CHAPTER 1

BASIC FEATURES OF
MIXED METHODS RESEARCH

TOPICS IN THE CHAPTER   

•• Mixed methods as a methodology and a method about 25 years old
•• A definition of mixed methods research
•• What is not mixed methods research
•• Four key characteristics of a mixed methods study

UNDERSTANDING MIXED   
METHODS RESEARCH
The best way to begin, I believe, is to reach an understanding of the basic
characteristics of mixed methods research. As a field of methodology
about 25 years old, this approach has common elements that can easily be
identified. That is not to say that there is no disagreement about the core
meaning of this approach. It can be viewed from a philosophical stance, in
which epistemology and other philosophical assumptions take center stage.
It can also be presented as a methodology, that is, as a research process
originating from a broad philosophy and extending to interpretation and
dissemination. Or it can be positioned within a transformative perspective,

©SAGE Publications
2– ●– A CONCISE INTRODUCTION TO MIXED METHODS RESEARCH

such as feminism or disability theory. Since these are all possibilities, it is

crucial to recognize that several definitions exist depending on the perspec-
tive of the author.
My stance is to look at mixed methods as a method. This means that
I will give it a distinct methods orientation, one in which data collection,
analysis, and interpretation hold center stage. This is not to minimize the
importance of philosophy or of methodology or of the research questions.
It is simply to place emphasis on the methods, because they provide a spe-
cific, concrete way to enter the field of mixed methods.

   WHAT MIXED METHODS IS

Given this perspective, I see mixed methods research as:

An approach to research in the social, behavioral, and health sciences

in which the investigator gathers both quantitative (closed-ended) and
qualitative (open-ended) data, integrates the two, and then draws in-
terpretations based on the combined strengths of both sets of data to
understand research problems.

A core assumption of this approach is that when an investigator com-

bines statistical trends (quantitative data) with stories and personal experi-
ences (qualitative data), this collective strength provides a better under-
standing of the research problem than either form of data alone.

   WHAT MIXED METHODS IS NOT

Given this definition, we can extrapolate several things that mixed methods
is not:

1. Mixed methods is not simply the gathering of both quantitative and

qualitative data. Although this form of research is helpful, it does not
speak to the integration of the two data sources and play upon the
strength that this combination brings to a study.
2. Mixed methods research is not simply a matter of using that label in
your study. There are specific scientific techniques associated with
this methodology, and reviewers familiar with mixed methods will be
looking for them.

©SAGE Publications
 Chapter 1.   Basic Features of Mixed Methods Research– ●–3

3. Mixed methods should not be confused with a mixed model

approach to quantitative research, in which investigators conduct
statistical analysis of fixed and random effects in a database.

4. Mixed methods is not simply an evaluation technique, such as for-

mative plus summative evaluation, even though a researcher could
collect and integrate both quantitative and qualitative data in per-
forming such evaluation.

5. Mixed methods is not simply the addition of qualitative data to a

quantitative design. Mixed methods can be employed in this way,
but we can also add quantitative data to qualitative, and we need a
rationale for doing it either way.

6. Mixed methods further is not simply the collection of multiple

forms of qualitative data (e.g., interviews and observations), nor
the collection of multiple types of quantitative data (e.g., survey
data, experimental data). It involves the collection, analysis, and
integration of both quantitative and qualitative data. In this way,
the value of the different approaches to research (e.g., the trends
as well as the stories and personal experiences) can contribute
more to understanding a research problem than one form of data
collection (quantitative or qualitative) could on its own. When
multiple forms of qualitative data (or multiple forms of quantitative
data) are collected, the term is multimethod research, not mixed
methods research.

CORE CHARACTERISTICS   
OF MIXED METHODS
•• Collection and analysis of quantitative and qualitative data in
response to research questions
•• Use of rigorous qualitative and quantitative methods
•• Combination or integration of quantitative and qualitative data using
a specific type of mixed methods design, and interpretation of this
integration
•• Sometimes, framing of the design within a philosophy or theory

In the remainder of this chapter, I will address each key feature in

greater detail.

©SAGE Publications
4– ●– A CONCISE INTRODUCTION TO MIXED METHODS RESEARCH

Collecting Quantitative and Qualitative Data

I start with the assumption that the two types of data differ and that they
take different but equally important roles. A researcher using quantitative
methods decides what to study, poses specific questions or hypotheses,
measures variables to facilitate the finding of answers, uses statistical analy-
sis to obtain information in order to answer the questions/hypotheses, and
makes an interpretation of the results. This form of research is quite dif-
ferent from qualitative research, in which the investigator poses general
questions and collects data in the form of text, audio recordings, or video
recordings. A hallmark of qualitative research is that the researcher collects
data by observing participants or directly asking them open-ended ques-
tions using tools such as interviews, focus group protocols, or question-
naires. After collecting qualitative data, the researcher conducts a thematic
analysis and presents the findings in literary form, such as a story or narra-
tive. Thus, both approaches follow the general process of research: Identify
a problem, determine research questions, collect data, analyze data, and
interpret results. However, the means of carrying out each of these stages
differs considerably between the two methods.
Elements of both quantitative and qualitative research are included in
a mixed methods study. It becomes important, then, to realize that a mixed
methods researcher needs to be skilled in both quantitative and qualitative
approaches. Furthermore, to make the most of a mixed methods design,
investigators need to understand the advantages and the disadvantages that
accrue from both quantitative and qualitative research. See Table 1.1 for a
brief comparison of quantitative and qualitative research.

Using Rigorous Methods

Although both quantitative and qualitative research flow into a mixed meth-
ods study, this does not mean that the scope of each approach will be
reduced. Over the years, several authors have advanced criteria for what
constitutes rigorous research from either a quantitative or qualitative per-
spective. We need to pay attention to those guidelines, whether they are the
CONSORT guidelines in the medical field or informal guidelines for qualita-
tive research advanced in research design books such as Research Design:
Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (Creswell, 2014).
Key elements of rigor for both quantitative and qualitative methods are:

•• Type of design (e.g., experiment, ethnography)

•• Permissions for gaining access to the site

©SAGE Publications
 Chapter 1.   Basic Features of Mixed Methods Research– ●–5

Table 1.1  Advantages and Limitations of Qualitative and Quantitative

Research

Qualitative Research
Advantages Disadvantages
Provides detailed perspectives of a few Has limited generalizability
people Provides only soft data (not hard data,
Captures the voices of participants such as numbers)
Allows participants’ experiences to be Studies few people
understood in context Is highly subjective
Is based on the views of participants, Minimizes use of researcher’s expertise
not of the researcher due to reliance on participants
Appeals to people’s enjoyment of
stories
Quantitative Research
Advantages Disadvantages
Draws conclusions for large numbers Is impersonal, dry
of people Does not record the words of
Analyzes data efficiently participants
Investigates relationships within data Provides limited understanding of the
Examines probable causes and effects context of participants
Controls bias Is largely researcher driven
Appeals to people’s preference for
numbers

•• Sampling approach (systematic vs. purposeful)

•• Number of participants
•• Types of data to be collected (e.g., text, audio and video recordings,
test score questionnaire responses)
•• Instruments used to collect the data (e.g., surveys, observational
checklists, open-ended interviews, focus group protocols)
•• Organization and cleaning of the database as the first step in data
analysis
•• Later data analysis procedures, ranging from basic to more sophis-
ticated approaches (e.g., descriptive to inferential, coding to theme
development)
•• Approaches to establish the validity and reliability of the data (e.g.,
internal validity vs. validation strategies)

©SAGE Publications
6– ●– A CONCISE INTRODUCTION TO MIXED METHODS RESEARCH

Integrating Data
No topic in the field of mixed methods research is so confusing as the ques-
tion of how to integrate the datasets. How do you reconcile words or text
data with numbers or numeric data? Researchers are often simply not famil-
iar with these procedures because they typically deal with only one type of
data (i.e., quantitative or qualitative).
To understand where and how to integrate the databases requires first
knowing something about the types of mixed methods designs (these
designs will be briefly introduced here and developed in more depth in
Chapter 4). There are three basic designs at the center of all mixed methods
projects, as well as three advanced designs that constitute add-ons to the
basic designs.
The three basic mixed methods designs are:

•• A convergent design, in which the intent of the research is to collect

both quantitative and qualitative data, analyze both datasets, and
then merge the results of the two sets of data analyses with the pur-
pose of comparing the results (some say validating one set of results
with the other).
•• An explanatory sequential design, in which the intent is to first
use quantitative methods and then use qualitative methods to help
explain the quantitative results in more depth. This is an easy,
straightforward design.
•• An exploratory sequential design, in which the intent is first to explore
a problem with qualitative methods because the questions may not
be known, the population may be understudied or little understood,
or the site may be difficult to access. After this initial exploration, the
researcher uses the qualitative findings to build a second quantitative
phase of the project. This phase may involve designing an instru-
ment to measure variables in the study, developing activities for an
experimental intervention, or designing a typology that is then mea-
sured using existing instruments. In the third phase, the quantitative
instrument, intervention, or variables are used in a quantitative data
collection and analysis procedure.

One of these basic designs is typically found in every mixed methods

study, either explicitly or implicitly. In some studies, additional features are add-
ed to the basic design. I call the resulting design an advanced design. Here are
examples of advanced designs popular in the mixed methods literature today:

©SAGE Publications
 Chapter 1.   Basic Features of Mixed Methods Research– ●–7

•• Intervention designs are those in which the researchers employ a con-

vergent design, an explanatory design, or an exploratory design within
a larger experimental framework. Simply put, the investigator gathers
qualitative data at some phase during the experiment, such as before
the trial, during the trial, or after the trial. Integration in this case con-
sists of embedding the qualitative data within an experimental trial.
•• Social justice or transformative designs are those in which the
researcher includes a social justice framework that surrounds the
convergent, explanatory, or exploratory design. This framework flows
into the mixed methods study at different points, but it becomes a
constant focus of the study aimed at improving the lives of indi-
viduals in our society today (e.g., a feminist social justice design).
Integration in this type of design involves threading the social justice
concept throughout the study.
•• Multistage evaluation designs are longitudinal studies consisting of
many stages conducted over time with the central objective of a
sustained line of inquiry. Within this objective would be the use of
multiple mixed methods studies (as well as separate quantitative and
qualitative studies) using convergent, explanatory, or exploratory
designs. A prime example of this design would be the evaluation
over time of the design, piloting, and implementation of a program
in a community. Many stages of research would be involved in this
program evaluation study: a needs assessment, a conceptual frame-
work, the testing of the program, and a follow-up to the program.
In this case, integration consists of expanding one stage into other
stages over time.

Integration can then take several forms: merging, explaining, building,

and embedding, depending on the type of design. It is common for the
designs to emerge in a project rather than being preplanned. In addition,
variations on these basic and advanced designs are allowed and often used.
Still, it is important for learners of mixed methods research to understand
the six designs (three basic and three advanced), because these designs will
be the popular types found in the literature.

Using a Framework
The advanced designs suggest the importance of various conceptual and
theoretical frameworks that are often used in mixed methods research. We

©SAGE Publications
8– ●– A CONCISE INTRODUCTION TO MIXED METHODS RESEARCH

see in many mixed methods studies the use of a social or behavioral sci-
ence framework that surrounds the mixed methods study. For example, a
researcher may use a leadership theory to advance an explanatory sequen-
tial design and to present both the quantitative and qualitative results.
Alternatively, a behavioral change model may surround a mixed methods
study in the health sciences. As suggested by the social justice design, the
framework may be a transformative or advocacy framework that surrounds
the project in order to advance the needs of a marginalized group (e.g.,
a mixed methods study of racial profiling). These theoretical frameworks
fall under either social or behavioral theoretical models or transformative
theoretical models.
Another framework that may be used in a mixed methods study
is a philosophical perspective. Philosophical frameworks are general
beliefs and assumptions about research, such as how researchers dis-
cover knowledge. We all bring our understanding of the nature of the
world and our assumptions about what information needs to be collected
(e.g., subjective knowledge versus objective knowledge) to our study of
a research problem. Research fields differ in terms of the importance of
making these philosophical assumptions explicit or implicit in a study.
Regardless of your field, it is important to acknowledge that our values
and beliefs shape our orientation to research, how we gather data, the
biases we bring to research, and whether we see our investigations as
more emerging or fixed.

   RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THIS CHAPTER

I would recommend that researchers planning or conducting a mixed meth-
ods study be able to:

• define mixed methods research;

•• recognize whether their proposed study meets this definition; and
•• evaluate their idea for a mixed methods project by asking themselves
the following questions to determine whether it contains the four
key characteristics of a mixed method study:
{{ Am I collecting and analyzing quantitative and qualitative data in
response to research questions?
{{ Am I using rigorous qualitative and quantitative methods?

©SAGE Publications
 Chapter 1.   Basic Features of Mixed Methods Research– ●–9

{{ Am I combining or integrating the quantitative and qualitative data,

interpreting this integration, and using a mixed methods design?
{{ Am I framing the study within a philosophy and/or a theory?

ADDITIONAL READINGS   
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed meth-
ods research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of
mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 112–133.

©SAGE Publications