Evolving Trends in Qualitative Research: Advances in Mixed-Method Design

Abstract

Q ualitative methods evolve in particular areas, in rushes of development fol- lowing long periods of diminished activity.The latest burst of activity is in the area of mixed-method design, more specifically in the combined use of qualitative and quantitative strategies within a single data set.As I write this, I feel as though I am running the risk of heresy.I have argued fervently for years that qualitative research can stand alone and is rigorous, and that its theories are valid and do not need quantitative testing.Qualitative results inform and guide practice, dictate interventions, and produce policy.Qualitative methods can be reliably and validly used to evaluate, to document mechanisms of change microanalytically, to record macrolevel changes in society.Why, then, the aboutface and the sudden interest in quantifying qualitative data?It is the sudden faddishness of mixed-method design that brings these many awkward and unanswered issues to the fore.Granting agencies are placing calls for mixed-method design research, even wanting to fund it, and workshops on this topic are being scheduled all over the country.The problem is, mixed-method designs raise questions that have not been clearly addressed and reveal many methodological issues that need urgently to be resolved.Mixed-method research consists of designs that are either primarily qualitative or quantitative and that incorporate strategies of the other method (either qualitative or quantitative) into the same research project.Although researchers argue that incorporating, for instance, qualitative strategies into quantitative research increases its validity, it is in this area that the largest abuses of qualitative data are occurring, largely because methodological principles have not been developed.Qualitative researchers, therefore, have a choice: We can take control, or we can ignore this trend; we can step aside and let other researchers establish rules for the use of qualitative data, or we ourselves can develop sound principles of appropriate use.Mixing methods raises some important and basic questions.First, it forces us to consider what are qualitative data?I disagree with Glaser (1998) that "everything is data" (p.8).Rather, I maintain that qualitative data must be deliberately collected, so that anything may become data.If serendipitous events demand to be included as data, they must first be transformed into data: recorded as text, documented, and then analyzed, and so forth.All data are subject to considerations of such criteria as their relevance to the central question, form and level of abstraction, adequacy and appropriateness, accuracy, and verification (given, of course, that the appropriate ethical permissions are attended to access those data).

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 87 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.