If you had done interviews with participants, that were quite open ended i.e. 30-40 minute discussion about their love of x factor, then coded the interviews with numerical codes and analysed those statistically....

is that a mixed methods study? or a quantitative study?

You've quantitised qualitative data, which is an example of mixed methods data analysis. Just make sure that you've laid the ground work for why this is the case in your methodology at some point. So, based on your pragmatic research philosophy, you've applied methods traditionally associated with positivism to analyse data collected that you would associate with interpretivism (open ended interviews and thematic analysis). It is very difficult for someone to argue that it is quantitative because the collection of data in the qual stage required completely different ontological, epistemological and axiological assumptions than in the quan stage and without using a mixed methods apporach it would be very difficult to justify what you've done.

axiological???:$, just when I thought I had epistemological and ontological sorted in my mind, well sort of...:-(

======= Date Modified 11 Sep 2011 18:03:22 =======
Thanks Wal, that's what I thought. I'm having an argument with my sup who thinks its a purely quantitative study.

However, I've gone with 'constructivism' not 'interpretivisim???' :$ so I'm saying I'm using 'storytelling' (constructivist) type methods for the qual stage and then analysing them quantitatively.

I analyse this data qualitatively and then do a quantitative questionnaire study later, so I know I do do mixed methods, its just this particular study, which I think within itself is a mixed methods study - she thinks not :-s

yeah - what is axiological??

Hi Sneaks and Ady. I never had much to do with social constructivism back when I did my research, but there won't be any issue with that. WRT you supervisor, some people have conducted studies in the past that combine qual and quan data collection and analysis, and see them as quantitative. However, if you then peel away the layers of the study until you reach the philosophical core, you find they don't hold much water. Anyway, with regards to axiology, it is a term that relates to the values we have when we conduct an inquiry. With qualitative research, the inquiry is often attached with our own values. For example, if we're working with disenfranchised people, we might have caring feelings and desperately want to help them. On the other hand, quantitative research is positivistic and supposed be value free; we're objective scientists and are not supposed to have any feelings that might influence our work. I think post-positivism rectified this somewhat, acknowledging that it is difficult to be a completely objective being without any feelings when conducting research.

Thanks Walminski, your explanation is really clear. Hmmmm, will find a way to insert it into my thesis, my conclusion I think :-)

I totally agree with Ady. Straight forward explanation and no hole in the pocket as well.
Although, I would say that the question lacked any clarity that is needed at a doc level..

Perhaps, Sneaks could explain how she coded her interviews? Was this with a Morse Key?
My teachers always emphasized that PhD is all about twisting appearance, easy>difficult
and vice versa!!!

Hey Sneaks, I don't know what you've coded or how, but to the best of my knowledge 'content analysis' is one type of analysis that refers to qualitative interviews that have been coded numerically and then reported in a quantitative fashion. But it depends on what you are coding and the type of stats you are doing- I think content analysis is more reporting how often something occurs in the interviews etc, rather than doing any complex stats or anything. Possibly irrelevant but thought I'd throw it in your direction in case it was of any use! Best, KB

Thanks all, I think I might hire you Wal to be my personal epistemology expert!

I'm using a complicated sort of coding, to say more would give myself up, but its basically coding statements in terms of how they match 10 things. So each statement gets 10 scores based on a likert scale and then you can play around with the stats e.g. compare groups, predict outcomes based on these scores etc. PM me if you want to know specifics :p

Ah, okay, think that rules out the content analysis thing then! KB

I have a similar question. I assumed my analysis which involves (Content analysis and Discourse Analysis) as a mixed method. I have one chapter in which I did content analysis. The rest four analysis chapters are qualitative. But, I have quantitatively analysed some responses of the participants in one of these mainly qualitatively analysed chapter. My supervisor does not like saying this as a mixed method. As per them, this is 'limited quantification of the qualitative data' and I removed saying 'mixed method' in my Methodology chapter. I rather stated: This is the combination of quantitative and qualitative methods in which qualitative methods had precedence over quantitative method. I am convinced to state like this but bit worried if the examiner ask why not used 'mixed method'. Sups say this is not the mixed method although the combination of quantitative and qualitative methods since this is mainly the qualitative analysis and quantitative part is just to support my qualitative analysis. Swetch

Hi Swetcha, I'll have to be brief, so apologies if this answer if fumbled and the equivalent of a brain fart. There are over 20 definitions for mixed methods research and a lot of the main writers seem to have their own ideas of what it is precisely. It's in its adolescence and like most teenagers, it's stroppy, messy and disorganised. In fact, one of the definitions is what your supervisors have called it. It can be any study (or series of studies) that combine elements of qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis for broad purposes. I'm not entirely clear what you design is or what you were aiming to do (you can PM me if you like, so I can consider it more specifically). Mixed methods studies can come in lots of shapes and sizes (some can even be emergent designs!), and there need not necessarily be equal priority between the qual and quan methods - either can take precedence. You supervisor is right to be cautious because conducting a MM study requires a lot of considerations - the design, questions, sampling, integration and so forth.
You personal research philosophy is really important here because it ultimately informs the particular methodological approach you take and the methods you use. Have you thought about what your worldview is? Ontology? Epistemology? If you're clear on this, then you'll be better able to defend your study. Just remember that you can't call it 'intermethod mixing' because this is now considered to be mixed methods.

Hi walminskipeasucker, thank you so much for answering my query. I will PM you in detail in the evening. Ontology? Epistemology? I am still confused !