Define Mixed Methods "Use of both qualitative and quantitative methods to study phenomena. These two sets of methods can be used simultaneously or at different stages of the same study." from www.uwex.edu/ces/tobaccoeval/glossary.html
The difference between SAD and MAD is SAD or single approach design is when extra qualitative and/or quantitative strategies are employed to get a more detailed and enhance research quality whereas MAD or mixed approach design requires you to be able to tell the difference between research strategies and research approach.
After reading the blog online, here are my options on multi-method research and mixed-method research, multi-method is when use both qualitative and quantitative data but you treat them as two separate data sets, so you analyse them as qualitative and quantitative. Compared to mixed when you mix the finds of both data sets and compare them together as a whole.
In my option they both have their good points and both bad points, multi-method research allows you to see clearly the different methods that were used and the results that were found, but mixed-method research allows you to compare the different data’s that you get and create a move overall and concrete view on a topic area.
Qualitative and quantitative studies have their strengths and weaknesses so it would seem logical that combining these methods is logical and optimal (when used with the correct study). This is what I thought one week ago, but today “not so much”. Earlier I posed that it seemed with such limitations in other strategies of inquiry it seems that a mixed methods study is the best of both worlds. While researching I viewed a statement and it is as follows: “‘… using multiple and diverse methods is a good idea, but is not automatically good science” (Greene & Caricelli, 1997, p. 74). I also wonder if sometimes we make ideas harder than they have to be by overthinking.
ReplyDeleteFirst, there are clear distinctions when referring to mixed methods. In the glossary of mixed methods terms and research provided by Tashakkori and Teddlie's 2003, Handbook of mixed methods in the social and behavioral research, there are a plethora of terms that explain differences in mixed methods.
As one might deduce there are many methods for handling a mixture of quantitative and qualitative studies. Mixed methods are more than combining QUAL and QUAN together, it seems logical to say it depends on how a researcher combines the methods. From the terms above, it is also clear there is a distinction between mixed and multi methods. To paraphrase it seems that multi method studies use different methods, but the research paradigm is one constant underlying research paradigm (beliefs) (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2004). In contrast, mixed method studies have many or more than one paradigm. These terms and differences can be very complicated in fact, Tashakkori & Teddlie (2003), provided more clarification and knowledge about the multiple strategy studies of inquiry as well as stating there is a lack of knowledge in the field of mixed methods. The researchers also refer to mixed methods as, “the third paradigm that is separate from QUAN (positivist), and QUAL (constructivist). I feel very inadequate to debate or agree because of my novice level, but it seems the study might determine the view and strategy.
The next set of challenges are how the methods are combined. Researchers are able to use “information at the same time (concurrently) or after one method is completed (sequentially)… it is argued structuring this component has implications on research and the results (Teddlie & Tashakorri, 2012). Another issue that has been brought up is the special skills researchers need to carry out a mixed method study. I thought this was an issue that seemed “to be a snobbish view” because I expect my understanding of methods to be robust when I write my dissertation (and of course after as a researcher in the field). The fact is, there is an exponential number of possibilities when conducting mixed methods research. When using a mixed strategy there is more to learn, which may result in more knowledge being acquired or more mistakes made. The decision to use a mixed method study should (I use “should” loosely as it infers I am the authority on the subject) be chosen after analyzing the field of study, deciding on paradigms, ontology, and vetting of skills required. A mixed methods study completed effectively is important for a field of study, but there are many challenges as there are rewards.
References
Greene, J., & Caricelli, V. (1997). Advances in mixed-method evaluation: The challenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms. San Fransisco, California, United States of America: Jossey-foss. Retrieved May 4, 2013
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2004). FIU: Handbook of mixed methods in the social and behavioral research. Retrieved May 8, 2013, from FIU: http://www2.fiu.edu/~bridges/glossary.htm
Teddlie, C., & Tashakorri, C. (2012, June). Common “Core” Characteristics of Mixed Methods Research A Review of Critical Issues and Call for Greater Convergence. American Behavioral Scientist, 56(6), 774-788. doi:10.1177/0002764211433795
Nice Effort
ReplyDelete