 |
Relationship between Theory & Research
|
|
|
|
Relationship between Theory & Research
Deductive Testing of Theory
Inductive Generation of Theory
Abductive Problem Solving
MIXED METHODS DESIGNS
This section discusses what to consider when designing your mixed methods research project. Two key questions will be covered: the priority question and the sequence question (Bryman, 2016; Denscombe, 2014). The priority question is concerned with the weighting of the qualitative and quantitative component(s) of the research and asks whether the components are to be equally weighted, or whether one component is more dominant than the other. The sequence question is related to the order in which you carry out the qualitative and quantitative component(s) of the research: which component should come first, second and so on, or is each component to be carried out simultaneously? The section ends by looking at how the answers to the sequence and priority questions combine to create the overall design of the research.
The priority question
The priority question will often be the first aspect of the research design that you need to make decisions about in a mixed methods project. Consideration will be given as to which aspect of the research, the qualitative or the quantitative, is the more important or dominant component of the project, or whether they are of equal status. Some authors refer to this as the ‘status question’ (Denscombe, 2014) and some, as we do here, as the ‘priority question’ (Bryman, 2016).
Your answer to the priority question will depend on your research question(s) and the aims and objectives of your research. You may feel that the quantitative and qualitative components of your research are of the same value and importance because they will help you answer your research question in the same measure. In this case, one component should not dominate the other, and the answer to the pri- ority question is that the components are equal in priority. This can be shown through the use of notation: in this case it would be shown as ‘QUANT’ and ‘QUAL’, with both in capital letters. An example is Best et al. (2016). This research collected data about participants’ substance use and recovery (QUANT) and carried out interviews (QUAL). Both data collection methods and subsequent data were of equal importance, therefore had equal priority (QUANT→ QUAL).
If your quantitative and qualitative components are not of equal status, then you can denote which component is dominant. The notation for this is to show the dominant component in capital letters and the less dominant component in lower-case letters. So, if your research has a dominant quantitative component, the notation for this would be ‘QUANT qual’. Alternatively, if the dominant component of your research is qualitative, the notation for this would be ‘QUAL quant’. In Waters’ (2009) research into older, illegal drug users, the quantitative component (secondary data analysis of the British Crime Survey) took precedence over the qualitative component (interviews). This meant that the quantitative component was of higher status (QUANT/qual}→ ).
|
|
|
Some research inquiries will demand a more intricate mixed methods design which incorporates more than one qualitative and one quantitative component. In this instance, you still need to decide if all the components are of equal status and priority, or if certain components are more or less dominant, and you would use the same approach to notation as above to show this. Maruna and King (2009) used this design in their public perceptions research about the ‘redeemability’ of offenders, consisting of three components of equal priority (QUANT → QUAL → QUANT).
The sequence question
The sequence question is concerned with the order in which the components of the research are organized. The two basic options are simultaneous and sequential. In a simultaneous design, the qualitative and quantitative components are carried out at roughly the same time. The two components resemble standalone ‘silos’ of work where the data from each is essentially collected independently of the other silo, although of course the silos ultimately remain part of a broader piece of research. The two compo- nents are then brought together and the findings are integrated. Crucially, in a simultaneous study, the components remain distinct and do not influence each other during the data collection phase. Of course, it may be the case that in a simultaneous study the data collection for each component does not take place at exactly the same time, but there is generally no interaction between the two processes of data collection which are carried out as close in time as is practical. Examples of a simultaneous piece of work might include conducting qualitative interviews whilst at the same time carrying out a quantitative questionnaire, or carrying out secondary analysis of a data set whilst working on a qualitative media analysis. Waters’ (2009) study into older, illegal drug users also applies here, as she used a simultaneous design with data collection for both components being carried out at the same time (QUANT/qual}→ ). The simultaneous design is illustrated in Table 5. 2, but can also be shown more simplistically with a for- ward slash between the components (for example, QUAL/QUANT}→ ).
In a sequential design, one component is carried out first. The data collection process, the data itself and the analysis of the data are then used to inform the design of the sub- sequent component(s). Either a qualitative or quantitative component can be used as the starting point, dependent once again on the research question(s) and the aims and objec- tives of the inquiry. This approach allows you to ‘build’ the research from one component to the next. The notation for a sequential design is shown in Table 5. 2. One example of a sequential design is where you may conduct a number of qualitative interviews to inform a subsequent large quantitative questionnaire (qual→ QUANT). Another example might be that you carry out a large-scale quantitative survey that is used to inform an additional method of data collection such as qualitative interviews (QUANT→ QUAL). An example of this is where Best et al. (2016) used their survey (QUANT) not only to collect data, but also as a precursor to the creation of their interview schedule and qualitative data collection (QUAL), resulting in a sequential design, as the quantitative data collec- tion came before the qualitative data collection (QUANT→ QUAL).
|
|
|
Sequential Design
Single- phase Design
Multi-phase Design
Component B (QUAL / qual)
Component A (QUANT /
quant / QUAL
/ qual)
Component A (QUANT /
quant / QUAL
/ qual)
Component B
® (QUANT /
quant / QUAL
/ qual)
Component B (QUANT /
® quant / QUAL
/ qual)
Component C (QUANT /
® quant / QUAL
/ qual)
‘Multi-phase’ sequential designs are also options. This is where there is more than one quantitative or qualitative component. The notation for a sequential multi-phase design is shown in Table 5. 2. You can include as many iterations as are necessary for the pur- poses of your research project. Examples might include a focus group (qual) to highlight key issues, followed by a representative questionnaire (QUANT) to measure the concept, followed by interviews (QUAL) to add further detail to the findings of the questionnaire. The notation of the resulting sequence would be ‘qual→ QUANT→ QUANT’. In their evaluation of the Gateway Protection Programme (a refugee assistance scheme), Platts- Fowler and Robinson (2015) use this design, starting with interviews and focus groups with refugees (qual), followed by three waves of a survey (QUANT). The final ‘multi- phase’ sequential design looks like this: (qual→ QUANT→ QUANT→ QUANT).
|
|
|
