Category Archives: Uncategorized

Mark Up Your Articles and Books!

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

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

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

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. 

Visual Displays in Qualitative and Mixed Methods Research to be Released July 2, 2024

This new book by author E. Creamer expands ideas about how joint displays can be used in both qualitative and mixed methods as a tool to advance analysis. Packed with creative examples from diverse fields, the book is available for pre-order https://www.routledge.com/Visual-Displays-in-Qualitative-and-Mixed-Method-Research-A-Comprehensive-Guide/Creamer/p/book/9781032301419

Figures, tables, and other types of displays that bridge qualitative and mixed methods research