Oslo Summer School in Comparative Social Science Studies 2018

Mixed and Merged Methods: Toward a Methodological Pluralism

Professor Dr. Giampietro Gobo, Department of Social and Political Studies, University of Milan, Italy

Course dates: 30 July - 3 August 2018

Application procedures

Main disciplines: Methodology, Sociology,
Political Science, Psychology, Economics, Geography

Course Credits: 10 pts (ECTS)
Limitation: PhD students only. 30 participants


Objectives and learning outcome
From the 1990s, mixed methods – the integration of “qualitative and quantitative approaches or methods in a single study or a program of inquiry” (Tashakkori and Creswell 2007: 4) – are an important aspect of contemporary social research.

However, their presence is not new in the methodological landscape. Historically, mixed methods were a common practice for almost one century, since the making of social research until the late 1930s. Examples are: the seminal work of the French Frédéric Le Play in the late 1840s; the inquiries directed by the Englishmen Charles Booth in 1886 and B. Seebohm Rowntree in 1899; the golden age of the Chicago School in the 1920s; the studies conducted by the Austrian P.F. Lazarsfeld from the 1930s; the work of the American Rensis Likert in the same period, and so on.

Therefore, the current trend of mixed methods did not emerge unexpectedly, but it is rooted in important experiences and practices of the past, without which the philosophy and epistemological foundations of contemporary mixed methods research cannot be fully understood.

After a historically introduction on the making of mixed methods and their renaissance in the 1990s, the course will give an overview about current debates and the most important issues in the field.

The course will first propose an alternative classification (of the main methodologies currently used in social sciences), aiming to overcome the outdated dichotomy qualitative-quantitative. Then, the (apparently obsolete) language of social research (shaped by terms such as 'measurement', 'concepts', 'hypothesis', ‘indicators’, ‘variable', ‘sampling’, ‘generalization’ and so on) will be revisited in the light of a new epistemological framework; that will serve as a basis for re-joining qualitative and quantitative approaches on a new methodological ground, which was called by someone “third paradigm” (Tashakkori and Teddlie 1998, Greene and Caracelli 2003, Morgan 2007, Creswell and Plano Clark 2011).

As a result, course participants will acquire skills and competencies in order to design a mixed methods study and develop an appropriate strategy to answer specific research questions. In this regard, some little-known techniques (“inter-vey”, calendar interviewing, Delphi method, mystery shopper), classified as “merged methods” (Gobo 2015), will be showed. They are particularly interesting because could represent an overshooting of the qualitative and quantitative divide, by the fact they embody in one single method the advantages of either approaches or methods (Gobo 2016).

Finally, it will be argued how mixed methods are useful for decolonizing contemporary methodology and why they are particularly suitable for studying multicultural societies.

During the course, participants (if they wish) will have the chance to share own ideas and plans regarding a mixed methods design (e.g. a PhD project, a fieldwork problem and so on) and receive comments, suggestions and advices emerging from the collective debate.


Research designs/assignments
Students have two options in terms of submitting a research design/paper in order to receive ECTS credits:

  1. In particular, students have the option of presenting a 2.500 word research project in the concluding Friday session of the course week for constructive critiques by course participants as well as the lecturer. Presumably, students will choose to present the research design for their PhD thesis, though students could also present a research design for a separate project, article, or edited volume. Research designs should be crafted according to the guidelines offered, in advance and in a separate e-mail sent to you, by the lecturer/summer school administration.
  2. It is also possible to earn a course certificate together with 10 ECTS credits points for a PhD program by submitting a short essay (3.000 – 4.000 words) within two months after the course.


Specific requirements
Since the focus of the course is not on qualitative and quantitative methods itself (although short summarizing overviews about essentials of qualitative and quantitative methodology and methods will be given) it is expected that course participants have at least basic knowledge about qualitative and quantitative research methods.


COURSE OUTLINE

Lecture 1 (part A): Mixed methods: a historical view
Current mixed methods did not emerge unexpectedly in the late 1980s. They have their roots in several “ancestral” tradition and practices: the European making of social surveys, the Chicago School heritage, and the legacy of Weber, Lazarsfeld and Likert. Recovering these experiences, enable us to better understand the philosophy and epistemological foundations of contemporary mixed methods research. In addition an historical viewpoint immunizes us against the ingenuousness (increasingly commonplace among contemporary social scientists) of presenting as novel theories and methods which were proposed seventy or eighty years ago. Knowledge of history saves us from having constantly to reinvent the wheel…

Readings:

  • Bryman, A. (2008b), 'The end of the paradigm wars?', in P. Alasuutari, J. Brannen and L. Bickman (eds) Handbook of Social Research, London: Sage, pp. 13-25.
  • Gobo, Giampietro (2005) The Renaissance of qualitative methods, in Forum Qualitative Social Research, 6(3), http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/3-05/05-3-42-e.htm
  • Gobo, Giampietro (2014), Surveying the survey: back to the past, Gobo, G. and Mauceri, S., Constructing Survey Data. An interactional approach, London: Sage, chap. 1, pp. 3-14
  • Johnson, Burke; Gray, Robert (2010): A history of philosophical and theoretical issues for mixed methods research. In: Tashakkori, Abbas; Teddlie, Charles (eds.): Sage handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage, pp. 69 – 94.
  • Lazarsfeld, P.F., & Oberschall, A.R. (1965). Max Weber and empirical social research. American Sociological Review, 30(2), 185–99.
  • Maxwell, J.A. (2016), Expanding the History and Range of Mixed Methods Research, Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 10(1): 12–27.
  • Sieber, S.D. (1973). The integration of fieldwork and survey methods. American Journal of Sociology, 6, 1335–59.


Lecture 1 (part B): An alternative classification of research methods: overcoming the dichotomy qualitative-quantitative
The most common classification of current research methods is the dichotomy qualitative-quantitative. However, besides being outdated, it does not reflect the plurality and complexity of the contemporary research practices. In order to improve the understanding of such complexity, the first lecture will discuss three important issues: 1) what is a classification, 2) what is a methodology, and 3) what is a method. The answer to these three questions will lead us to formulate a new classification proposal, which assumes sixth main methodologies in social sciences.

Readings:

  • Bryman, A. (2008a), 'Of methods and methodology', in Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management, 3, 2: 159-68
  • Gobo, Giampietro and Molle Andrea (2017), Method or methodology? Locating ethnography in the methodological landscape, in Gobo, Giampietro and Molle Andrea (2017), Doing Ethnography, London: Sage, chap. 2, pp. 15-31.
  • Marradi, Alberto (1990), Classification, Typology, Taxonomy, in Quality and Quantity", XXIV, 2: 129-57.


Lecture 2: Revitalizing the (apparently obsolete) traditional language of social research
Terms such as 'measurement', 'concepts', 'hypothesis', ‘indicators’, ‘model’, ‘variable', ‘sampling’, ‘generalization’ seem old-fashioned. However, they are, unaware and tacitly, performed by social scientists in every single research act; because they are properties of both common—sense and scientist reasoning. Hence, what we need is not to abandon them but to revitalize within a new agenda. Whereby they will be shortly revisited in the light of a new epistemological framework, which will serve firstly to understand that measuring, counting, scaling and classifying are four different ways of assembling data; secondly as a basis for re-joining qualitative and quantitative approaches on a new methodological ground.

Readings:

  • Gobo, Giampietro (2018), Upside down. Reinventing research design, in Uwe Flick (ed.), Handbook of Qualitative Data Collection, London, Sage, (Chapter 5), forthcoming.
  • Hammersley, Martyn (2010). Is Social Measurement Possible, and is it Necessary? In: Walford, Geoffrey; Tucker, Eric and Viswanathan, Madhu eds. Sage Handbook of Measurement. London, UK: Sage, pp. 409–426.
  • Maxwell, J. A. (2010) ‘Using numbers in qualitative research’, Qualitative Inquiry, 16(6): 475–82.
  • Maxwell, J. A. (2012) ‘The importance of qualitative research for causal explanation in education’, Qualitative Inquiry, 18(8): 649–55.


Lecture 3 (part A): What are mixed methods?
Many definitions of mixed methods are available in the literature (e.g. see Johnson, Onwuegbuzie and Turner, 2007). Sometimes they are in competition; also, there are doubts about their substance. Whether Morgan (2007) sees mixed methods as a ‘third paradigm’, with the potential to open a new era in social sciences, others suggest to discard the term ‘methods’ because it conveys the idea that qualitative and quantitative methods are independent and in some ways mutually exclusive. For this reason, they prefer to speak of ‘mixed approaches’ (Johnson and Christensen 2010), ‘mixed research’ (Onwuegbuzie 2007) or ‘mixed methodology’ (Tashakkori and Teddlie 1998). The lecture will try to unravel this skin.

Readings:

  • Brannen, Julia (2005): Mixing Methods: The Entry of Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches into the Research Process, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8:3, 173-184
  • Creswell, John W. and Plano Clark, Vicki L. (2011), Choosing a Mixed Methods Design, in Creswell, J.W. and Plano Clark, V.L, Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage, Chap. 3, pp. 53 – 106, second edition.
  • Greene JC and Caracelli VJ. 2003. Making paradigmatic sense of mixed methods practice. In Tashakkori A and Teddlie C. (eds.) Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research: 91-110.
  • Johnson, R. Burke., Onwuegbuzie, Anthony J., & Turner, L.A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 112–33.
  • Johnson, R. B. (2015).  Conclusions: Toward an Inclusive and Defensible Multimethod and Mixed Science. In S. Hesse-Biber & R. B. Johnson, The Oxford handbook of multimethod and mixed methods research inquiry. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. 
  • Kelle, Udo (2006): Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Research Practice – Purposes and Advantages. In: Gürtler, Leo; Huber, Günter L. (ed.). Special Guest Issue on Mixed Methods. Qualitative Research in Psychology,Vol. 3 (4), pp. 293-311.
  • Leech, N.L., & Onwuegbuzie, A.J. (2009). A typology of mixed methods research designs. Quality & Quantity, 43, 265–75.
  • Mauceri, Sergio (2014), Back to the ‘golden age’: towards a Multilevel Integrated Survey Approach, in Gobo, G. and Mauceri, S., Constructing Survey Data. An interactional approach, London: Sage, chap. 2, pp. 20-48
  • Morgan, D.L. (2007). Combining qualitative and quantitative methods paradigms lost and pragma­tism regained: Methodological implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1, 48–76.
  • Newman, I., Ridenour, C.S., Newman, C., & DeMarco, G.M.P., Jr. (2003). A typology of research purposes and its relationship to mixed methods. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (eds), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 167–88). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Onwuegbuzie, A.J. (2007). Mixed Methods Research in Sociology and Beyond. In G. Ritzer (ed.), Encyclopedia of Sociology, Vol. VI (pp. 2978–81). Oxford: Blackwell.
  • Tashakkori, A., & Creswell, J. (2007). Exploring the nature of research questions in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(3), 207–11.
  • Tashakkori, Abbas and Teddlie, Charles (1998), Introduction to mixed methods and mixed model studies in the social and behavioral sciences, in Tashakkori, A. and Teddlie, C., Mixed methodology: combining qualitative and quantitative approaches, Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage, Chap. 1, pp. 3 – 19.


Lecture 3 (part B): Debates and controversies
The final part of the lecture focuses on the main controversies: should we talk about mixed methods or mixed strategies? About integration or complementarity? Do mixed methods really collect better data and improve theory? Participants will end up getting their own opinion, which will guide their future research.

Readings:

  • Bazeley, Pat (2016), Mixed or merged? Integration as the real challenge for mixed methods, in Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 11(3): 189-194
  • Bryman, A. (2007). Barriers to integrating quantitative and qualitative research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 8-22.
  • Flick, Uwe (2016),  Mantras and Myths: The Disenchantment of Mixed-Methods Research and Revisiting Triangulation as a Perspective, in Qualitative Inquiry, 23(1): 1 –12
  • Giddings Lynne S. (2006). Mixed-methods research: Positivism dressed in drag? Journal of Research in Nursing, 11(3), 195203. 
  • Gobo, Giampietro (2016), Why “merged” methods realize a higher integration than “mixed” methods. A reply, in Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 11(3): 199-208.
  • Greene, Jennifer C. (2008). Is Mixed Methods Social Inquiry a Distinctive Methodology?, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research,  2(1): 7-22
  • Hesse-Biber, Sharlene (2015), Mixed Methods Research: The “Thing-ness” Problem, Qualitative Health Research, 25(6), 775–88.
  • Heyvaert, M., Maes, B., & Onghena, P. (2013). Mixed methods research synthesis: Definition, frame­work, and potential. Quality & Quantity, 47, 659–76.
  • John W. Creswell (2011), Controversies in Mixed Methods Research, in Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln Y.S., The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research, chap. 15, pp. 269-83, forth edition.
  • Symonds, J., & Gorard, S. (2010, September). The death of mixed methods: Research labels and their casualties. Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, Heriot Watt University, Edinburgh, Scotland
  • Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2003). Major issues and controversies in the use of mixed methods in the social and behavioral sciences. In A.Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (eds), Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research (pp. 3–50). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.


Lecture 4: Merged methods I: two techniques (“inter-vey” and the “calendar interviewing”)
The future step in mixed methods research could be “merged methods”, represented by some little-known techniques, which embody in one single method the advantages of either approaches or methods (Gobo 2015). Such techniques could be an overpassing of the qualitative and quantitative divide. The lecture discusses the first two: the “inter-vey” (survey) and the “calendar interviewing” (life course, life history, autobiographical research, time diary).

Readings:

  • Belli, Robert F. and Callegaro, Mario (2009), The emergence of calendar interviewing: A theoretical and empirical rationale, in R. F. Belli, F. P. Stafford, & D. F. Alwin (Eds.), Calendar and time diary methods in life course research (pp. 31-52). Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Gobo, G (2011), Back to Likert. Towards a conversational survey, in Williams, Malcolm and Vogt, Paul (eds.), The Sage Handbook of Innovation in Social Research Methods, London, Sage, pp. 228-248.
  • Gobo, G. (2015), The next challenge: from mixed to merged methods, in Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 10: 4, pp. 329-31.


Lecture 5: Merged methods II: two other techniques (“Delphi method” and the” mystery shopper)
Other integrated techniques are the “Delphi method” (policy studies) and the” mystery shopper” (market research and business).

Readings:

  • Fletcher Amber J. and Marchildon Gregory P. (2014). Using the Delphi method for qualitative, participatory action research in health leadership. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 13(1): pp.1-18.
  • Michael Bloor, Helen Sampson, Susan Baker, Katrin Dahlgren (2014), Useful but no Oracle: reflections on the use of a Delphi Group in a multi-methods policy research study, in Qualitative Research, Vol 15, Issue 1, pp. 57 - 70
  • Skulmoski, Gregory J.; Hartman, Francis T.; Krahn, Jennifer (2007), The Delphi Method for Graduate Research, in Journal of Information Technology Education, v6 p1-21
  • Wiele, A. van der, Hesselink, M.G. & Iwaarden, J.D. van (2005). Mystery shopping: A tool to develop insight into customer service provision, in Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 16(4), 529-541.


Lecture 6: Decolonizing and creolizing methodology
In order to become a “third paradigm” or (simply) fully overcame the qualitative/quantitative divide, mixed methods need to discharge the colonial elements still present in either approaches or methods. Critics and opponents of globalization advocate the ambition of “decolonizing methodologies” (Tuhiwai Smith 1999, see also http://www.rangahau.co.nz/method/), designing indigenous methodologies (IM), implementing a participatory action research (PAR), and inventing a multicultural and creole methodology, where the global and local can cohabit.

Readings:

  • Fielding, Nigel G. (2014), Qualitative Research and Our Digital Futures, in Qualitative Inquiry November 2014 20(9): 1064-1073.
  • Flick, Uwe and Röhnsch, Gundula (2014), Migrating Diseases: Triangulating Approaches—Applying Qualitative Inquiry as a Global Endeavor, in Qualitative Inquiry November 20(9): 1096-109.
  • Gobo, G. (2011) Glocalizing methodology? The encounter between local methodologies, in International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 14(6): pp. 417-437.
  • Evans, M., Hole, R., Berg, L.D., Hutchinson, P., and Sookraj, D. (2009). Common insights, differing methodologies. Toward a fusion of indigenous methodologies, participatory action research, and white studies in an urban aboriginal research agenda, Qualitative Research, 15(5), 893–910.
  • Heath, A. F., Fisher, S., & Smith, S. (2005). The globalization of public opinion research. Annual Review of Political Science 8: 297–333.
  • Weaver, Lesley Jo and Kaiser, Bonnie N. (2015), Developing and Testing Locally Derived Mental Health Scales: Examples from North India and Haiti, Field Methods 2015: 27(2):115-130


Lecture 7: Sampling: outlines of a ideographic theory of samples
An important step in the mixed methods design is sampling. The lecture explores the different concepts of sampling, offering an alternative vision that reconciles quantitative requests and qualitative needs.

Readings:

  • Lieberson, Stanley (1992): Small N´s and big conclusions: an examination of the reasoning in comparative studies based on a small number of cases, reprinted in Gomm, R., Hammersley, M. and Foster, P. (eds.): Case Study Method. Key Issues, Key Texts. London: Sage, pp. 208-22.
  • Onwuegbuzie, Anthony and Collins, Kathleen (2007), A Typology of Mixed Methods Sampling Designs in Social Science Research, in The Qualitative Report, 12 (2), pp.281-316.
  • Julia L. Sharp, Catherine Mobley, Cathy Hammond, Cairen Withington, Sam Drew, Sam Stringfield, Natalie Stipanovic (2012), A Mixed Methods Sampling Methodology for a Multisite Case Study, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 6, Issue 1, pp. 34 - 54
  • Charles Teddlie, Fen Yu (2007), Mixed Methods Sampling: A Typology With Examples, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 1, Issue 1, pp. 77 - 100


Lecture 8: Generalizing: a dissent view
As for sampling, also the generalization of the research findings is an important step. On this issue there are different divergent positions, which will be described and discussed. The lecture will end up with an alternative proposal.

Readings:

  • Connolly, P. (1998), “Dancing to the wrong tune”: Ethnography, Generalization, and research on racism in schools, in P. Connolly and B. Troyna (eds.) Researching Racism in Education, Open University Press, Buckingham, pp. 122-39.
  • Dumez, Hervi (2015), "What Is a Case, and What Is a Case Study?" Bulletin of Sociological Methodology/Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique, 127, 1:43-57.
  • Edwards P. & Bélanger J. (2008): "Generalizing from Workplace Ethnographies: From Induction to Theory" in Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 37 (2008); 291-313.
  • Gobo, Giampietro (2008): "Re-conceptualizing generalization: old issues in a new frame." In: Alasuutari, Pertti, Bickman, Leonard, Brannen, Julia (eds.): The Sage handbook of social research methods. London: Sage, pp. 193 – 227.
  • Halkier B. (2011): Methodological Practicalities in Analytical Generalization. Qualitative Inquiry 17 (9):787-797
  • Payne, Geoff and Williams, Malcolm (2005), Generalization in Qualitative Research, Sociology, Vol. 39, No. 2, 295-314
  • Schofield Janet Ward (1990), Increasing the generalizability of qualitative research, in E.W. Eisner and A. Peshkin (eds.), Qualitative Inquiry in Education: The Continuing Debate, New York: Teachers College Press.
  • Simons, H. (2015), Interpret in context: generalizing from the single case in evaluation, Evaluation, 21(2) 173–188.
  • Williams, Malcolm (2000), 'Interpretivism and generalisation', Sociology 34(2), pp. 209–24.


Lecture 9 and 10: Student research design presentations
See the introduction on research designs/assignments for details.


Some examples of mixed methods empirical research

  • Bronwyn Hall, Kirsten Howard (2008), A Synergistic Approach: Conducting Mixed Methods Research With Typological and Systemic Design Considerations, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 2 (3): 248 - 269
  • Nataliya V. Ivankova (2014), Implementing Quality Criteria in Designing and Conducting a Sequential QUAN → QUAL Mixed Methods Study of Student Engagement With Learning Applied Research Methods Online, Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 8, Issue 1, pp. 25 - 51
  • Monica Reid Kerrigan  (2014), A Framework for Understanding Community Colleges’ Organizational Capacity for Data Use: A Convergent Parallel Mixed Methods Study, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 8, Issue 4, pp. 341 - 362
  • Mauceri, S, (2014). Teenage homophobia: A multilevel and integrated survey approach to the social construction of prejudice in high school. SAGE Research Methods Cases. doi.org/10.4135/978144627305013503433
  • Donald J. Nicolson, Peter Knapp, Peter Gardner, David K. Raynor (2011), Combining Concurrent and Sequential Methods to Examine the Usability and Readability of Websites With Information About Medicines, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 5, Issue 1, pp. 25 - 51
  • Vicki L. Plano Clark, Nancy Anderson, Jessica A. Wertz, Yuchun Zhou, Karen Schumacher, Christine Miaskowski (2014), Conceptualizing Longitudinal Mixed Methods Designs: A Methodological Review of Health Sciences Research, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 9, Issue 4, pp. 297 - 319
  • Eleanor Palo Stoller, Noah J. Webster, Carol E. Blixen, Richard A. McCormick, Andrew J. Hund, Adam T. Perzynski, Stephanie W. Kanuch, Charles L. Thomas, Kyle Kercher, Neal V. Dawson (2009), Alcohol Consumption Decisions Among Nonabusing Drinkers Diagnosed with Hepatitis C: An Exploratory Sequential Mixed Methods Study, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 3, Issue 1, pp. 65 - 86


Issues of integration

  • Patricia Bazeley (2009), Editorial: Integrating Data Analyses in Mixed Methods Research, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 3, Issue 3, pp. 203-7
  • Felipe González Castro, Joshua G. Kellison, Stephen J. Boyd, Albert Kopak (2010), A methodology for conducting integrative mixed methods research and data analyses, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(4) 342–60
  • Norman K. Denzin (2012), Triangulation 2.0, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 6, Issue 2, pp. 80-8
  • Nigel G. Fielding (2012), Triangulation and Mixed Methods Designs: Data Integration With New Research Technologies, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 6, Issue 2, pp. 124 - 136
  • Uwe Flick, Vjenka Garms-Homolová, Wolfram J. Herrmann, Joachim Kuck, Gundula Röhnsch (2012), “I Can’t Prescribe Something Just Because Someone Asks for It . . .”: Using Mixed Methods in the Framework of Triangulation, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 6, Issue 2, pp. 97 - 110
  • Kenneth R. Howe (2012), Mixed Methods, Triangulation, and Causal Explanation, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 6, Issue 2, pp. 89 - 96
  • Sharlene Hesse-Biber (2012), Feminist Approaches to Triangulation: Uncovering Subjugated Knowledge and Fostering Social Change in Mixed Methods Research, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 6, Issue 2, pp. 137 - 146
  • Donna M. Mertens, Sharlene Hesse-Biber (2012), Triangulation and Mixed Methods Research: Provocative Positions, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 6, Issue 2, pp. 75 - 79
  • Eunice E. Jang, Douglas E. McDougall, Dawn Pollon, Monique Herbert, Pia Russell (2008), Integrative Mixed Methods Data Analytic Strategies in Research on School Success in Challenging Circumstances, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 2, Issue 3, pp. 221 - 247
  • Maxwell, Joseph, Chmiel Margaret, and Rogers, Silvia E. (2015) ‘Designing integration in multimethod and mixed methods research’, in Sharlene Nagy Hesse-Biber, and Burke Johnson (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Multimethod and Mixed Methods Research Inquiry, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 223–39.


Complete reading list:

  • Patricia Bazeley (2009), Editorial: Integrating Data Analyses in Mixed Methods Research, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 3, Issue 3, pp. 203-7
  • Bazeley, Pat (2016), Mixed or merged? Integration as the real challenge for mixed methods, in “Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal”, 11(3): 189-194
  • Belli, Robert F. and Callegaro, Mario (2009), The emergence of calendar interviewing: A theoretical and empirical rationale, in R. F. Belli, F. P. Stafford and D. F. Alwin (Eds.), Calendar and time diary methods in life course research (pp. 31-52). Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Michael Bloor, Helen Sampson, Susan Baker, Katrin Dahlgren (2014), Useful but no Oracle: reflections on the use of a Delphi Group in a multi-methods policy research study, in Qualitative Research, Vol 15, Issue 1, pp. 57 - 70
  • Brannen, Julia (2005): Mixing Methods: The Entry of Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches into the Research Process, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8:3, 173-184
  • Bronwyn Hall, Kirsten Howard (2008), A Synergistic Approach: Conducting Mixed Methods Research With Typological and Systemic Design Considerations, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 2 (3): 248 - 269
  • Bryman, A. (2007). Barriers to integrating quantitative and qualitative research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 8-22.
  • Bryman, Alan (2008a), 'Of methods and methodology', in Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management, 3(2), pp. 159-68.
  • Bryman, A. (2008b), The end of the paradigm war?, in P. Alasuutari, J. Brannen and L. Bickman (eds.) The SAGE Handbook of Social Research Methods, London: Sage, pp. 13-25.
  • Felipe González Castro, Joshua G. Kellison, Stephen J. Boyd, Albert Kopak (2010), A methodology for conducting integrative mixed methods research and data analyses, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(4) 342–60
  • Connolly, P. (1998), “Dancing to the wrong tune”: Ethnography, Generalization, and research on racism in schools, in P. Connolly and B. Troyna (eds.) Researching Racism in Education, Open University Press, Buckingham, pp. 122-39.
  • Creswell John W. (2011), Controversies in Mixed Methods Research, in Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln Y.S., The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research, chap. 15, pp. 269-83, forth edition.
  • Creswell, John W. and Plano Clark, Vicki L. (2011), Choosing a Mixed Methods Design, in Creswell, J.W. and Plano Clark, V.L, Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage, Chap. 3, pp. 53 – 106, second edition.
  • Norman K. Denzin (2012), Triangulation 2.0, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 6, Issue 2, pp. 80-8
  • Edwards P. & Bélanger J. (2008): Generalizing from Workplace Ethnographies: From Induction to Theory. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 37 (2008);291-313.
  • Evans, M., Hole, R., Berg, L.D., Hutchinson, P., and Sookraj, D. (2009). Common insights, differing methodologies. Toward a fusion of indigenous methodologies, participatory action research, and white studies in an urban aboriginal research agenda, Qualitative Research, 15(5), 893–910.
  • Nigel G. Fielding (2012), Triangulation and Mixed Methods Designs: Data Integration With New Research Technologies, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 6, Issue 2, pp. 124 - 136
  • Fielding, Nigel G. (2014), Qualitative Research and Our Digital Futures, in Qualitative Inquiry, 20(9): 1064-1073.
  • Fletcher Amber J. and Marchildon Gregory P. (2014). Using the Delphi method for qualitative, participatory action research in health leadership. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 13(1): pp.1-18.
  • Flick, Uwe (2016),  Mantras and Myths: The Disenchantment of Mixed-Methods Research and Revisiting Triangulation as a Perspective, in Qualitative Inquiry, 23(1): 1 –12
  • Uwe Flick, Vjenka Garms-Homolová, Wolfram J. Herrmann, Joachim Kuck, Gundula Röhnsch (2012), Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 6, Issue 2, pp. 97 - 110
  • Flick, Uwe and Röhnsch, Gundula (2014), Migrating Diseases: Triangulating Approaches—Applying Qualitative Inquiry as a Global Endeavor, in Qualitative Inquiry, 20(9): 1096-109.
  • Gobo, Giampietro (2008): Re-conceptualizing generalization: old issues in a new frame. In: Alasuutari, Pertti, Bickman, Leonard, Brannen, Julia (eds.): The SAGE Handbook of Social Research Methods. London: Sage, pp. 193 – 227.
  • Gobo, Giampietro (2011) Glocalizing methodology? The encounter between local methodologies, in International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 14(6): pp. 417-437.
  • Gobo, Giampietro (2011), Back to Likert. Towards a conversational survey, in Williams, Malcolm and Vogt, Paul (eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Innovation in Social Research Methods, London, Sage, pp. 228-248.
  • Gobo, Giampietro (2014), Surveying the survey: back to the past, in Gobo, G. and Mauceri, S., Constructing Survey Data. An interactional approach, London: Sage, chap. 1, pp. 3-14
  • Gobo, G. (2015), The next challenge: from mixed to merged methods", in “Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal”, 10: 4, pp. 329-31.
  • Gobo, Giampietro (2016), Why “merged” methods realize a higher integration than “mixed” methods. A reply, in “Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal”, 11(3): 199-208.
  • Gobo, Giampietro (2005) The Renaissance of qualitative methods, in «Forum Qualitative Social Research», 6(3), http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/3-05/05-3-42-e.htm
  • Gobo, Giampietro and Molle, Andrea (2017), Designing research, Gobo, G. and Molle, A., Doing Ethnography, London: Sage, chap. 5, pp. 69-96.
  • Gobo, Giampietro and Molle, Andrea (2017), Method or methodology? Locating ethnography in the methodological landscape, in Gobo, G. and Molle, A., Doing Ethnography, London: Sage, chap. 2, pp. 15-31.
  • Greene, Jennifer C. (2008). Is Mixed Methods Social Inquiry a Distinctive Methodology?, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research,  2(1): 7-22
  • Greene JC and Caracelli VJ. 2003. Making paradigmatic sense of mixed methods practice. In Tashakkori A and Teddlie C. (eds.) Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research: 91-110.
  • Halkier B. (2011): Methodological Practicalities in Analytical Generalization. Qualitative Inquiry 17 (9):787-797
  • Hammersley, Martyn (2010), Is Social Measurement Possible, and is it Necessary? in Walford, Geoffrey; Tucker, Eric and Viswanathan, Madhu (eds.), Sage Handbook of Measurement, London, Sage, pp. 409–426.
  • Heath, A. F., Fisher, S., & Smith, S. (2005). The globalization of public opinion research. Annual Review of Political Science 8: 297–333.
  • Heyvaert, M., Maes, B., & Onghena, P. (2013). Mixed methods research synthesis: Definition, frame­work, and potential. Quality & Quantity, 47, 659–76.
  • Sharlene Hesse-Biber (2012), Feminist Approaches to Triangulation: Uncovering Subjugated Knowledge and Fostering Social Change in Mixed Methods Research, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 6, Issue 2, pp. 137 - 146
  • Kenneth R. Howe (2012), Mixed Methods, Triangulation, and Causal Explanation, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 6, Issue 2, pp. 89 - 96
  • Nataliya V. Ivankova (2014), Implementing Quality Criteria in Designing and Conducting a Sequential QUAN → QUAL Mixed Methods Study of Student Engagement With Learning Applied Research Methods Online, Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 8, Issue 1, pp. 25 - 51
  • Eunice E. Jang, Douglas E. McDougall, Dawn Pollon, Monique Herbert, Pia Russell (2008), Integrative Mixed Methods Data Analytic Strategies in Research on School Success in Challenging Circumstances, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 2, Issue 3, pp. 221 - 247
  • Johnson, Burke and Gray, Robert (2010), A history of philosophical and theoretical issues for mixed methods research, in: Tashakkori, A. and Teddlie, C. (eds.): The SAGE handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA., Sage, pp. 69 – 94.
  • Johnson, R. Burke, Onwuegbuzie, Anthony J., & Turner, L.A. (2007), Toward a definition of mixed methods research, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 112–33.
  • Johnson, R. B. (2015). Conclusions: Toward an Inclusive and Defensible Multimethod and Mixed Science. In S. Hesse-Biber & R. B. Johnson, The Oxford handbook of multimethod and mixed methods research inquiry. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. 
  • Kelle, Udo (2006): Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Research Practice – Purposes and Advantages. In: Gürtler, Leo; Huber, Günter L. (ed.). Special Guest Issue on Mixed Methods. Qualitative Research in Psychology,  3(4), pp. 293-311.
  • Monica Reid Kerrigan  (2014), A Framework for Understanding Community Colleges’ Organizational Capacity for Data Use: A Convergent Parallel Mixed Methods Study, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 8, Issue 4, pp. 341 - 362
  • Lazarsfeld, P.F. and Oberschall, A.R. (1965). Max Weber and empirical social research, in American Sociological Review, 30(2), 185–99.
  • Leech, N.L., and Onwuegbuzie, A.J. (2009). A typology of mixed methods research designs. Quality & Quantity, 43, 265–75.
  • Lieberson, Stanley (1992): Small N´s and big conclusions: an examination of the reasoning in comparative studies based on a small number of cases, reprinted in Gomm, R., Hammersley, M. and Foster, P. (eds.): Case Study Method. Key Issues, Key Texts. London: Sage. S. 208-222.
  • Marradi, Alberto (1990), Classification, Typology, Taxonomy, "Quality and Quantity", XXIV, 2: 129-57.
  • Mauceri, Sergio (2014), Back to the ‘golden age’: towards a Multilevel Integrated Survey Approach, in Gobo, G. and Mauceri, S., Constructing Survey Data. An interactional approach, London: Sage, chap. 2, pp. 20-48
  • Mauceri, S, (2014). Teenage homophobia: A multilevel and integrated survey approach to the social construction of prejudice in high school. SAGE Research Methods Cases. doi.org/10.4135/978144627305013503433
  • Maxwell, J. A. (2010) ‘Using numbers in qualitative research’, Qualitative Inquiry, 16(6): 475–82.
  • Maxwell, J. A. (2012) ‘The importance of qualitative research for causal explanation in education’, Qualitative Inquiry, 18(8): 649–55.
  • Maxwell, J.A. (2016), Expanding the History and Range of Mixed Methods Research, Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 10(1): 12–27.
  • Maxwell, Joseph, Chmiel Margaret, and Rogers, Silvia E. (2015) ‘Designing integration in multimethod and mixed methods research’, in Sharlene Nagy Hesse-Biber, and Burke Johnson (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Multimethod and Mixed Methods Research Inquiry, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 223–39.
  • Donna M. Mertens, Sharlene Hesse-Biber (2012), Triangulation and Mixed Methods Research: Provocative Positions, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 6, Issue 2, pp. 75 - 79
  • Morgan, D.L. (2007). Combining qualitative and quantitative methods paradigms lost and pragma­tism regained: Methodological implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1, 48–76.
  • Newman, I., Ridenour, C.S., Newman, C., & DeMarco, G.M.P., Jr. (2003). A typology of research purposes and its relationship to mixed methods. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (eds), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 167–88). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Donald J. Nicolson, Peter Knapp, Peter Gardner, David K. Raynor (2011), Combining Concurrent and Sequential Methods to Examine the Usability and Readability of Websites With Information About Medicines, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 5, Issue 1, pp. 25 - 51
  • Onwuegbuzie, A.J. (2007). Mixed Methods Research in Sociology and Beyond. In G. Ritzer (ed.), Encyclopedia of Sociology, Vol. VI (pp. 2978–81). Oxford: Blackwell.
  • Onwuegbuzie, Anthony and Collins, Kathleen (2007), A Typology of Mixed Methods Sampling Designs in Social Science Research, in The Qualitative Report, 12 (2), pp.281-316.
  • Vicki L. Plano Clark, Nancy Anderson, Jessica A. Wertz, Yuchun Zhou, Karen Schumacher, Christine Miaskowski (2014), Conceptualizing Longitudinal Mixed Methods Designs: A Methodological Review of Health Sciences Research, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 9, Issue 4, pp. 297 - 319
  • Sieber, S.D. (1973). The integration of fieldwork and survey methods, in American Journal of Sociology, 6, 1335–59.
  • Payne, Geoff and Williams, Malcolm (2005), Generalization in Qualitative Research, Sociology, Vol. 39, No. 2, 295-314
  • Schofield Janet Ward (1990), Increasing the generalizability of qualitative research, in E.W. Eisner and A. Peshkin (eds.), Qualitative Inquiry in Education: The Continuing Debate, New York: Teachers College Press.
  • Eleanor Palo Stoller, Noah J. Webster, Carol E. Blixen, Richard A. McCormick, Andrew J. Hund, Adam T. Perzynski, Stephanie W. Kanuch, Charles L. Thomas, Kyle Kercher, Neal V. Dawson (2009), Alcohol Consumption Decisions Among Nonabusing Drinkers Diagnosed with Hepatitis C: An Exploratory Sequential Mixed Methods Study, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 3, Issue 1, pp. 65 – 86
  • Julia L. Sharp, Catherine Mobley, Cathy Hammond, Cairen Withington, Sam Drew, Sam Stringfield, Natalie Stipanovic (2012), A Mixed Methods Sampling Methodology for a Multisite Case Study, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 6, Issue 1, pp. 34 - 54
  • Skulmoski, Gregory J.; Hartman, Francis T.; Krahn, Jennifer (2007), The Delphi Method for Graduate Research, in Journal of Information Technology Education, v6 p1-21
  • Symonds, J., and Gorard, S. (2010). The death of mixed methods: Research labels and their casualties. Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, Heriot Watt University, Edinburgh, Scotland, September, 3-6.
  • Tashakkori, A., & Creswell, J. (2007). Exploring the nature of research questions in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(3), 207–11.
  • Tashakkori, Abbas and Teddlie, Charles (1998), Introduction to mixed methods and mixed model studies in the social and behavioral sciences, in Tashakkori, A. and Teddlie, C., Mixed methodology: combining qualitative and quantitative approaches, Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage, Chap. 1, pp. 3 – 19.
  • Charles Teddlie, Fen Yu (2007), Mixed Methods Sampling: A Typology With Examples, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol 1, Issue 1, pp. 77 - 100
  • Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2003). Major issues and controversies in the use of mixed methods in the social and behavioral sciences. In A.Tashakkori and C. Teddlie (eds), Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research (pp. 3–50). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Wiele, A. van der, Hesselink, M.G. & Iwaarden, J.D. van (2005). Mystery shopping: A tool to develop insight into customer service provision, in Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 16(4), 529-541.
  • Weaver, Lesley Jo and Kaiser, Bonnie N. (2015), Developing and Testing Locally Derived Mental Health Scales: Examples from North India and Haiti, Field Methods 2015: 27(2):115-130
  • Williams, Malcolm (2000), 'Interpretivism and generalisation', Sociology 34(2), pp. 209–24.


Recommended for additional reading
The literature on mixed methods is huge and growing. Among the many good books, four significant collections are:

  • Hesse-Biber, S. N., & Johnson, R. B. (Eds.) (2015). Oxford handbook of multimethod and mixed methods research inquiry. New York, NY: Oxford University Press​.
  • Johnson, R. Burke and Christensen, Larry B. (2014). Educational Research: Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Approaches, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, Fifth edition, pp. 744
  • Plano-Clark, Vicki L. and Creswell, John (2008) (eds.) The mixed methods reader, Thousand Oaks: Sage, pp. 640 (a collection of classical contributions on mixed methods).
  • Tashakkori, Abbas and Teddlie, Charles (2010) (eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Sciences, Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage, second edition, pp. 912.


Other books related to the topics of the course are:

  • Greene, Jennifer C. (2007): Mixed methods in social inquiry. San Francisco, CA.: Jossey Bass.
  • Jahoda, M., Lazarsfeld, P.F., & Zeisel, H. (1933). Die Arbeitslosen von Marienthal. Leipzig: Hitzel, transl. Marienthal. Sociography of an Unemployed Community. Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 2002.
  • Merton, Robert K., Coleman, James S. and Rossi, Peter H. (1976) (eds.), Qualitative and Quantitative Social Research: Papers in Honor of Paul F. Lazarsfeld, New York: The Free Press.
  • Tuhiwai Smith, Linda (1999), Decolonizing Methodologies. Research and Indigenous Peoples, London, Zed Books.
  • Varma (Ed.), Mystery Shopping - An Introduction. Hyderabad, India: Icfai University Press, 2008.


The lecturer
Dr. Giampietro Gobo is Professor of Social Research Methods and Evaluation Methods at the Faculty of Humanities at the University of Milano. He holds degrees in Sociology (Master) and in Methodology and Social Research (Ph.D.). For many years, he served as Director of the centre ICONA (Innovation and Organizational Change in the Public Administration) at the University of Milan. He has taught Research Methods, Evaluation research, Epistemology, Social Studies of Science, Ethnography and Applied Ethnography on the undergraduate, graduate and postgraduate level at various universities in Italy, Germany, Norway, Spain and US.

Areas of specialization: Epistemology, Sociology of Science, Qualitative methods, Quantitative methods, Marketing research, Organization studies, Management studies, Computer supported cooperative work, Ergonomics.


Selected publications:

Quantitative methods

  • 2001     Best practices: rituals and rhetorical strategies in the “initial telephone contact”, in «Forum Qualitative Social Research», vol. 2(1), http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/1-01/1-01gobo-e.htm
  • 2006     Set them free. Improving data quality by broadening interviewer’s task, in «International Journal of Social Research Methodology. Theory & Practice», 9(4), pp. 279–301
  • 2011     Back to Likert. Towards a conversational survey, in Williams, Malcolm and Vogt, Paul (eds.), The Sage Handbook of Innovation in Social Research Methods London, Sage, pp. 228-248 ,
  • 2014     (with Mauceri, S.), Constructing Survey Data. An interactional approach, London: Sage.


Qualitative methods

  • 2004     Sampling, representativeness and generalizability, in Seale C., Gobo G, Gubrium J.F, Silverman D., (eds.), Qualitative Research Practice, London, Sage.
  • 2005     The Renaissance of qualitative methods, in «Forum Qualitative Social Research», 6(3), http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/3-05/05-3-42-e.htm
  • 2008     Re-conceptualizing generalization. Old issues in a new frame, in Alasuutari Pertti, Brannen Julia and Bickman Leonard (eds.) The SAGE Handbook of Social Research Methods, London, Sage, pp. 193-213.
  • 2008     Doing Ethnography, London: Sage (translated in Arabic)
  • 2011     Ethnography, in Silverman, David (ed.), Qualitative Research, (third edition), London, Sage, pp. 15-34.
  • 2011     Ethnographic methods, in Badie Bertrand, Berg-Schlosser Dirk e Morlino Leonardo, Encyclopedia of Political Science, London, Sage (on behalf of International Political Science Association - IPSA ).
  • 2011     Glocalizing methodology? The encounter between local methodologies, in International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 14(6): pp. 417-437.
  • 2015     Gobo, G. (2015), The next challenge: from mixed to merged methods", in “Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal”, 10: 4, pp. 329-31.
  • 2016     Why “merged” methods realize a higher integration than “mixed” methods. A reply, in “Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal”, 11(3): 199-208.
  • 2016     What is ethnography? (with Lukas T. Marciniak) in Silverman, David (ed.), Qualitative Research, (fourth edition), London, Sage, pp. 103-119
  • 2017     Doing Ethnography (with Andrea Molle), London: Sage (second edition)
  • 2018     Qualitative research across boundaries: indigenousation, glocalization or creolization? in Cassell Cathy, Cunliffe Ann and Gandy Gina (eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Business and Management Research Methods (Chapter 29), pp. 495-514
  • 2018     Upside down. Reinventing research design, in Uwe Flick (ed.), Handbook of Qualitative Data Collection, London, Sage, (Chapter 5), forthcoming


Epistemology and Social Theory

  • 1993     Class: stories of concepts. From ordinary language to scientific language, in “Social Science Information”, 32 (3), pp. 467-89.
  • 1995     Class as metaphor. On the unreflexive transformation of a concept in an object, in “Philosophy of the Social Sciences”, 25 (4), pp. 442-67.


Organization studies

  • 2008     Crafting blindness: Its organizational construction in a first grade school, in Qualitative Sociology Review, 4(1), pp. 92-108 http://www.qualitativesociologyreview.org/ENG/Volume9/QSR_4_1_Gobo.pdf (transl. in Polish)
  • 2010     Garzone G., Catino M., Gobo, G., Bait M., Catenaccio P., Degano C. and Rozzi S. Towards an Integrated Model for the Understanding of Communication Failures in Aviation Accidents: Tenuous Identities under Pressure, in Giuliana Garzone and James Archibald (eds.), Discourse, Identities and Roles in Specialized Communication, Bern: Peter Lang, pp. 209-44.


Contact
Questions about this PhD course and the application procedures may be directed to Senior Executive Officer Tron Harald Torneby.

 

Did you find what you were looking for?
Tags: Research Methods, Methodology, Summer School, Qualitative Methods, Sociology, PhD, Political Science, Ethnography, Quantitative methods
Published Oct. 23, 2017 9:31 AM - Last modified Nov. 24, 2017 2:11 PM