Journal of Advances in Education Research
Not a One-Size-Fits-All Methodology: A Survey of Mixed Methods
Download PDF (142.9 KB) PP. 97 - 102 Pub. Date: May 18, 2017
Author(s)
- Liping Wei*
School of Education, Health Professions, and Human Development University of Houston-Victoria, TX, USA - Hsin-Hui Lin
School of Education, Health Professions, and Human Development University of Houston-Victoria, TX, USA
Abstract
Keywords
References
[1] Ayer, A. J. (1959). Logical positivism. New York: The Free Press.
[2] Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81-105.
[3] Creswell, J., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
[4] Denzin, N. K. (1978). The logic of naturalistic inquiry. In N. K. Denzin (Ed.), Sociological methods: A sourcebook. New York: McGraw-Hill.
[5] Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2005). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
[6] Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2008). How to design and evaluate research in education. (7th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
[7] Gergen, M., & Gergen, K. (2000). Qualitative inquiry, tensions and transformations. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The landscape of qualitative research: Theories and issues (pp. 1025-1046). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
[8] Greene, J. C. (2005). The generative potential of mixed methods inquiry. International Journal of Research and Method in Education, 28(2), 207-211.
[9] Greene, J. C. (2008). Is mixed methods social inquiry a distinctive methodology? Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 2(1), 7-22.
[10] Greene, J. C., & Caracelli, V. J. (1997). Defining and describing the paradigm issue in mixed method evaluation. In J. C. Greene & V. J. Caracelli (Eds.), Advances in mixed-method evaluation: The challenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms (New Directions for Evaluation, No. 74, pp. 5-17). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
[11] Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Gragam, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(3), 255-274.
[12] Jick, T. D. (1979). Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 602-611.
[13] Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26.
[14] Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Tuner, L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 112-133.
[15] Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
[16] Maxwell, J. A., & Delaney, J. D. (2004). Designing experiments and analyzing data. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
[17] Morgan, D. L. (2007). Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: Methodological implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 48-76.
[18] Popper, K. R. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. New York: Routledge.
[19] Rossman, G. B., & Wilson, B. L. (1985). Number and words: Combining quantitative and qualitative methods in a single large-scale evaluation study. Evaluation Review, 9(5), 627-643.
[20] Spratt, C., Walker, R., & Robinson, B. (2004). Module A5: Mixed research methods. Commonwealth of Learning[Online]. Retrieved from http://www.col.org/SiteCollectionDocuments/A5.pdf.
[21] Symonds, J. E., & Gorard, S. (2010). Death of mixed methods? Or the rebirth of research as a craft. Evaluation & Research in Education, 23(2), 121-136.
[22] Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (Eds.) (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
[23] Webb, E., Campbell, D., Schwartz, R., & Sechrest, L. (1966). Unobtrusive measures. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
[24] Wheeldon, J. (2010). Mapping mixed methods research: Methods, measures, and meaning. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(2), 87-102.