How Explanatory Sequential Design can be applied in research where mediating and moderating variable exist?
How if the findings from quantitative and qualitative differ? Is this a disadvantage for the researcher? How to report the results?
Any samples of Research questions where 3 variables involved (IV, DV, and Mediator)?
In an explanatory sequential design, you need to begin by obtaining the quantitative results and then designing the qualitative follow-up study so that it can help your understand those results. For example, if you initially found a moderating effect, then you would set up qualitative interviews with two sets of people, representing the groups from the moderating effect, and then question them each about the differences involved in the original effect.
In that example, it is possible that you would not "replicate" the original moderating difference, and if so, you would want to use your qualitative data to generate hypotheses about about why this occurred .(I picked the moderating example because you need at least two IVs to have a mediating effect.)
But note that it is not typical to compare the results of the qualitative and quantitative results in an explanatory sequential design, because the usual goal for the qualitative follow-up study is to extend and build upon the quantitative results. So, be sure that your design actually does follow the template for an explanatory sequential design.
In the explanatory sequential mixed method design you will get the themes for the qualitative phase from the results you get on the quantitative phase which is the goal of this design to help constructing the qualitative phase from the quantitative. Thus, you will initially analyze and obtain the quatitative instruments results before proceeding to the qualitative analysis.
Kavita - there may be some differences between the results of the qualitative and quantitative data. We can't fully control the data and so there may well be data 'nunaces (perhaps confounding). However, as David and Abdelrazzaq have highlighted - the initial qualitative findings should inform the quantitative phase. This being the case, the quantitative findings (if interpreted correctly) should broadly 'mirror' and complement the qualitative findings. Where there are differences, it is 'interesting' for readers to see this, in the discussion, and view your interpretations (and the existing) literature as to why this might be the case.
The goals of your study flow from the problem you identify in your introduction.
The research questions flow from your goals.
Each research question must have a data collection and analysis plan.
Qualitative data can answer questions about experiences and perceptions.
As answers above have indicated, in some cases it may be appropriate to collect the quantitative data first and then design the qualitative protocols based on the quantitative results.
Other people do it the other way around. It really depends on your goals and research questions.
I often do the quantitative first, and then select participants to explore the topic in more detail with interviews, etc.
Thank you Kavita Naranasamy for your question. Usually, mixed methods are used to strengthen research and research outcomes. Also, it depends on which part is dominating the research, the qualitative vs quantitative and the purpose you need to have mixed methods. Here is the experience of authors on how to make things well-synthesised and homogenous to present a paper that is well-structured and present in its results both elements. I do not think there is a method in steps that can be described, read the literature, and attend a workshop on this area, and work with colleagues who have experience in this area to learn from them.
Also, Kavita Naranasamy I recommend reading Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research by John W. Creswell.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Medical Science Nursing
- Dissertations