Author Archives: EGCreamer

About EGCreamer

I am a faculty member and an avid foodie, traveler, Francophile, and cook. I recently completed a textbook with SAGE, An Introduction to Fully Integrated Mixed Method Research. The site offers supplemental materials, photos, You Tubes, and articles from popular media that illustrate creative uses of multiple methods.

A crystal as a metaphor for integration in MMR

Exciting New Examples of MM-GT

Leave a reply

I am working on the second chapter of a new book about research that pairs mixed methods and grounded theory (MM-GT). This book concentrates on an inspiring batch of journal articles published in 2020 and after. A SCOPUS search in April 2026 of articles with mixed methods research in the title and grounded theory in the title or abstract yielded a surprising number of articles. 231 in total, with 145 were published in 2020 and after.  I further curated the selection to concentrate attention on those using one or more joint displays to advance theoretical insight.

Although there are not dozens and dozens of them, it’s inspiring to find exemplars that are doing something new and to see the new ground that is being plowed in MM-GT. 

For example, I just finished reviewing two MM-GT articles that developed a grounded theory paradigm model from mixed analysis. Both sets of authors developed blended or mixed themes from a joint display that were subsequently incorporated in final composite grounded theory paradigm model. The examples are: Kim and Lee (2025) and Shikarpura et al. (2024).

My first book is: Advancing Grounded Theory with Mixed Methods Research (2022)

Mark Up Your Articles and Books!

Leave a reply

If you are serious about developing expertise in mixed methods research it pays to create a personal library.

As young children, most of us were cautioned never to mark up a book or even so much as turn down the corner of a page. It is a different story when you are building an expertise. Writing comments in the margins and highlighting text are among the strategies that streamline the process when you return to article or chapter in the future.

To develop an expertise requires, on the other hand, to accummulate a personal library and a system to access it over time. The system I developed to keep track of hundreds and hundreds of publications about mixed methods research began more than 20 years ago. I started, first, in a simple way with a file cabinet and a set of folders to file articles and chapters alphabetically. At the same time, I created and up-dated a comphrehensive reference list and on-line set of PDFs. What started as one file cabinet now extends to three, three drawer cabinets of articles and chapters all marked up with my handwriting.

Developing a deep expertise requires decades. Malcolm Gladwell introduced the idea that it takes 10,000 hours to achieve mastery in a field. For me, in addition to new reading, this has meant returning to key articles and chapters to clarify and add to my understanding. Thre process is streamlined because I mainly revisit my annotations and comments and add to them. Over time, these layers of marking up is a way to revisit my own thinking. It expose refinements in my own thinking. The system is part of developing an expansive understanding of mixed methods research.

To develop expertise in mixed methods research requires reading widely, across authors, and academic fields. Each of the now four generations of Handbooks of Mixed Methods Research produced by SAGE (2003, 2010, 2018, 2023) provide a window in to the diverse ways of thinking about MMR at particular point in time. I keep them within easy reach of my desk. They are heavy and expensive but an important resource to have in your personal library. You will return to some of the chapters you’ve marked up again and again. The 2018 Handbook is especially helpful to those interested in an approach to MMR that reflects a qualitative orientation.

My next post will be devoted to re-reading.

New Publication: Creamer, E. G. (2024). Strategies to Interrogate Dissonance with Mixed Methods Research

Leave a reply

International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, Vol. 16, No 3, p. 1-11.

This is an abstract of the article which will appear soon on the Journal webpage.

ABSTRACT

A small subset of methodological literature has investigated ways that researchers have grappled with dissonant findings that emerge when quantitative and qualitative data and/or findings are compared in mixed methods research. Absent from this discussion is consideration of research when the dissonance emerges from a clash between results produced from quantitative analysis and the assumptions embedded in a theoretical framework. This methodological article reports on the findings from an exploratory content analysis of eleven empirical mixed methods articles that encountered dissonance during an initial stage and followed this stage with additional data collection and/or analysis. An in-depth case-based analysis exposed differences between those that addressed dissonance by adding a qualitative phase and those that added both a qualitative phase and one devoted to merging both qualitative and quantitative data, often through a joint display. Although the qualitative phase generally served to elaborate theoretical understanding, those reporting on mixed analysis were more likely to frame their findings as disputing assumptions from a theoretical framework. Reframing the discussion about dissonance in mixed methods research, findings suggest that researchers will benefit by considering the process of exploring dissonant findings as a series of steps rather than a single strategy. Findings contest the assumption that designing a research project with a theoretical framework rules out the possibility of a robust exploratory component.

Keywords: mixed methods research, mixed analysis, Initiation rationale, dissonance, joint display

Timelining as a Strategy to Integrate Qualitative and Quantitative Data – A MMR Brief

Leave a reply

Nothing is more central to mixed methods research than strategies that allow for the alignment of data from different sources during analysis. Visualizations of different kinds, from timelining, to mapping, or different forms of matrices are instrumental to the process.

Any educational program or activity designed to promote a measure of mental health or physical well-being has a time element that often varies between points in time where there is forward progress and others where there is little or no progress or even, possibly, regression. Whether it is about improving a skill in math or recovery from some type of traumatic event, timelines can be instrumental in research about an intentionally designed activity. Timelining is often thought of as an example of graphic elicitation that is part of the arsenal of strategies associated with qualitative research.  These can be collected at one point of time or at multiple points of time to help participants reflect on patterns in a trajectory or speculate about what was occurring at the time that might influence. In a mixed methods context, a researcher can use timelines for purposes of analysis by overlaying quantitative indicators or to cluster groups with similar patterns to detect differences and similarities.

 This post provides a link to a brief, 2-page summary posted to Academia, of some uses of timelining in mixed methods research. This entry extracts two examples of timelining reviewed in a chapter from the book, Visual Displays in Qualitative and Mixed Methods Research (Creamer, 2024). One derives from research in an educational context and the second is about individual progress in a drug rehabilitation program. Each illustrates how a visualization or graphic can be at the core of meaningful integration of qualitative and quantitative data during analysis in mixed methods research. Each demonstrates how a visualization or graphics can promote the ability the experiment with different ways to align data to detect patterns and relationships. Additional resources and examples are listed at the end of the entry. 

Data Collection Strategies

Approaches to collecting data that link a quantitative measure(s) and participant observations include:

  • Participants maintain or submit online on a regular basis.
  • A participant and researcher meet and construct through conversation, sometimes at regular intervals.
  • A researcher constructs, plotting both qualitative and quantitative data on a timeline.

A You Tube video of mine illustrates a simple way to spot changes of time by plotting qualitative data in a simple matrix (https://youtu.be/ngY7lmPxRxo). 

MMR Approaches to Timelining

Distinguishing Equal and Mixed Priority Mixed Methods Research – Paper on Academia

Leave a reply

https://www.academia.edu/144157726/Distinguishing_Equal_and_Mixed_Priority_in_Mixed_Methods_Research

This research brief takes the stance that there are advantages to adding terminology that distinguishes between an equal and mixed priority mixed methods study. It provides examples of each.

ABSTRACT

Three components distinguish mixed methods research: a qualitative one, a quantitative one, and one that involves meaningful integration of the two. An equal priority study declares that the qualitative and quantitative components contributed equally to the product, without weighing the contribution of mixing. A mixed priority study is distinguished by results that are generated through mixed analysis, often with the benefit of one or more visual displays.