: Doctrine, verity and fable in the organizational and social sciences (pp. 61-87). New York, NY: Routledge.
3. Bernstein R. J., (1992). The resurgence of pragmatism. Social Research, 59, 813-840.
4. Biesta G., (2010). Pragmatism and the philosophical foundations of mixed methods research. In Tashakkori A., Teddlie C., (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 95-118). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
5. Bollen K. A., (2002). Latent variables in psychology and the social sciences. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 605-634.
6. Bollen K. A., (2007). Interpretational confounding due to misspecification, not type of indicator: Comment on Howell, Brievik, and Wilcox (2007). Psychological Methods, 12, 219-228.
7. Borsboom D., (2005). Measuring the mind: Conceptual issues in contemporary psychometrics. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
8. Brown T. A., (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
9. Bryman A., (2007). Barriers to integrating quantitative and qualitative research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 8-22.
10. Cherryholmes C. H., (1999). Reading pragmatism. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
11. Coltman T., Devinney T. M., Midgley D. F., Venaik S., (2008). Formative versus reflective measurement models: Two applications of formative measurement. Journal of Business Research, 61, 1250-1262.
12. Creswell J. W., (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. London, England: Sage.
13. Creswell J. W., Plano Clark V. L., (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
14. Crocker L., Algina J., (1986). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. Orlando, FL: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
15. Crotty M., (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
16. De Ayala R. J., (2009). The theory and practice of item response theory. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
17. Denscombe M., (2008). Communities of practice: A research paradigm for the mixed methods approach. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 2(3), 270-283.
18. Denzin N. K., (2012). Triangulation 2.0. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6(2), 80-88.
19. Diamantopoulos A., Riefler P., Roth K. P., (2008). Advancing formative measurement models. Journal of Business Research, 12, 1203-1218.
20. Edwards J. R., Bagozzi R. P., (2000). On the nature and direction of relationships between constructs and measures. Psychological Methods, 5, 155-174.
21. Fetters M. D., Curry L. A., Creswell J. W., (2013). Achieving integration in mixed methods designs—Principles and practices. Health Services Research, 48(6 pt. 2), 2134-2156.
22. Gergen K. J., (2001). Psychological science in a postmodern context. American Psychologist, 56, 803-813.
23. Gorsuch R. L., (1983). Factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
24. Greene J. C., (2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley.
25. Greene J. C., (2008). Is mixed methods social inquiry a distinctive methodology?Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 2(1), 7-22.
26. Greene J. C., Caracelli V. J., (Eds.). (1997). Advances in mixed-method evaluation: The challenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms (New Directions for Evaluation No. 74). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
27. Greene J., Hall J., (2010). Dialectics and pragmatism: Being of consequence. In Tashakkori A., Teddlie A., (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 119-143). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
28. Grice J. W., (2001). Computing and evaluating factor scores. Psychological Methods, 6, 430-450.
29. Hacking I., (1982). Experimentation and scientific realism. Philosophical Topics, 13, 71-87. doi:10.5840/philtopics19821314
30. Haig B. D., (2005). Exploratory factor analysis, theory generation, and scientific method. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 40, 303-329.
31. Hanson W. E., Creswell J. W., Plano Clark V. L., Petska K. S., Creswell J. D., (2005). Mixed methods research designs in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 224-235.
32. Hempel C., (1999). A critique of operationalism. In Klee R., (Ed.), Scientific inquiry: Readings in the philosophy of science (pp. 45-54). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
33. Hood S. B., (2013). Psychological measurement and methodological realism. Erkenntnis, 78, 739-761.
34. Horwich P., (1982). Three forms of realism. Synthese, 51, 181-201.
35. Howe K. R., (1988). Against the quantitative-qualitative incompatibility thesis or dogmas die hard. Educational Researcher, 17(8), 10-16.
36. Howell R. D., Breivik E., Wilcox J. B., (2007). Reconsidering formative measurement. Psychological Methods, 12, 205-218.
37. Johnson R. B., Onwuegbuzie A. J., (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26.
38. Kamata A., Bauer D. J., (2008). A note on the relation between factor analytic and item response theory models. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 15, 136-153.
39. Leplin J., (1986). Methodological realism and scientific rationality. Philosophy of Science, 53, 31-51.
40. Leplin J., (1997). A novel defense of scientific realism. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
41. Lincoln Y. S., (2009). “What a long strange trip it’s been.. ”: Twenty-five years of qualitative and new paradigm research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16, 1-7.
42. MacKenzie S. B., (2003). The dangers of poor construct conceptualization. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31, 323-326.
43. Martela F., (2015). Fallible inquiry with ethical ends-in-view: A pragmatist philosophy of science for organizational research. Organization Studies, 36, 537-563.
44. Maxcy S. J., (2003). Pragmatic threads in mixed methods research in the social sciences: The search for multiple modes of inquiry and the end of the philosophy of formalism. In Tashakkori A., Teddlie C., (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 51-90). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
45. Maxwell J. A., (2004). Causal explanation, qualitative research, and scientific inquiry in education. Educational Researcher, 33(2), 3-11.
46. Mertens D. M., (2012). What comes first? The paradigm or the approach?Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6(4), 255-257.
47. Morgan D. L., (2007). Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: Methodological implications of combining qualitative and qualitative methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 48-76.
48. Moustakas C., (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
49. Mulaik S. A., (1987). A brief history of the philosophical foundations of exploratory factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 22, 267-305.
50. Mulaik S. A., (1990). Blurring the distinctions between component analysis and common factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 53-59.
51. Onwuegbuzie A. J., Johnson R. B., Collins K. M. T., (2009). Call for mixed analysis: A philosophical framework for combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 3, 114-139.
52. Podsakoff N. P., Shen W., Podsakoff P. M., (2006). The role of formative measurement models in strategic management research: Review, critique and implications for future research. In Ketchen D. J., Bergh D. D., (Eds.), Research methodology in strategy and management (Vol. 3, pp. 197-252). Burlington, MA: Elsevier.
53. Psillos S., (1999). Scientific realism: How science tracks truth. New York, NY: Routledge.
54. Salmon W. C., (1984). Scientific explanation and the causal structure of the world. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
55. Thompson B., (2004). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: Understanding concepts and applications. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
56. van Fraassen B. C., (1980). The scientific image. Oxford, England: Clarendon Press.
57. Widaman K. F., (1993). Common factor analysis versus principal components analysis: Differential bias in representing model parameters?Multivariate Behavioral Research, 28, 263-311.
58. Willig C., (2001). Introducing qualitative research in psychology: Adventures in theory and methods. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
59. Woodward J., (2003). Making things happen: A theory of causal explanation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.