Respond to discussion #4

   The mixed method approach follows the qualitative and the quantitative approach and is the third design discussed in this course. The mixed method approach was first introduced in 1959, when Campbell and Disk used multimethods to study validity of psychological traits (Creswell, 2009, p. 14). This research design is also known as “multi-method, convergence, integrated, and combined [method]” (p. 14). There are three different sub-categories in the mixed method approach: the sequential, concurrent, and transformative design. It is possible to combine qualitative data and quantitative data and produce a large database which supports and reinforces each of the two designs (pp. 14 – 15). However, the mixed-method approach seems to be more than just a combination of the qualitative and the quantitative approach. Researchers of the Northwest Nazarene University (n.d.) stated that because of its “logical and intuitive appeal, [the mixed method design] provides a bridge between the qualitative and quantitative paradigms, an increasing number of researchers are utilizing mixed methods research to undertake their studies” (para. 1).  

    Further, it appears the mixed-method design is suitable for research in social services.  In this week’s video sequence, Dr. Wilson explains in essence the mixed method approach can be used in social sciences, such as psychology and PTSD related to abuse of minors. Her research focuses on stress management, and she compared hard data, such as medical records, with subjective perception of victims. The quantitative approach included data; the qualitative approach included human circumstances (para. 1-5).  The author of this week’s second essay, Onwuegbuzie (2005), supported Wilson’s claim and wrote that “mono‐method research is the biggest threat to the advancement of the social sciences” (para. 1). He seems to argue that modern research in social sciences should be based on the mixed-method approach, because he further wrote all graduate students should “learn to utilize and to appreciate both quantitative and qualitative research; in so doing, students will develop into what we term as pragmatic researchers” (para. 1).   

   There are, however, some disadvantages to the mixed-method-approach, as outlined by faculty of the South Alabama University (n.d.). First and foremost, it seems the combination of both mono research designs can, if done concurrently, be time consuming, difficult, complex, and expensive. Further, it could be the combination of both mono-designs creates conflicting data which need to be interpreted (sec. 1, para. 1-5)      

   In summary, the mixed-method design is not simply a combination of the qualitative and the quantitative approaches, but a realistic method which can serve as a bridge and reinforcement for both mono research designs. In addition, it seems that in most recent years, mixed-method research increases importance and replaces the above defined mono-methods to allow a broader, but still more practical approach. 
 

References

Creswell, J. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3 ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.  

Northwest Nazarene University. (n.d.d). Mixed-methods-research: Benefits and challenges. Retrieved from https://mixed-methods-research-nnu-group-project.wikispaces.com/Benefits+and+Challenges+of+Mixed+Methods+Research

Onwuegbuzie, A. (2005). On becoming a pragmatic researcher: the importance of combining quantitative and qualitiative research methodologies [Abstract]. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(5), 375-387.  

South Alabama University. (n.d.). Disadvantage of mixed method designs. Retrieved from www.southalabama.edu/.../Tab14-03.pd

Wilson, D: (2009f) Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). Mixed methods: An example. Baltimore, MD: Author.