Mixed Methods? Do They Really Work? A Commentary
In this short commentary, I comment on the state and popularity of mixed methods in social sciences in recent decades. While quantitative and qualitative methods are considered complementary, I question the use of mixed methods by scholars without deeper reflections on the epistemological and method...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Hipatia Press
2013-11-01
|
| Series: | RIMCIS |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://hipatiapress.com/hpjournals/index.php/rimcis/article/view/790 |
| _version_ | 1818470470970769408 |
|---|---|
| author | Shu-Ju Ada Cheng |
| author_facet | Shu-Ju Ada Cheng |
| author_sort | Shu-Ju Ada Cheng |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | In this short commentary, I comment on the state and popularity of mixed methods in social sciences in recent decades. While quantitative and qualitative methods are considered complementary, I question the use of mixed methods by scholars without deeper reflections on the epistemological and methodological foundations of these two methods. My contention is that researchers cannot simply combine qualitative and quantitative methods without explicating how they reconcile and negotiate their different foundations. These two methods are not just tools. The act of mixing them without reflections is simply not sufficient. Reconciling and reflecting upon the foundational differences between these two methods would be an essential step.
|
| first_indexed | 2024-04-13T21:38:26Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-dce90789e30b4799b3ede1d0b32b43f1 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2014-3680 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-13T21:38:26Z |
| publishDate | 2013-11-01 |
| publisher | Hipatia Press |
| record_format | Article |
| series | RIMCIS |
| spelling | doaj.art-dce90789e30b4799b3ede1d0b32b43f12022-12-22T02:28:52ZengHipatia PressRIMCIS2014-36802013-11-012310.4471/rimcis.2013.22Mixed Methods? Do They Really Work? A CommentaryShu-Ju Ada Cheng0DePaul UniversityIn this short commentary, I comment on the state and popularity of mixed methods in social sciences in recent decades. While quantitative and qualitative methods are considered complementary, I question the use of mixed methods by scholars without deeper reflections on the epistemological and methodological foundations of these two methods. My contention is that researchers cannot simply combine qualitative and quantitative methods without explicating how they reconcile and negotiate their different foundations. These two methods are not just tools. The act of mixing them without reflections is simply not sufficient. Reconciling and reflecting upon the foundational differences between these two methods would be an essential step. https://hipatiapress.com/hpjournals/index.php/rimcis/article/view/790mixed methodsqualitative methodquantitative methodepistemologyreflexivity |
| spellingShingle | Shu-Ju Ada Cheng Mixed Methods? Do They Really Work? A Commentary RIMCIS mixed methods qualitative method quantitative method epistemology reflexivity |
| title | Mixed Methods? Do They Really Work? A Commentary |
| title_full | Mixed Methods? Do They Really Work? A Commentary |
| title_fullStr | Mixed Methods? Do They Really Work? A Commentary |
| title_full_unstemmed | Mixed Methods? Do They Really Work? A Commentary |
| title_short | Mixed Methods? Do They Really Work? A Commentary |
| title_sort | mixed methods do they really work a commentary |
| topic | mixed methods qualitative method quantitative method epistemology reflexivity |
| url | https://hipatiapress.com/hpjournals/index.php/rimcis/article/view/790 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT shujuadacheng mixedmethodsdotheyreallyworkacommentary |