Pub Date : 2022-09-20DOI: 10.1177/15586898221126816
Kevin Proudfoot
Inductive/deductive hybrid thematic analysis offers significant opportunities for researchers, but its application within integrative mixed methods research has yet to be fully explored. Firstly, this article contributes by demonstrating the compatibility of inductive/deductive hybrid thematic analysis with quantitative work in a mixed methods approach to research. Secondly, the article then innovates by highlighting the value of this approach within a critical realist meta-theoretical perspective. Here, the critical realist concepts of abduction and retroduction are crucial, both in terms of facilitating the convergence of methods and in the generation of new theory. This article will be of relevance to researchers interested in integrating inductive/deductive hybrid thematic analysis with quantitative methods within a coherent and enabling philosophical paradigm.
{"title":"Inductive/Deductive Hybrid Thematic Analysis in Mixed Methods Research","authors":"Kevin Proudfoot","doi":"10.1177/15586898221126816","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898221126816","url":null,"abstract":"Inductive/deductive hybrid thematic analysis offers significant opportunities for researchers, but its application within integrative mixed methods research has yet to be fully explored. Firstly, this article contributes by demonstrating the compatibility of inductive/deductive hybrid thematic analysis with quantitative work in a mixed methods approach to research. Secondly, the article then innovates by highlighting the value of this approach within a critical realist meta-theoretical perspective. Here, the critical realist concepts of abduction and retroduction are crucial, both in terms of facilitating the convergence of methods and in the generation of new theory. This article will be of relevance to researchers interested in integrating inductive/deductive hybrid thematic analysis with quantitative methods within a coherent and enabling philosophical paradigm.","PeriodicalId":47844,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Mixed Methods Research","volume":"17 1","pages":"308 - 326"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2022-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43848462","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-14DOI: 10.1177/15586898221125636
Erica L. Doering, B. Cooper
Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) is both a case-oriented research approach and analytic technique that uses set theory to understand causal relationships among conditions and an outcome (Rihoux & Ragin, 2009). Both quantitative and qualitative data can be used in QCA making the method useful for mixed methods research (MMR; de Block & Vis, 2019). QCAwas created by a sociologist, Charles Ragin, in 1987 (Ragin, 1987) and has slowly gained traction in multiple fields to provide a deeper understanding of causal complexity (e.g., Hill et al., 2019). If you are looking for a useful resource for understanding and conducting QCA within the context of MMR, we highly recommend Qualitative Comparative Analysis in Mixed Methods Research and Evaluation by Leila C. Kahwati and Heather L. Kane. This text is the 6th volume in the “Mixed Methods Research Series” providing applied and practical practice for QCA within MMR. Kahwati and Kane bring their practical experience using QCA in MMR to life within the pages of this text. The structure, content, and organization allow researchers to quickly grasp QCA and MMR concepts and apply it to their own research. This review comes from the perspective of a graduate student with interest and training in QCA andMMR and a senior researcher with MMR training and experience publishing studies using QCA.
{"title":"Media Review: Qualitative Comparative Analysis in Mixed Methods Research and Evaluation","authors":"Erica L. Doering, B. Cooper","doi":"10.1177/15586898221125636","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898221125636","url":null,"abstract":"Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) is both a case-oriented research approach and analytic technique that uses set theory to understand causal relationships among conditions and an outcome (Rihoux & Ragin, 2009). Both quantitative and qualitative data can be used in QCA making the method useful for mixed methods research (MMR; de Block & Vis, 2019). QCAwas created by a sociologist, Charles Ragin, in 1987 (Ragin, 1987) and has slowly gained traction in multiple fields to provide a deeper understanding of causal complexity (e.g., Hill et al., 2019). If you are looking for a useful resource for understanding and conducting QCA within the context of MMR, we highly recommend Qualitative Comparative Analysis in Mixed Methods Research and Evaluation by Leila C. Kahwati and Heather L. Kane. This text is the 6th volume in the “Mixed Methods Research Series” providing applied and practical practice for QCA within MMR. Kahwati and Kane bring their practical experience using QCA in MMR to life within the pages of this text. The structure, content, and organization allow researchers to quickly grasp QCA and MMR concepts and apply it to their own research. This review comes from the perspective of a graduate student with interest and training in QCA andMMR and a senior researcher with MMR training and experience publishing studies using QCA.","PeriodicalId":47844,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Mixed Methods Research","volume":"17 1","pages":"115 - 117"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2022-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41719552","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-02DOI: 10.1177/15586898221120566
Yuchun Zhou
There is a paucity of empirical research on teaching mixed methods. To fill this gap in literature, this convergent mixed methods study explores the effectiveness of using active learning approaches in teaching a mixed methods course. The qualitative data, including 10 individual interviews, 29 students’ reflections, and 26 teaching evaluation surveys, were used to examine students’ learning experience and outcomes. Students’ presentations (N = 29) and final papers (N = 29) were transformed into numbers as the quantitative data. The converged results indicated that students were actively engaged in learning and achieved the expected learning outcomes. This study makes valuable contributions to the mixed methods pedagogical culture by providing details and suggestions on how to use active learning approaches in teaching mixed methods.
{"title":"Teaching Mixed Methods Using Active Learning Approaches","authors":"Yuchun Zhou","doi":"10.1177/15586898221120566","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898221120566","url":null,"abstract":"There is a paucity of empirical research on teaching mixed methods. To fill this gap in literature, this convergent mixed methods study explores the effectiveness of using active learning approaches in teaching a mixed methods course. The qualitative data, including 10 individual interviews, 29 students’ reflections, and 26 teaching evaluation surveys, were used to examine students’ learning experience and outcomes. Students’ presentations (N = 29) and final papers (N = 29) were transformed into numbers as the quantitative data. The converged results indicated that students were actively engaged in learning and achieved the expected learning outcomes. This study makes valuable contributions to the mixed methods pedagogical culture by providing details and suggestions on how to use active learning approaches in teaching mixed methods.","PeriodicalId":47844,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Mixed Methods Research","volume":"17 1","pages":"396 - 418"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2022-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41551780","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-23DOI: 10.1177/15586898221122758
Joseph A. Maxwell
David Morgan ’ s analysis of the concept of triangulation (Morgan, 2019) raises some important issues for mixed methods researchers. I agree with Morgan ’ s general critique of this concept, and his account of the origin of the term ’ s use in social science provides a valuable clari fi cation of its history. 1 However, neither Morgan ’ s analysis, nor the earlier discussion of this concept by Fetters and Molina-Azorin (2017), makes the important point that “ triangulation ” , aside from its original use in surveying, is a metaphor . Like all metaphors, triangulation provides some insights into the phenomena to which it ’ s applied, while ignoring or obscuring other insights (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980, 2003). This in itself is suf fi cient reason to abandon triangulation as a technical term in the social sciences. 2
David Morgan对三角测量概念的分析（Morgan，2019）为混合方法研究人员提出了一些重要问题。我同意Morgan对这一概念的一般性批评，他对该术语在社会科学中使用的起源的描述为其历史提供了宝贵的澄清。1然而，无论是Morgan的分析，还是Fetters和Molina Azorin（2017）对这一概念的早期讨论，都没有提出重要的观点，即“三角测量”除了最初在测量中使用外，还是一种隐喻。像所有隐喻一样，三角测量提供了对其所应用的现象的一些见解，而忽略或掩盖了其他见解（Lakoff&Johnson，19802003）。这本身就是放弃三角测量作为社会科学技术术语的充分理由。2.
{"title":"Response to David Morgan on Triangulation","authors":"Joseph A. Maxwell","doi":"10.1177/15586898221122758","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898221122758","url":null,"abstract":"David Morgan ’ s analysis of the concept of triangulation (Morgan, 2019) raises some important issues for mixed methods researchers. I agree with Morgan ’ s general critique of this concept, and his account of the origin of the term ’ s use in social science provides a valuable clari fi cation of its history. 1 However, neither Morgan ’ s analysis, nor the earlier discussion of this concept by Fetters and Molina-Azorin (2017), makes the important point that “ triangulation ” , aside from its original use in surveying, is a metaphor . Like all metaphors, triangulation provides some insights into the phenomena to which it ’ s applied, while ignoring or obscuring other insights (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980, 2003). This in itself is suf fi cient reason to abandon triangulation as a technical term in the social sciences. 2","PeriodicalId":47844,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Mixed Methods Research","volume":"16 1","pages":"412 - 414"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2022-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44163650","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-17DOI: 10.1177/15586898221120880
Reinhold, A. M., Raile, E. D., Izurieta, C., McEvoy, J., King, H. W., Poole, G. C., Ready, R. C., Bergmann, N. T., & Shanahan, E. A. (2022). Persuasion with Precision: Using Natural Language Processing to Improve Instrument Fidelity for Risk Communication Experimental Treatments. Journal of Mixed Methods Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898221096934
Reinhold, A. M.， Raile, E. D.， Izurieta, C.， McEvoy, J.， King, h.w.， Poole, g.c.， Ready, r.c.， Bergmann, n.t.， &;沙纳汉，E. A.(2022)。精确说服:使用自然语言处理来提高风险沟通实验处理的仪器保真度。混合方法研究杂志。https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898221096934
{"title":"Erratum to “Persuasion with Precision: Using Natural Language Processing to Improve Instrument Fidelity for Risk Communication Experimental Treatments”","authors":"","doi":"10.1177/15586898221120880","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898221120880","url":null,"abstract":"Reinhold, A. M., Raile, E. D., Izurieta, C., McEvoy, J., King, H. W., Poole, G. C., Ready, R. C., Bergmann, N. T., & Shanahan, E. A. (2022). Persuasion with Precision: Using Natural Language Processing to Improve Instrument Fidelity for Risk Communication Experimental Treatments. <i>Journal of Mixed Methods Research</i>. https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898221096934","PeriodicalId":47844,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Mixed Methods Research","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2022-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138517849","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-01Epub Date: 2021-10-13DOI: 10.1177/15586898211037412
Anna Dion, Alessandro Carini-Gutierrez, Vania Jimenez, Amal Ben Ameur, Emilie Robert, Lawrence Joseph, Neil Andersson
Mixed methods research is well-suited to grapple with questions of what counts as valid knowledge across different contexts and perspectives. This article introduces Weight of Evidence as a transformative procedure for stakeholders to interpret, expand on and prioritize evidence from evidence syntheses, with a focus on engaging populations historically excluded from planning and decision making. This article presents the procedure's five steps using pilot data on perinatal care of immigrant women in Canada, engaging family physicians and birth companions. Fuzzy cognitive mapping offers an accessible and systematic way to generate priors to update published literature with stakeholder priorities. Weight of Evidence is a transparent procedure to broaden what counts as expertise, contributing to a more comprehensive, context-specific, and actionable understanding.
{"title":"<i>Weight of Evidence</i>: Participatory Methods and Bayesian Updating to Contextualize Evidence Synthesis in Stakeholders' Knowledge.","authors":"Anna Dion, Alessandro Carini-Gutierrez, Vania Jimenez, Amal Ben Ameur, Emilie Robert, Lawrence Joseph, Neil Andersson","doi":"10.1177/15586898211037412","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898211037412","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Mixed methods research is well-suited to grapple with questions of what counts as valid knowledge across different contexts and perspectives. This article introduces Weight of Evidence as a transformative procedure for stakeholders to interpret, expand on and prioritize evidence from evidence syntheses, with a focus on engaging populations historically excluded from planning and decision making. This article presents the procedure's five steps using pilot data on perinatal care of immigrant women in Canada, engaging family physicians and birth companions. Fuzzy cognitive mapping offers an accessible and systematic way to generate priors to update published literature with stakeholder priorities. Weight of Evidence is a transparent procedure to broaden what counts as expertise, contributing to a more comprehensive, context-specific, and actionable understanding.</p>","PeriodicalId":47844,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Mixed Methods Research","volume":"16 3","pages":"281-306"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/84/5a/10.1177_15586898211037412.PMC9297342.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"40618910","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-01DOI: 10.1177/15586898221083765
Gregory Hadley
Fifty years ago, Glaser and Strauss (1967/1999, p. 18) wrote that both qualitative and quantitative data could be used in the grounded theory methodology (GTM)—a point punctuated by Glaser (1978) later when explaining, “There are no limits to the techniques of data collection, the way they are used, or the types of data required” (p. 158). The problem is that Glaser, Strauss, and other early grounded theorists focused primarily on qualitative data analysis in their instructional texts. This early branding of GTM as qualitative in nature has led to a growing interest in what is often called Mixed Methods Grounded Theory Methodology (MM-GTM). However, while increasing numbers of researchers claim to have used MM-GTM over the past 10 years, Guetterman et al.’s (2019) meta-analysis of 61 MM-GTM studies find that few “draw upon all or even most of the major features of grounded theory” (p. 188). It is out of the fog of this current confusion that Elizabeth Creamer emerges with her book entitled Advancing Grounded Theory with Mixed Methods.
50年前，格拉泽和斯特劳斯（1967/1999，第18页）写道，定性和定量数据都可以用于基础理论方法论（GTM）——格拉泽（1978）后来解释道，“数据收集技术、使用方式或所需数据类型没有限制”（第158页）。问题是，格拉泽、施特劳斯和其他早期的理论家在他们的教学文本中主要关注定性数据分析。GTM的这种早期定性品牌已经引起了人们对通常被称为混合方法基础理论方法论（MM-GTM）的兴趣。然而，尽管越来越多的研究人员声称在过去10年中使用了MM-GTM，但Guetterman等人（2019）对61项MM-GTM研究的荟萃分析发现，很少有人“利用了基础理论的全部甚至大部分主要特征”（第188页）。伊丽莎白·克雷默（Elizabeth Creamer）的《用混合方法推进基础理论》（Advancing Grounded Theory with Mixed Methods）一书正是从当前的困惑中走出来的。
{"title":"Media Review: Advancing Grounded Theory with Mixed Methods","authors":"Gregory Hadley","doi":"10.1177/15586898221083765","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898221083765","url":null,"abstract":"Fifty years ago, Glaser and Strauss (1967/1999, p. 18) wrote that both qualitative and quantitative data could be used in the grounded theory methodology (GTM)—a point punctuated by Glaser (1978) later when explaining, “There are no limits to the techniques of data collection, the way they are used, or the types of data required” (p. 158). The problem is that Glaser, Strauss, and other early grounded theorists focused primarily on qualitative data analysis in their instructional texts. This early branding of GTM as qualitative in nature has led to a growing interest in what is often called Mixed Methods Grounded Theory Methodology (MM-GTM). However, while increasing numbers of researchers claim to have used MM-GTM over the past 10 years, Guetterman et al.’s (2019) meta-analysis of 61 MM-GTM studies find that few “draw upon all or even most of the major features of grounded theory” (p. 188). It is out of the fog of this current confusion that Elizabeth Creamer emerges with her book entitled Advancing Grounded Theory with Mixed Methods.","PeriodicalId":47844,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Mixed Methods Research","volume":"58 2","pages":"381 - 383"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41306758","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-23DOI: 10.1177/15586898221108545
Nozomi Sakata
Whereas the significance and potential impacts of messiness in mixed methods research have been well acknowledged, the literature on mixed methods research has accumulated few examples of engaging and navigating mess. This article provides an account of the nitty-gritty of messiness and its consequences during the process of mixed methods research. By applying the ‘craft attitude’ and a socio-ecological framework for mixed methods research to a mixed methods case study, I demonstrate how my embracing of research messiness through the craft attitude exemplifies the interconnectedness of the personal, interpersonal and social contexts. This article contributes to knowledge by proposing a new way to conceptualize mess in mixed methods research through the integration of the craft attitude within the socio-ecological framework for mixed methods research.
{"title":"Embracing the Messiness in Mixed Methods Research: The Craft Attitude","authors":"Nozomi Sakata","doi":"10.1177/15586898221108545","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898221108545","url":null,"abstract":"Whereas the significance and potential impacts of messiness in mixed methods research have been well acknowledged, the literature on mixed methods research has accumulated few examples of engaging and navigating mess. This article provides an account of the nitty-gritty of messiness and its consequences during the process of mixed methods research. By applying the ‘craft attitude’ and a socio-ecological framework for mixed methods research to a mixed methods case study, I demonstrate how my embracing of research messiness through the craft attitude exemplifies the interconnectedness of the personal, interpersonal and social contexts. This article contributes to knowledge by proposing a new way to conceptualize mess in mixed methods research through the integration of the craft attitude within the socio-ecological framework for mixed methods research.","PeriodicalId":47844,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Mixed Methods Research","volume":"17 1","pages":"288 - 307"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2022-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43511197","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-23DOI: 10.1177/15586898221110387
José F. Molina-Azorín, M. Fetters
This July 2022 issue of the Journal of Mixed Methods Research (JMMR) includes an editorial, four articles, a commentary, and three media reviews. In the editorial, Poth et al. (2022) have collected discussions about mixed methods designs in a virtual special issue (VSI) based on selected articles published in JMMR. They included 13 readings, 10 empirical and methodological articles as well as three editorials that were published between 2008 and June, 2022. They conclude three points from analysis of this collection, a trend toward greater engagement with stakeholders in mixed methods research designs, a need for authors to be consistent and comprehensively use their design terminology throughout all sections of papers, and authentic or detailed reporting to facilitate the understanding of readers about the procedures employed. VSIs are prepared by chief or associate editors with purpose of identifying from previously articles published in JMMR perspectives on key contributions of the articles relative to the chosen theme (Fetters &Molina-Azorı́n, 2020). Previous VSIs have addressed timely topics of discussion in the field such as paradigms in mixed methods research (Molina-Azorin & Fetters, 2020), integration in mixed methods research (Guetterman et al., 2020), and quality in mixed methods research (Fàbregues et al., 2021). Additionally, Shannon-Baker (2022) examined publications from the field of education with a focus on designs, integration, and visual displays. VSI editorials are available open access under the collections link on the JMMR homepage. In the first article in this issue, Dion et al. (2022) with affiliations in health sciences have introduced Weight of Evidence as a transformative procedure to contextualize evidence in the understanding of relevant stakeholders. Through this procedure, stakeholders can interpret, expand upon, and prioritize evidence from synthesis, and inform service improvements and program evaluation that can refine syntheses. The authors describe the philosophical orientations
2022年7月出版的《混合方法研究杂志》（JMMR）包括一篇社论、四篇文章、一篇评论和三篇媒体评论。在社论中，Poth等人（2022）根据JMMR上发表的精选文章，在虚拟特刊（VSI）中收集了关于混合方法设计的讨论。其中包括13篇阅读材料、10篇实证和方法论文章，以及2008年至2022年6月发表的三篇社论。他们从对该系列的分析中得出了三点结论：在混合方法研究设计中，利益相关者有更多参与的趋势，作者需要在论文的所有章节中保持一致并全面使用他们的设计术语，以及真实或详细的报告，以便于读者了解所采用的程序。VSI由主编或副主编编写，目的是从JMMR先前发表的文章中确定文章对所选主题的关键贡献（Fetters&Molina Azorı́n，2020）。先前的VSI及时解决了该领域的讨论主题，如混合方法研究的范式（Molina Azorin&Fetters，2020）、混合方法研究中的整合（Guetterman et al.，2020）和混合方法研究质量（Fàbregues et al.，2021）。此外，Shannon Baker（2022）研究了教育领域的出版物，重点关注设计、集成和视觉展示。VSI社论可在JMMR主页上的收藏链接下开放访问。在本期的第一篇文章中，Dion等人（2022）在健康科学领域引入了证据权重，将其作为一种变革性程序，在相关利益相关者的理解中将证据情境化。通过该程序，利益相关者可以解释、扩展和优先考虑综合证据，并为服务改进和项目评估提供信息，从而完善综合。作者描述了哲学取向
{"title":"In This Issue: Transformative and Participatory Methods, Integration Through Multiple Correspondence Analysis, and Network Analysis of Qualitative Data","authors":"José F. Molina-Azorín, M. Fetters","doi":"10.1177/15586898221110387","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898221110387","url":null,"abstract":"This July 2022 issue of the Journal of Mixed Methods Research (JMMR) includes an editorial, four articles, a commentary, and three media reviews. In the editorial, Poth et al. (2022) have collected discussions about mixed methods designs in a virtual special issue (VSI) based on selected articles published in JMMR. They included 13 readings, 10 empirical and methodological articles as well as three editorials that were published between 2008 and June, 2022. They conclude three points from analysis of this collection, a trend toward greater engagement with stakeholders in mixed methods research designs, a need for authors to be consistent and comprehensively use their design terminology throughout all sections of papers, and authentic or detailed reporting to facilitate the understanding of readers about the procedures employed. VSIs are prepared by chief or associate editors with purpose of identifying from previously articles published in JMMR perspectives on key contributions of the articles relative to the chosen theme (Fetters &Molina-Azorı́n, 2020). Previous VSIs have addressed timely topics of discussion in the field such as paradigms in mixed methods research (Molina-Azorin & Fetters, 2020), integration in mixed methods research (Guetterman et al., 2020), and quality in mixed methods research (Fàbregues et al., 2021). Additionally, Shannon-Baker (2022) examined publications from the field of education with a focus on designs, integration, and visual displays. VSI editorials are available open access under the collections link on the JMMR homepage. In the first article in this issue, Dion et al. (2022) with affiliations in health sciences have introduced Weight of Evidence as a transformative procedure to contextualize evidence in the understanding of relevant stakeholders. Through this procedure, stakeholders can interpret, expand upon, and prioritize evidence from synthesis, and inform service improvements and program evaluation that can refine syntheses. The authors describe the philosophical orientations","PeriodicalId":47844,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Mixed Methods Research","volume":"16 1","pages":"271 - 273"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9,"publicationDate":"2022-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48742343","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：