Abstract
This chapter refines the principal research question introduced initially in Chap. 1, viz: What is the relationship between Greater Seattle’s smart growth plans and territorial programs and the shifting geographies of work, home, and mobility? These questions include both quantitative and qualitative dimensions and suggest a mix-methods research approach based on a what is called here an “abductive” philosophy on inquiry. The chapter discusses this approach, highlighting the use of interview data, documentary review, census and GIS analysis, and other visualization techniques. The chapter also discuss the main data sources, including quantitative data on jobs, housing, and transportation and qualitative data that help interpret, visualize, and contextualize major quantitative trends, including interviews, site visits, analysis of public documents, newspaper and activist accounts, and drone imagery.
Mixed methods research, when undertaken from a transformative stance, is the use of qualitative and quantitative methods that allow for the collection of data about historical and contextual factors, with special emphasis on issues of power….
—Donna Mertens (cited in Johnson et al., 2007, p. 120)
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Dierwechter, Y. (2014). The spaces that smart growth makes: Sustainability, segregation, and residential change across Greater Seattle. Urban Geography, 35(5), 691–714. doi:10.1080/02723638.2014.916905.
Fainstein, S. (2005). Planning Theory and the City. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 25(2), 121–130. doi:10.1177/0739456x05279275.
Green Leigh, N., & Hoelzel, B. (2012). Smart growth’s blindside: Sustainable cities need productive urban industrial land. Journal of the American Planning Association, 78(1), 87–103.
Harwell, M. (2011). Research design in qualitative/quantitative/mixed methods. In C. Conrad & R. Serlin (Eds.), The Sage handbook for research in education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 112–133. doi:10.1177/1558689806298224.
Lucas, J. (2015). Urban governance and the American political development approach. Urban Affairs Review. doi:10.1177/1078087415620054.
Maxwell, J. A. (2012). A realist approach for qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
McPherson, M., Hirschman, A. O. (1989). In Eatwell, J., Milgate, M., & Newman, P. The New Palgrave: Economic development. London: Macmillan.
Nzeadibe, T. C., Anyadike, R. N. C., & Njoku-Tony, R. F. (2012). A mixed methods approach to vulnerability and quality of life assessment of waste picking in urban Nigeria. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 7(4), 351–370.
Orren, K., & Skowronek, S. (1996). Institutions and intercurrence: Theory building in the fullness of time Nomos (28): 111–171.
Rodgers, D. (2005). The search for American political development (review). Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 36(2), 275–276.
Thibert, J. (2015). Governing regions through collaboration: A view from North America Farnham. Surrey, UK: Ashgate.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2016). LED: New data from the states and the U.S. Census Bureau.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Dierwechter, Y. (2017). Methodology: Mixed-Methods Research Design. In: Urban Sustainability through Smart Growth. The Urban Book Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54448-9_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54448-9_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-54447-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-54448-9
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)