Dear Carole,

Thank you for your enlightening answer! Concerning what you said about the survey (mixing qualitative methods/technics in the same quantitative research), isn't a multi-method approach? I've seen researchers discussing this before.

Best regards!

The editors of the Journal of Mixed Methods Research have recently defined multiple methods as a broader category that includes mixed methods (where there has to be both a qualitative and quantitative method).

But in my opinion, whether your work is truly mixed methods depends on the degree of integration between the qualitative and quantitative methods. If you have simply done two separate studies, with little connection between, then them I would find it dubious to call that mixed methods. One potential resolution to such a separation is to have a further Discussion section that describes the connection between the two types of data.

Professor Morgan,

Thanks for your insight on this discussion. Both articles certainly have a strong connection as the qualitative article's results will be used for the instrument construction of the quantitative article and further meta-inferences. This is a fresh information (multiple methods). I will look for this Journal of Mixed Methods Research edition.

The discussion section is already used in mix methods dissertations and thesis at my Uni's department.

Yves - David L Morgan is correct in saying that whether your work is truly mixed methods depends on the degree of integration between the qualitative and quantitative methods. The overall goal of mixed methods research, of combining qualitative and quantitative research components, is to expand and strengthen a study’s conclusions and, therefore, contribute to the published literature. In all studies, the use of mixed methods should contribute to answering one’s research questions. Bryman (2006) conducted a content analysis of 232 mixed methods studies across five disciplines: sociology; social psychology; human, social, and cultural geography; management; and organizational behavior. Bryman (2007) observed that many of the authors of these studies explicitly indicated the collection of qualitative and quantitative data, but tended to report results from one type of data only or presented qualitative and quantitative results separately “so that there was more or less no integration at all”

Thank you Dr Manzoor Hussain

I guess it became clear for me now that we need to be sure of the integration when we write our report.

Best!

Dear Yves, is one of the two components designed as a validation tool of the other? Have you consider the possibility of using a non-traditional research method?

Here some food for thoughts"

Article Non-Traditional Research Methods and Regional Planning Needs...

Have a nice day!