Qualitative Research in Practice : Stories From the Field - Blogs Unpad

Mixing methods
the different components are adequately articulated and integrated.
This includes being clear about what each approach brings to the
study, and their limitations.
There are many reasons why mixed methods may be appropriate.
Greene, Caracelli and Graham (1989) reviewed 57 evaluation
studies that used mixed methods and identified five main purposes
for combining methods: triangulation; complementarity; development;
initiation; and expansion.
• Triangulation seeks convergence, corroboration and correspondence
of results from the different methods.
• Complementarity seeks elaboration, enhancement, illustration
and clarification of the results from one method with the results
from the other method.
• Development seeks to use the results from one method to help
develop or inform the other method, where development is
broadly construed to include sampling and implementation, as
well as measurement decisions.
• Initiation seeks the discovery of paradox and contradiction, new
perspectives of frameworks, the recasting of questions or results
from one method with questions or results from the other
method.
• Expansion seeks to extend the breadth and range of inquiry by
using different methods for different inquiry components
(Greene et al., 1989, p. 259).
Of the studies they reviewed, 80 per cent of the primary purposes
and half of the 70 total purposes were either complementarity or
expansion.
Types of mixed method design
In this section, we consider four common approaches to mixing
methods.
Qualitative then quantitative
This design occurs when the findings of the qualitative research are
used to develop the quantitative phase of the research. This is a
common approach to mixing methods, but one that is sometimes
121