Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Nature of Mixed Methods Research

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences

Abstract

Mixed methods research (MMR) has gained traction in the social sciences, evolving as a genre of inquiry that intentionally and systematically connects qualitative and quantitative methods in order to address substantive questions. Mixed methods projects are often preplanned, resulting in a fixed design. MMR can also be emergent; a researcher may craft a follow-up qualitative study, for instance, to make meaning of elusive quantitative findings. We unveil the nature of mixed methods research in the context of philosophical positions (e.g., constructivism, postpositivism, advocacy, and pragmatism) with critical attention to successes and challenges (e.g., incompatibility, conditional incompatibility, integration). Drawing from examples in the health social sciences, we showcase major mixed methods approaches – such as convergent parallel, exploratory, explanatory, intervention, and hybrid designs – while attending to notions of mixing, timing, and weighting data. Criticisms and accolades regarding MMR are thread throughout the chapter, given their parallels to phases in research design. Pivotally, the chapter also addresses ways that readers can “get started” on their own mixed methods projects.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 649.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 849.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Anderson G, Herr K. The action research dissertation: a guide for students and faculty. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argyris C, Putnam R, Smith DM. Action science. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asante KO, Meyer-Weitz A, Petersen I. Mental health and health risk behaviours of homeless adolescents and youth: a mixed methods study. Child Youth Care Forum. 2016;45:433–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biesta G. Pragmatism and the philosophical foundations of mixed methods research. In: Tashakkori A, Teddlie C, editors. Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2010. p. 95–118.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bowers BJ. Grounded theory. In: Sarter B, editor. Paths to knowledge: innovative research methods for nursing. New York: National League for Nursing; 1988. p. 33–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryman A. Quantity and quality in social research. London: Routledge; 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryman A. Barriers to integrating quantitative and qualitative research. J Mix Method Res. 2007;1(1):8–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell DT, Fiske DW. Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychol Bull. 1959;56:81–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz K. Constructing grounded theory: a practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cherryholmes CH. Reading pragmatism. New York: Teachers College Press; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell J. Research design: qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. 4th ed. London: Sage; 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell JW. A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell JW, Klassen AC, Plano Clark VL, Smith KC. Best practices for mixed methods research in the health sciences. Bethesda: National Institutes of Health; 2011.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell JW, Plano Clark VL. Designing and conducting mixed methods research. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell JW, Plano Clark VL. Designing and conducting mixed methods research. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crotty M. The foundations of social research: meaning and perspective in the research process. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Curry LA, Brault MA, Linnander EL, McNatt Z, Brewster AL, Cherlin E, Peterson Fleiger S, Ting HH, Bradley EH. Influencing organisational culture to improve hospital performance in care of patients with acute myocardial infarction: a mixed-methods intervention study. BMJ Quality & Safety. 2017;0:1–11. Retrieved from http://qualitysafety.bmj.com

    Google Scholar 

  • Denscombe M. Communities of practice: a research paradigm for the mixed methods approach. J Mix Method Res. 2008;2(3):270–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denzin NK. The research act: a theoretical introduction to sociological methods. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freshwater D. Reading mixed methods research: contexts for criticism. J Mix Method Res. 2007;1(2):134–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Field TA, Beeson ET, Jones LK. Neuroscience-informed cognitive-behavior therapy in clinical practice: A preliminary study. Journal of Mental Health Counseling. 2016;38:139–154. https://doi.org/10.17744/mehc.28.2.05

  • Field TA, Beeson ET, Jones LK, Miller R. Counselor allegiance and client expectancy in neuroscience-informed cognitive-behavior therapy: A 12-month qualitative follow-up. Journal of Mental Health Counseling. 2017;39:351–365. https://doi.org/10.17744/mehc.39.4.06

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glascoe FP. Parents’ evaluation of developmental status. Nashville: Ellsworth and Vandermeer Press 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddings LS. Mixed-methods research: positivism dressed in drag? J Res Nurs. 2006;11(3):195–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene JC. Mixed methods in social inquiry. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene JC, Caracelli VJ, editors. Advances in mixed-method evaluation: the challenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms: new directions for evaluation, 74. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halcomb EJ, Andrew S, Brannen J. Introduction to mixed methods research for nursing and the health sciences. In: Andrew S, Halcomb EJ, editors. Mixed methods research for nursing and the health sciences. Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell; 2009. p. 3–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen CE, Okoloko E, Ogynbajo A, North A, Niccolai LM. Acceptability of school-based health centers for human papillomavirus vaccination visits: a mixed-methods study. J Sch Health. 2017;87:705–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanson WE, Creswell JW, Plano Clark VL, Petska KS, Creswell JD. Mixed methods research designs in counseling psychology. J Couns Psychol. 2005;52(2):224–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hathcoat JD, Meixner C. Pragmatism, factor analysis, and the conditional incompatibility thesis in mixed methods research. J Mix Method Res. 2017;11(4):433–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hathcoat JD, Nicholas M. Epistemology. In: Coghlan D, Brydon-Miller M, editors. The Sage encyclopedia of action research (“E” entries). Washington, DC: Sage; 2014. p. 285–332.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmes CA. Mixed (up) methods, methodology and interpretive frameworks. Paper presented at the Mixed Methods Conference, Cambridge, UK; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howe KR. Against the quantitative-qualitative incompatibility thesis or dogmas die hard. Educ Res. 1988;17:10–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jick TD. Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: triangulation in action. Adm Sci Q. 1979;24:602–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson RB, Onwuegbuzie AJ. Mixed methods research: a research paradigm whose time has come. Educ Res. 2004;33(7):14–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kovacs Burns K, Bellows M, Eigenseher C, Jackson K, Gallivan J, Rees J. Exploring patient engagement practices and resources within a health care system: applying a multi-phased mixed methods knowledge mobilization approach. Int J Mult Res Appro. 2014;8(2):233–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kukla M, Bonfils KA, Salyers MP. Factors impacting work success in veterans with mental health disorders: a veteran-focused mixed methods pilot study. J Vocat Rehabil. 2015;43(2015):51–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lanza R, Berman B. Biocentrism: how life and consciousness are the keys to understanding the true nature of the universe. Dallas: BenBella Books, Inc.; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meixner C, O’Donoghue CR, Witt M. Accessing crisis intervention services after brain injury: a mixed methods study. Rehabil Psychol. 2013;58(4):377–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morse JM, Niehaus L. Mixed method design: principles and procedures. New York: Taylor & Francis; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholas M, Hathcoat JD. Ontology. In: Coghlan D, Brydon-Miller M, editors. The sage Encyclopedia of action research (“O” entries). Washington, DC: Sage; 2014. p. 285–332.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reichardt CS, Rallis SF, editors. The qualitative-quantitative debate: new perspectives. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  • Restall G, Borton B. Parents’ concerns about their children’s development at school entry. Child Care Health Dev. 2009;36(2):208–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rossman GB, Wilson BL. Numbers and words: combining quantitative and qualitative methods in a single large-scale evaluation study. Eval Rev. 1985;9(5):627–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sieber SD. The integration of fieldwork and survey methods. Am J Sociol. 1973;78:1335–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tashakkori A, Teddlie C, editors. Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Graduate Psychology, Center for Faculty Innovation, James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA, USA

    Cara Meixner

  2. Department of Graduate Psychology, Center for Assessment and Research Studies, James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA, USA

    John D. Hathcoat

Authors
  1. Cara Meixner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John D. Hathcoat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cara Meixner .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Science and Health, Western Sydney University, Penrith, NSW, Australia

    Pranee Liamputtong

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Meixner, C., Hathcoat, J.D. (2019). The Nature of Mixed Methods Research. In: Liamputtong, P. (eds) Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5251-4_76

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation