Type Bryman
Alan
author names here
Social Research Methods
Chapter 27: Mixed methods
research: combining quantitative and
qualitative research
Slides authored by Tom Owens
The argument against multi-strategy
research
• The embedded methods argument:
– research methods carry epistemological and
ontological commitments
– thus multi-strategy research is not feasible or even
desirable
• The paradigm argument:
– quantitative and qualitative research are separate,
incommensurable paradigms
– thus even when combined they are incompatible
Pages 629,630
Bryman: Social Research Methods, 4th edition
Two versions of the debate
• Epistemological version
– incompatible epistemological principles of quantitative
and qualitative research
– e.g. embedded methods /paradigm arguments
• Technical version
– quantitative and qualitative research strategies can be
combined
– relative strengths and weaknesses of each for data
collection / analysis
Page 631
Bryman: Social Research Methods, 4th edition
Bryman’s classification
of approaches to mixed methods research
1.Triangulation; 2.Offset; 3.Completeness;
4.Process; 5.Different research questions;
6.Explanation; 7.Unexpected results;
8.Instrument development; 9.Sampling;
10.Credibility; 11.Context; 12.Illustration;
13.Utility; 14.Confirm and discover;
15.Diversity of views; 16.Enhancement.
Thinking deeply 27.3
Pages 633,634
Bryman: Social Research Methods, 4th edition
Triangulation
– Results of one method/research strategy can be crosschecked against the results of another
– e.g. Silva and Wright (2008): Cultural Capital and
Social Exclusion
• qualitative interviews conducted to ‘check and correct’
the quantitative data
– Planned or unplanned
– What happens if results are inconsistent?
• treat one set of results as definitive
• but better to re-examine the data
Pages 635,636
Bryman: Social Research Methods, 4th edition
Offset and Completeness
– When neither research strategy can provide all the
answers
– e.g. particular methods do not provide access to
required information / groups of people
– Quantitative and qualitative methods both
compensate for the other’s weaknesses
– e.g. when ethnographers use structured
interviewing or self-completion questionnaires,
because not everything of research interest is
accessible through observation.
Pages 636
Bryman: Social Research Methods, 4th edition
Process
 Quantitative research can uncover regularities
 Qualitative research reveals social processes
 e.g. Holdsworth (2006) used a web-based
questionnaire survey to provide a broad picture
of differences between university students living at
home and living away from home and qualitative
interviews and focus groups to explore the
processes that lie behind those differences.
Pages 639,640
Bryman: Social Research Methods, 4th edition
Different research questions
– Quantitative research is better suited to the study of ‘macro’
phenomena (such as social mobility)
– Qualitative research is better suited to the study of ‘micro’
phenomena (such as small group interaction)
– Different phases in a research study suit one strategy more
than another, because of the different aspects studied
– Different kinds of research questions are better answered by
one strategy more than another
– Leading to choices of methods – and how they should be
interweaved - in mixed methods research
Pages 640
Bryman: Social Research Methods, 4th edition
Explanation
Quantitative researchers constantly
face the problem of explaining the
relationships between variables.
Qualitative research can discover the
presence and role of intervening
variables.
Pages 641, 642
Bryman: Social Research Methods, 4th edition
Unexpected results
– Research outcomes can yield unexpected results,
inconsistent data and puzzling surprises.
– Sometimes anticipated results fail to materialize, such
that findings are inconsistent with the research
hypothesis,
– So using a second method can help to explain data
(unplanned triangulation),
– Or can provide a ‘salvage operation’ as an alternative
to reconstructing the hypothesis or simply filing them
away.
Pages 642
Bryman: Social Research Methods, 4th edition
Instrument development
By aiding measurement: focus groups and
semi-structured interviews can provide the
measurements of concepts to be tested in
quantitative research, leading to much
more appropriate specification of
questions.
Pages 642-644
Bryman: Social Research Methods, 4th edition
Sampling
By providing a basis for representative
sampling in qualitative research:
samples of people or companies, with
particular sets of characteristics, for indepth interviewing or case study.
Pages 644,645
Bryman: Social Research Methods, 4th edition
Credibility
 Some quantification of findings from
qualitative research can help to make the
study seem more believable
 Mixed methods research is often done
because of its appeal to funders and
sponsors
Page 645
Bryman: Social Research Methods, 4th edition
Diversity of views
Quantitative methods test researcher’s
theories;
Qualitative methods make participants’
meanings the center of attention;
Some research studies require both
perspectives.
Pages 647,648
Bryman: Social Research Methods, 4th edition
Morgan’s (1998) classification
The priority decision: How far is a qualitative or a
quantitative method the principal data-gathering tool or
do they have equal weight?
The sequence decision: Which method precedes
which? In other words, does the qualitative method
precede the quantitative one or vice versa or is the
data collection associated with each method
concurrent?
Thinking deeply 27.2
Page 631
Bryman: Social Research Methods, 4th edition
Morgan’s types of mixed methods in
terms of priority and sequence
Figure 27.1
Page 632
Bryman: Social Research Methods, 4th edition
Reflections on mixed methods research
• Increasingly common in social research
– research methods seen as autonomous
– softening of feminist attitudes to
quantification
• Not inherently superior to mono-method or
mono-strategy research
Pages 649,650
Bryman: Social Research Methods, 4th edition
Indicators of quality in
mixed methods research
Is it well designed and conducted?
Are the methods appropriate to the research questions?
Is there an explicit rationale for the mixture?
Are the separate components integrated?
Is there a detailed account of the entire research process?
Are resources spread too thinly, or unevenly?
Are the researchers more skilled in one strategy than
another?
Page 649
Bryman: Social Research Methods, 4th edition