Triangulation in Social Research: : Qualitative and Quantitative Methods Can Really Be Mixed

Abstract

For those who teach methodology within social science departments, notably sociology, the mixing of quantitative and qualitative methods presents an ongoing problem. Recent developments in the philosophy of science have argued that the two traditions should not have a separate-but-equal status, and should instead interact. By reviewing three positions about this issue ('empiricist', constructionist, and realist) the chapter offers a review of the sociological approach now known as triangulation. The chapter refers to several empirical examples that illustrate the realist position and its strengths. The conclusion of the chapter is a more abstract review of the debate over pluralism in methodology. Triangulation, I argue, is not aimed merely at validation but at deepening and widening one's understanding. As a research aim, this one can be achieved either by a person or by a research team or group. Triangulation and pluralism both tend to support interdisciplinary research rather than a strongly bounded discipline of sociology.

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 — 609 citations exist upstream.

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