No, that is known as 'survey schedule'. Mixed method entails two separate instruments (quant and qual) with two separate samples.

I agree with Sachin-Suknunan, generally you have two research instruments, e.g. a survey and a focus group or in-depth interview.

No, this does not qualify for being labeled as a mixed methods study. More often than not, answers on open ended questions end up not being used because of a difficult quantitative operationalization. Therefore, I would like to recommend you this article by O'Cathain and Nicholl (2010), that might provide you with insights on how you can combine these two survey options into one article (https://www.bmj.com/content/341/bmj.c4587.full).

Agree with the above; you used one instrument with embedded open questions to be systematically analysed. This leads to one method, which consists of some qualitative insight.

Mixed methods involves the use of a combination of a quantitative instrument and a qualitative instrument in one study - NOT a combination of closed-ended and open-ended questions in one instrument. For more details on mixed methods approaches I would recommend "An Introduction to Fully Integrated Mixed Methods Research" by Elizabeth G. Creamer

OK, I disagree with all of the above answers on the grounds that the answers to open-ended questions are indeed qualitative data. Whether or not you are doing mixed methods depends on whether you are integrating the results from qualitative and quantitative research, not on whether you used two different sources to collect your data.

Still, to do high quality mixed method research you need to have a clear design for how you will use the two types of data. One common design for the kind of data you have collected is a sequential explanatory design, QUAN --> qual, Here the plan is first to determine a set of quantitative results, and then use the qualitative data to help you understand the bases for those results.

Thank you for the above explanation which is correct - but a predominantly quan instrument with a few open-ended questions does not qualify as a Mixed Methods design. To my understanding you need a quan instrument ( a survey) and a qual instrument (i.e an interview)

I think it's important to take into account not only the nature of the data that have been collected, but also how those data are analyzed. For example, it's quite easy to collect qualitative data (e.g., via verbal responses to open-ended questions on a survey or through interviews), but those data can can be analyzed in ways that are predominantly quantitative (e.g., counting the number of times predetermined themes are mentioned within text), or by conducting a more extensive array of techniques that typify good qualitative research.

Certainly, I think that appending some open-ended questions to a set of fixed-choice questions on a survey in no way constitutes mixed-methods research. The following books might be helpful:

Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology. Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Sage.

Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research. Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. Sage

Robert Trevethan I disagree with you statement "that appending some open-ended questions to a set of fixed-choice questions on a survey in no way constitutes mixed-methods research."

In particular, if the qualitative content can be integrated with the quantitative content in ways that add to the overall understanding of the research question, then that is precisely the goal of mixed methods research. As I mentioned above, this is quite possible by using a QUAN --> qual explanatory sequential design in a survey that uses open-ended questions.

Ultimately, what matters most for mixed methods is the purpose that the two types of data serve within the overall design, not when or how they were collected.

David L Morgan, please do feel free to disagree with me if that helps attain greater clarity. Perhaps I should have written "merely appending some open-ended questions to a set of fixed-choice questions on a survey in no way constitutes mixed-methods research".

My main point was that it's important to consider how the data are analysed, not only what the data look like, before deciding whether a particular piece of research is appropriately referred to as being mixed methods.

Incidentally, do you mean "mixed mentors" in the last paragraph of your post above? If so, could you explain what you mean by that, please? I must confess to not being familiar with that term.

The definition of mixed methods research (MMR) has been a matter of contention for years. The obvious is that combining two types of data or using two different analyses of data in a study does not make it MMR. Creswell and Clark (2018) critically reviewed various definitions and proposed the core characteristics that distinguish MMR from other types of multi-method research. According to MMR characteristics, a scholar should collect and analyze quantitative and qualitative data, discussing their findings, addressing research questions within a specific research design based on a solid rationale. The attachment presents Creswell and Clark's (2018) proposed MMR core characteristics. The full citation is as follows.

Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/designing-and-conducting-mixed-methods-research/book241842

Best,

Thank you for the recommended title by Creswell and Plano-Clark. It's definitely worth reading.

Robert Trevethan I agree that "merely appending some open-ended questions to a set of fixed-choice questions on a survey in no way constitutes mixed-methods research." Throughout this discussion, I have tried to emphasize that the open-ended questions need to be carefully crafted, that they need to serve a clear purpose, and that they need to fit within a well-specified design.

What I am arguing against is the claim that using open-ended items cannot be mixed methods simply just because the qualitative data were collected in the context of a survey.

David L Morgan, thanks for getting back. It turns out our positions might not be far apart from each other. My main point was that researchers cannot claim to be conducting mixed-methods research by mere dint of having included some open-ended questions on their surveys. I agree with you that, under certain circumstances, open-ended questions on surveys can entitle researchers to claim they are conducting mixed-methods research. Apart from the circumstances you list, I would add that it's important to consider how the (verbal) data are analysed. Maybe you won't agree about that, however.

You didn't respond to my query about "mixed mentors". I'll assume, therefore, it was a typographical error on your part. If so, no problem: We all make those errors from time to time.

Robert Trevethan thanks for the reminder to edit "mixed mentors" to "mixed methods" (I have a hyper-active spelling corrector).

I'm not sure what you mean by considering how "how the (verbal) data are analysed" with open ended questions. Currently, most of the major qualitative data analysis programs (ATLAS.ti, Dedoose MAXQDA, NVivo) have what they call mixed methods features. AS far as I can tell, this mostly consists of letting you code open-ended data and then export the codes to SPSS or whatever.

I personally consider that to be a very limited form of mixed methods analysis.

David L Morgan, thanks for the reassurance about your having intended "mixed methods" rather than "mixed mentors". I've seen some mixed mentors in my time and, although I thought you probably weren't referring to them in your post, there was a possibility you were introducing an unexpected but interesting angle to the discussion.

With regard to how verbal data are analysed, I was referring to such activities as merely counting the number of times predetermined themes, or even emergent themes, are mentioned within text. To me, that kind of activity falls much more into the category of quantitative rather than qualitative analysis, and, furthermore, I believe that that kind of activity would be regarded as coming nowhere close to qualitative research by seasoned qualitative researchers.

As I mentioned above, you might not agree with me about that. If you don't agree, that's fine. Perhaps we can agree to disagree.

As far as I know, Mixed-Methods Research Design (MMRD) is called as such because the data gathered for analysis are a MIX of BOTH quantitative and qualitative types. Necessarily, these mixed DATA require mixed METHODS of analysis as well (Creswell, 2014).

Open and close-ended questions in an instrument do not make the design a MIXED-METHODS Research specially so if and when the resulting data gathered are of one type only - either qualitative OR quantitative. Hence, can not be Mixed. It is mainly the type of data that makes it a MMRD.

The purpose to use a mixed methods is to approach to a phenomenon using qualitative and quantitative techniques/methods, in such way that the results obtained for each one contribute to enrich the comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon/event, triangulating/validating each other with complementary information. The more expected results in qualitative, are balanced with those unexpected ones, that releases possible insights not covered in close-ended questions. In your research design, you would have to establish your mixed analysis (by nuancing the quantitative results with qualitative ones, using content analysis, for instance). By qualitative you can find possible causes, as well. It is highlighted to treat different data adequately: quantitative data may have, or not, a representative sample, whilst qualitative data will never be. Qualitative results will be analyzed until saturation. And many other nuances/differences between the different ways to treat the different data according to the quali/quanti approach.

You can also use references from 1) Neuman (2014), and 2) Bryman (2012), on Social Research Quantitative/Qualitative Methods (applied to any science/research field).

It depends on the analysis method you apply. If you apply such qualitative data analysis techniques as content analysis, narrative analysis or thematic analysis for the data collected via open-ended questions, it means that you employed qualitative method apart from the quantitative technique you used for analysis of closed-ended questions. Using both quantitative and qualitative data collections and analysis techniques in the same study calls for the application of mixed methods research. Besides, if the purpose of asking open-ended questions is for triangulation, then it becomes mixed methods research design. Anyhow, it is common to add open-ended questions at the end of a closed ended questionnaire with the aim of generating additional data.