Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Statistics & Research Methods II > Mixed Methods Approaches > Flashcards

Mixed Methods Approaches Flashcards

1
Q

FURTHER DEFINITION

A

CRESWELL ET AL. (2011)
- research questions whereby an understanding of IRL context is required
- use of multiple methods (quantitative/qualitative)
- intentional integration/combination
- mixing can occur at all research stages
- design drawing on strength of methods adopted
- enhance understanding/validity/rigour
- research framed within philosophical/theoretical positions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

QUALITATIVE APPROACH

A
  • context/setting
  • phenomenology/understanding
  • inductive
  • theory development
  • exploratory
  • rich/deep data
  • systematic/rigorous
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

QUANTITATIVE APPROACH

A
  • deductive
  • test theories of hypotheses
  • measures
  • objective
  • measurable evidence
  • assumes knowable reality
  • replication/generalisability
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH: DEVELOPMENT

A

JOHNSON & ONWUEGBUZIE (2004)
- ie. positivist paradigm
- historical cornerstone of socio-science research
- Purists call researchers to “eliminate biases & remain emotionally detached/uninvolved w/objects of study; tests/empirically justify states hypotheses

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

QUALITATIVE RESEARCH: DEVELOPMENT

A

JOHNSON & ONWUEGBUZIE (2004)
- support constructivist/interpretivist paradigm
- contend that:
1) multiple-constructed realities abound
2) time/context free generalisations are neither desirable/possible
3) research = value bound
4) impossible to differentiate fully causes/effects
5) logic flows from specific -> general
6) knower/known cannot be separated as subjective knower is only reality source

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

CALL TO END PARADIGM CONFRONTATION

A
  • call for “truce” between 2 major paradigms
  • many major authors/researchers felt quantitative/qualitative research methodologies = compatible
  • many social-scientists now believe there’s no major problem area that should be studied exclusively w/1 research method
  • quantitative = if; qualitative = why/how
    TASHAKKORI & TEDDLIE (2008)
  • we should use whatever philosophical/methodological approach that works for particular research issues under study
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

4 FACTORS

A

1) THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE
2) PRIORITY OF STRATEGY
3) SEQUENCY OF DATA COLLECTION IMPLEMENTATION
4) POINT AT WHICH DATA ARE INTEGRATED

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE

A

EXPLICIT
- based firmly on theory
IMPLICIT
- based indirectly on theory

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

PRIORITY OF STRATEGY

A
  • equal
  • qualitative
  • quantitative
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

SEQUENCE OF DATA COLLECTION IMPLEMENTATION

A
  • qualitative first
  • quantitative first
  • no sequence
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

POINT AT WHICH DATA ARE INTEGRATED

A
  • at data collection
  • at data analysis
  • at data interpretation
  • w/some combination
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

MULTIPLE STUDY EXAMPLE

A

STUDY 1
- quantitative study w/reported results + …
STUDY 2
- qualitative study w/reported results + …
STUDY 3
- quantitative study w/reported results

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

MAIN DESIGNS

A

1) SEQUENTIAL EXPLANATORY METHOD
2) SEQUENTIAL TRANSFORMATIVE STRATEGY
3) CONCURRENT TRIANGULATION STRATEGY
4) CONCURRENT NESTED STRATEGY
5) CONCURRENT TRANSFORMATIVE STRATEGY

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

SEQUENTIAL EXPLANATORY METHOD

A
  • employs 2 dif data-collection time points:
    1) quantitative data collected first
    2) qualitative data collected last
  • equal priority given to both
  • primary focus = to explain quantitative results by exploring certain results in more detail/helping explain unexpected results (ie. using follow-up interviews to better understand results of quantitative study)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

SEQUENTIAL EXPLANATORY METHOD: EVALUATION

A

STRENGTH
- relatively straight forward via clear distinct stages
- easier to describe > concurrent strategies
WEAKNESS
- v time consuming esp. when both phases are given equal consideration/priority

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

SEQUENTIAL TRANSFORMATIVE STRATEGY

A

CRESWELL (2003)
- 2 distinct data collection phases; either type can be collected first
- priority can be given to either/both data types; data are integrated during interpretation
- primary purpose = employ methods best able to serve theoretical perspective of researcher
- may be able to give vice to diverse perspectives & better advocate for pps/better understand phenomenon/process changing due to being studied

17
Q

SEQUENTIAL TRANSFORMATIVE STRATEGY: EVALUATION

A

STRENGTH
- v straight forward in terms of implementation/reporting
WEAKNESS
- time consuming
- little guidance due to relative lit lack on transformative nature of moving from 1st phase of data collection to 2nd

18
Q

CONCURRENT TRIANGULATION STRATEGY

A
  • 2 concurrent data collection points
  • priority should be equal BUT can be given to either approach
  • data = integrated during interpretation phase; either lack of convergence/convergence strengthening knowledge claim in interpretation notes
  • data integration can also occur during analysis
19
Q

CONCURRENT TRIANGULATION STRATEGY: EVALUATION

A

STRENGTHS
- familiar to many researchers
- shorter data collection time in comparison to sequential methods
- offsets weaknesses inherent to 1 design by using both
WEAKNESSES
- requires great deal of expertise/effort to study phenomenon under consideration using 2 dif methods
- may be difficult to compare 2 dif types of data as well as resolve discrepancies (if arisen)

20
Q

CONCURRENT NESTED STRATEGY

A
  • 2 data collection methods: 1 embedded (nested) within the other
  • priority given to primary data collection approach w/less emphasis placed on nested approach
  • data mixed during analysis phase
21
Q

CONCURRENT NESTED STRATEGY: EVALUATION

A

STRENGTHS
- able to collect 2 types of data simultaneously
- can collect both quantitative/qualitative data allowing for perspectives from each
- provides advantages of both methods
WEAKNESSES
- data need to be transformed to allow integration during analysis; may lead to issues in resolving discrepancies occurring between dif data types
- little lit here; results may be bias by differing priorities assigned to research design results

22
Q

CONCURRENT TRANSFORMATIVE STRATEGY

A
  • 2 concurrent data collection phases
  • priority may be given to either/may be equal
  • data = integrated during analysis/interpretation phase (possibly)
  • guided by specific theoretical perspective (ie. critical theory/advocacy/participatory research/theoretical framework)
23
Q

CONCURRENT TRANSFORMATIVE STRATEGY: EVALUATION

A

STRENGTHS
- can collect both quantitative/qualitative data simultaneously allowing for perspectives from each
- provides advantages of both methods
- familiar to many researchers
- shorter data collection time compared w/sequential methods
- offsets weaknesses inherent to 1 design via both
WEAKNESSES
- data need to be transformed to allow integration during analysis
- may lead to issues resolving discrepancies that occur between dif data types
- requires great deal of expertise/effort to study phenomenon under consideration using 2 dif methods

24
Q

STRENGTHS

A
  • seen to solve weaknesses that both quantitative/qualitative research suffer from:
    QUANTIATIVE
  • not taking into account context of pps talk
  • voices not “heard” in final analysis
    QUALITATIVE
  • potential interference of researcher; heavily involved in coding/interpreting findings
  • cannot generalise to wider pop
    MIXED METHODS: FIX
  • researchers have possibility to use wide variety of data collection/analysis; could arguably solve issues
25
Q

NEVES & BAECKER (2020)

A
  • methods integrated in 2 longitudinal studies to provide:
    1) detailed/nuanced picture of long-term adoption/use/social outcomes of technology
    2) in-depth understanding of older adults’ needs/contexts regarding tech-based interventions
  • data simultaneously collected via qualitative (interviews/field observations)/quantitative (tech logs/psychometric scales)/mixed methods techniques (ie. usability/accessibility tests)
  • based on tasks/mixed qs (ie. qualitative/quantitative) to evaluate how easy/accessible/satisfactory tech is for users
  • employed cross-disciplinary approach combining methods used in sociology (ie. interviews)/computer science (ie. usability tests) to grasp intervention’s social/technical dimensions
26
Q

NEVES & BAECKER (2020): RESULTS

A
  • accessible communication tech can enhance social interaction/connectedness to help address social isolation/loneliness in later life
  • supported in lit: Findlay (2003); Poscia et al. (2018)
  • enabled by mixed methods design
  • demonstrate how such techs can be adopted/used to achieve said social outcomes
27
Q

BAZELY (2004)

A
  • established rues for controlling validity in standard quantitative/qualitative research
  • same rules must be followed when methods are combined

Statistics & Research Methods II (8 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions