Triangulation was a term that was widely used in early mixed-methods research to say something about comparing the results from different methods. Unfortunately, too many people used it for too many purposes, so that it ultimately lacked a clear meaning. As a result, the editors of the Journal of Mixed Methods Research will no long accept articles that the authors say are based on triangulation.

I strongly agree with Dr David L Morgan . I can't understand the idea of using the term triangulation in mixed-methods research due to its lack of a clear and consistent definition. Some researchers use triangulation to refer to comparing data from different sources or sub-samples, while others may use it to describe the analysis of data from multiple methods or data collected at different times. In some cases, triangulation is even used in reference to theories, causing even further confusion. The inconsistent and ambiguous nature of this term makes it challenging to evaluate the validity and reliability of research claiming to use this approach. Instead, I think, researchers should use precise and specific language to describe the methods and analysis utilized in their study. By avoiding vague terms and clearly defining their approach, researchers can ensure that their results are accurately interpreted and understood.

Dear Dr. Leo!

You spotted a very important topic to discuss. I take hereby a different approach, compared to the experts above. I searched for up-to-date articles that deal with the issue you pointed to:

1) Kazu, İ.Y., Kuvvetli, M. A triangulation method on the effectiveness of digital game-based language learning for vocabulary acquisition. Educ Inf Technol 28, 13541–13567 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11756-y, Free access: Article A triangulation method on the effectiveness of digital game-...

2) Abramovich, S. (2022). Advancing the concept of triangulation from social sciences research to mathematics education. Advances in Educational Research and Evaluation, 3(1), 201-217. https://doi.org/10.25082/AERE.2022.01.002, Available at: https://www.syncsci.com/journal/AERE/article/view/AERE.2022.01.002

3) Jessi Hanson-DeFusco, What data counts in policymaking and programming evaluation – Relevant data sources for triangulation according to main epistemologies and philosophies within social science, Evaluation and Program Planning, Volume 97, 2023,

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2023.102238., Open access: Article What Data Counts in Policymaking and Programming Evaluation-...

4) Fan, Y., Rakovic, M., van der Graaf, J., Lim, L., Singh, S., Moore, J., Molenaar, I., Bannert, M., & Gašević, D. (2023). Towards a fuller picture: Triangulation and integration of the measurement of self-regulated learning based on trace and think-aloud data. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 39(4), 1303–1324. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12801, Open access: Article Towards a fuller picture: Triangulation and integration of t...

Yours sincerely, Bulcsu Szekely

I have no doubt that one can still find references to triangulation, it takes a while for things like editorials in the Journal of Mixed Methods Research to diffuse out to the larger community. But as far back as 1989, Greene et al. analyzed a large set of studies which claimed to use triangulation and found no coherence among them.

At present, mixed methods research tends to concentrate on three basic designs: convergence, exploratory sequential, and explanatory sequential (e.g., Creswell and Plano-Clark, 2018). Most what used to be called triangulation gets absorbed into convergence in this typology, which I personally consider to be problematic because it creates the same problem: a lack of coherence in what gets called convergent designs.

The more serious issue is that the low level of integration in studies that claim to use convergent designs.At present, what is known as a "joint display" (Guetterman, 2016) is considered to be the state of the art for integrating mixed methods designs, and I strongly recommend the anyone considering the use of a convergent design begin by planning what their joint display will look like.

Dear Professor Morgan!

I totally agree with YOU and respect your work! I just wanted to contribute to this discussion and I am optimistic: that science networks will solve the problems related to the application and use of triangulation:

Steckhan, N., Ring, R., Borchert, F. et al. Triangulation of Questionnaires, Qualitative Data and Natural Language Processing: A Differential Approach to Religious Bahá’í Fasting in Germany. J Relig Health (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-023-01929-x, Quote: "To get a holistic understanding of the effects of behavioral interventions, we investigated religious fasting using a triangulation of quantitative, qualitative, and natural language analysis." Open access:

Article Triangulation of Questionnaires, Qualitative Data and Natura...

My mentor is CEO Editor-In-Chief Emeritus, Prof. Kenneth David Strang. Hope I can join your research - network!

Have a Nice DAY!

Yours sincerely, Bulcsu Szekely (HUN&FIN joint-citizen doctoral researcher)

Dear

Prof Bulcsu Szekely, Prof David L Morgan, and Prof Salah Ahmed,

Thanks a lot for your valuable academic contribution to Triangulation and Mixed Methods. The Responses, references, and Discussion helped me to understand these concepts better.

Triangulation in educational research refers to the use of multiple sources of data, methods, theories, or researchers to examine a research question. The idea behind triangulation is to enhance the validity, reliability, and credibility of research findings by cross-verifying or corroborating information from different perspectives. In educational research, triangulation can be executed in various ways:

The execution of triangulation in educational research depends on the research question, objectives, and available resources. Researchers should carefully plan their approach to triangulation, considering the strengths and limitations of each method used. By triangulating data, methods, theories, and researchers, educational researchers can enhance the rigor and trustworthiness of their findings, leading to more robust conclusions and insights in the field of education.

This time, we have an AI-generated answer that misses the basic point, which is the troubled history of the multiple meanings of triangulation. Instead, this response only considers one of several uses for triangulation: "cross-verifying or corroborating information from different perspectives." This was the original meaning proposed by Donald Campbell and others. But the 1980s and 1980s saw the rise of a different version that emphasized one method adding to what was learned by the other; prominent advocates for this version of triangulation include Nigel Fielding and Uwe Flick.

Dear Prof. Morgan!

I agree with you again. Still, may I kindly point to the task of science - to bring about new concepts, and ways of adding novel conversation -forums on how to improve the rigorousness of research. "The troubled history of triangulation" reflects the richness of thinking of scientific agents - we all are in the same boat developing academia and thoughts that are relevant to scientific research. May I say the more troubles in the history of triangulation the better for agents of science as there are going to be more perspectives to discuss about improving triangulation as a method:

Campbell, R., Goodman-Williams, R., Feeney, H., & Fehler-Cabral, G. (2020). Assessing Triangulation Across Methodologies, Methods, and Stakeholder Groups: The Joys, Woes, and Politics of Interpreting Convergent and Divergent Data. American Journal of Evaluation, 41(1), 125-144. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214018804195, Free access: Article Assessing Triangulation Across Methodologies, Methods, and S...

Yours sincerely, Bulcsu Szekely

Bulcsu Szekely I think the key problem is that concept of triangulation has become less rigorous over time. I don't think that "having more troubles" is useful when it produces an inability to define our core concepts in a clear fashion. In this case, I think it we would be better off to abandon triangulation as a longer-useful useful concept, and concentrate instead on design that still do have clear meanings.

Dear Prof. Morgan!

I see the points you made. Still, let me argue for a new aspect hereby: scientific concepts evolve as time passes by. This evolution process might become slower and more cumbersome at some point. The concept of triangulation has passed a threshold over time where it has a global acceptance level with useful applications evolving all the time. I just want to make the most of the brand-new sets of materials one can find:

Sciberras, M., Dingli, A. (2023). Research Analysis—Triangulation Approach. In: Investigating AI Readiness in the Maltese Public Administration. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 568. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-19900-4_9, Available at:

Chapter Research Analysis—Triangulation Approach

May I comment - this publication has a very clear definition of triangulation:

"Triangulation is a research approach that combines numerous data sources, theories or research methodologies to guarantee that a research study’s data, analysis, and findings are as thorough and precise as possible."

There is also a book one can refer to with a similar clear definition:

An Introduction to Research Methods for Undergraduate Health Profession Students Copyright © 2023 by Faith Alele and Bunmi Malau-Aduli is licensed under a Creative Commons, Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, Quoting: "Triangulation in mixed methods research is also known as the integration of data. It refers to the process of using multiple methods, data sources, or perspectives to gain a more comprehensive understanding of a research problem."

Every scientist or researcher may add or may opt not to add to the evolution of this concept.

Yours sincerely, Bulcsu Szekely

Bulcsu Szekely Even the article you cite as an exemplar has at best a fuzzy definition of triangulation:, saying the results should be as "thorough and precise as possible." But thorough and precise are not the same thing. Thoroughness taps into the current portion of the discussion with the idea that having more results means more comprehensive coverage of the research topic. How that connects to precision I have no idea.

The second example you gives the vague core statement of "comprehensive understanding." If this means comprehensive coverage, then it totally omits the frequent goal of using triangulation to compare the results from different methods, often with the hope of getting cross-validation through the agreement between different methods.

But I don't see any reason to go though this debate article by article. The problem is with the concept as a whole and the field as a whole. Instead of combining too many idea into one concept, I would argue for a different kind of precision: precision in meaning. One example would be using multiple methods to investigate different aspects of a complex topic, i.e., comprehensive coverage. Another example would becomparing the results from two different methods, i.e., cross validation. Both of these examples state precisely what the research goal is, which makes the pair a superior choice over the lack of clarity in triangulation.

Dear Prof. Morgan!

May I kindly emphasize about the article I quoted:

a) In my view, the more research findings, and data are available employing a specific set of analyses during multiple iterations the more precise the whole research process becomes with more reliable outputs and outcomes as a result - finetuning findings, and the methods applied.

b) Concerning the definition of the book I quoted: Following multiple iterations of the research process using different data, methods, and alternative teams of researchers, the research community gains a more comprehensive understanding of the research problem:

" ...triangulation is not as much a results-validation strategy, but more of an alternative proposal for validation, through which the breadth, depth and consistency of the methodological processes is increased" in

Tzagkarakis, S.I., Kritas, D. Mixed research methods in political science and governance: approaches and applications. Qual Quant 57 (Suppl 1), 39–53 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-022-01384-y, Free access:

Article Mixed research methods in political science and governance: ...

I consider YOU as a highly experienced scientist who does not like the concept of triangulation. I understand and respect your line of argument.

Yours sincerely, Bulcsu Szekely

An excellent thought-provoking conversation on the issue of triangulation. So the question is what should be the correct meaning of triangulation? Is it a mixed-method concept or what? There is a need for researchers to have a common ground.

Such confusion in the academic circle always happens. Let me give two common examples:

1. Superiorty of Multiple vs Single Case Study

2. Understanding the concept of abduction in logical reasoning. A lot of researchers see abduction as a combination of deduction and induction. But that is not correct.

So what should be the common ground for the concept of triangulation? Is it a research concept or what? David L Morgan

Bulcsu Szekely The whole question of whether triangulation is about validation or breadth and depth is precisely the problem. Some researchers mean one thing, others mean the other. Or more commonly they don't say anything about the issue, they just assume that the reader knows what they mean. And there is no way that Tzagkarakis et al. or anyone else can resolve this issue just by stating their own preference.

And I also respect your point of view, which you present very articulately.

Duga Ewuga I personally do not think there is much room for common ground here, because some of us (including me) think we should stop using the term triangulation, while others think it is still useful. So, a debate about whether it should stay or go doesn't leave much room for a comprise solution.

I think it is a matter of making meta-inferences between the data collected by different techniques and instruments and the theoretical foundation on which these meta-inferences should be based

Dear Prof. Morgan!

Now I understand the whole idea you are after. I consider you an expert to follow. So here we discuss the evolution of triangulation and the global scientific community will embrace new projects to define the dimensions of triangulation for conducting research in specific fields. Hereby we both contribute to the evolution of defining better the concept of triangulation. I found these articles below dealing with this concept:

1) Heale R, Forbes D Understanding triangulation in research, Evidence-Based Nursing 2013;16:98. Quote: "Triangulation in research is the use of more than one approach to researching a question. The objective is to increase confidence in the findings through the confirmation of a proposition using two or more independent measures.2 The combination of findings from two or more rigorous approaches provides a more comprehensive picture of the results than either approach could do alone.3" Available at:

https://ebn.bmj.com/content/16/4/98

2) IGI Global Dictionary 2023. Quote: "The process by which the area under investigation is looked at from different perspectives. These can include two or more methods, sample groups or investigators. It is used to ensure that the understanding of an area is as complete as possible or to confirm interpretation through the comparison of different data sources." in

Data Speaks: Use of Poems and Photography in Qualitative Research Carolyn N. Stevenson (School of General Education, Purdue University Global, USA), Copyright: © 2020 |Pages: 26 Source Title: Applied Social Science Approaches to Mixed Methods Research, DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-1025-4.ch006

3) Kathryn Whitenton (2023). " Definition: Triangulation is the practice of using multiple sources of data or multiple approaches to analyzing data, to enhance the credibility of a research study."..."....In social-science research, triangulation does not necessarily mean you need exactly 2 different methods — it just means seeking out alternative viewpoints or verification of results." in "Triangulation: Get Better Research Results by Using Multiple UX Methods," Copyright © 1998-2023 Nielsen Norman Group, Available at: https://www.nngroup.com/articles/triangulation-better-research-results-using-multiple-ux-methods/

Above I have searched three different types of communities: 1) a research team, 2) an international publisher, and 3) a private company. In conclusion, may I argue that the term triangulation can be seen as diagnosing a "disease" by doctors from different medical fields. This is my interpretation of the term we have been discussing. Triangulation is having different views, contexts, researchers, and tools to scrutinize, and define the same "disease". Whether this is validation, reliability or just testing the spotted "disease" for enhancing confidence in a research process I do not know.

Yours sincerely, Bulcsu Szekely

Bulcsu Szekely Getting a second opinion from another doctor is almost always about validity and confirmation. That leaves out the whole part of the confusion that is based on comprehensive coverage and complementarity.

As for the definitions you offered, most them combine these two different purposes, which is what I find unhelpful. I think the two are both viable goals for mixed methods research, but I don't think they should be confused as two different things under one label.

Dear Prof. Morgan!

With reference to your text: "...That leaves out the whole part of the confusion that is based on comprehensive coverage and complementarity"

Please let me state I do not understand what you mean: why do comprehensive coverage and complementarity bring about confusion when aiming at validity and confirmation in a research process?

I found the following article which combines multiple triangulation with collaborative research in the context of "systems - thinking". The authors increase validity and confirmation by adding value-added comprehensive coverage, thereby complementing the understanding of the decision-making processes under scrutiny:

Johnson, M., O’Hara, R., Hirst, E. et al. Multiple triangulation and collaborative research using qualitative methods to explore decision making in pre-hospital emergency care. BMC Med Res Methodol 17, 11 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-017-0290-z, Open access: Article Multiple triangulation and collaborative research using qual...

Yours sincerely, Bulcsu Szekely

Based on my understanding, the triangulation method in educational investigation is practical because it helps researchers gather more robust and reliable evidence, leading to more informed educational decision-making. It is beneficial when studying complex and multifaceted scholastic phenomena where a single information origin or method may need help to grasp the complete picture.

Bulcsu Szekely I fear you are now perpetuating the basic problem, since "vanity and confirmation" are essentially the same thing, but the confusion in triangulation comes when comprehensiveness is also included in the definition -- as was the case in some of the quotations you posted.

Marinel Gara The difficulty comes in when you specify what you mean by "robust and reliable." If you "stronger and repeated" then that ties to the definition of triangulation as confirmation, but it doesn't include the widespread element of comprehensive coverage that others include in triangulation.

Dear Prof. Morgan!

I have to admit I am confused now. May I kindly request YOU to explain to me what specifically you mean? Hereby I provide you with my view: one must be comprehensive (to have an in-depth insight) on the phenomena that is the target of triangulation. May I even argue that you cannot confirm a set of factors being valid in a study without being comprehensive. May I refer to the following:'

1) Miliou, O., Adamou, M., Mavri, A. et al. An exploratory case study of the use of a digital self-assessment tool of 21st-century skills in makerspace contexts. Education Tech Research Dev (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10314-0, Quoting Section of Methodology: " The study involved collecting data from multiple contexts to provide a comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon being studied e.g., in-school makerspaces vs. out-of-school makerspaces, making activities linked to school curricula vs. making activities as extracurricular work, technologies available for projects from 3D printers to microbits, very experienced vs. less-experienced teachers, duration of making activities and nature of the making projects. The study draws from the perspectives of all participants (teachers, students, researcher-observer) ..." Open access: Article An exploratory case study of the use of a digital self-asses...

2) A definition of triangulation:

Jessica Abbadia (2023). "What is Triangulation in Research: The Path to Reliable Findings", October 8, 2023, © 2023, Cactus Communications, Quote: "...The concept of triangulation comes from surveying, where it is used to pinpoint an object’s exact location by using a number of reference points. Similar to this, triangulation in research aims to create a convergent and thorough understanding of a subject by examining it from various perspectives.", Available at: https://mindthegraph.com/blog/what-is-triangulation-in-research/

In this definition above may I state that the words "convergent, throughout understanding, examining it from various perspectives" --- refer to the objective of being comprehensive.

Yours sincerely, Bulcsu Szekely

I have said consistently that there are two different meanings of triangulation that have gotten confused over the past 4 decades. The first (and original) definition is based on comparing two different set of results to validate each other. The second (and later) definition is one adding to the data provided by the other to provide more comprehensive coverage.

As I said in last post, your definition, based solely on being comprehensive misses half of the problem, which as I have said, cannot be defined away simply by your preference for one definition over the other.

FYI, your second quotation that relies on surveying is almost certainly the source of the original definition, whereby comparing two different readings gives greater faith in the validity of the position for the object that is being surveyed. More specifically, that definition originated with Donald Campbell, and I have talked to two of his students who both confirmed that he used surveying as an analogy in his lectures on triangulation dating the late 60s and early 70s.

Triangulation in educational research is like getting directions from several GPS apps before starting a trip. It means checking your findings in different ways to make sure you're really onto something solid. This can be through using different sources of information, different researchers, or different theories to see if they all point to the same conclusion. It's a way to make your research stronger and your conclusions more trustworthy. I hope this helps! :)

Thank YOu, Mam.... Really Supportive Information

While generally agreeing with the answers above, especially David's, my take is that triangulation is essentially seeking one clear 'answer' from examining multiple sources of data judged relevant to your research.