![[PDF]](/pb-assets/Icons/adobe-pdf-icon-1498649896243.png){kind=icon}
Abstract
The purpose of this explanatory mixed methods study was to examine the perceived value of mixed methods research for graduate students. The quantitative phase was an experiment examining the effect of a passage’s methodology on students’ perceived value. Results indicated students scored the mixed methods passage as more valuable than those who scored the quantitative or qualitative passage. The qualitative phase involved focus groups to better understand students’ perceptions of the perceived value of mixed methods. Findings suggested graduate students view mixed methods passages as having rigorous methods, a newer history, and providing a deeper meaning of the phenomenon. This study adds to the literature base by revealing what value graduate students assign to quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research.
Keywords mixed methods, value, graduate student perceptions
References
Section:
|
Beyea, S. C., Nicoll, L. H. (2000). Learn more using focus groups. Association of Operating Room Nurses Journal, 71, 897-900. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Braun, V., Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77-101. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Bryman, A. (2006). Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: How it is done? Qualitative Research, 6, 97-113. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | |
|
Coyle, J., Williams, B. (2000). An exploration of the epistemological intricacies of using qualitative data to develop a quantitative measure of user views of health care. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 31, 1235-1243. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar | |
|
Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar | |
|
Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar | |
|
Dunning, H., Williams, A., Abonyi, S., Crooks, V. (2008). A mixed method approach to quality of life research: A case study approach. Social Indicators Research, 85, 145-158. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Earp, M. (2007). Development and validation of the statistics anxiety measures (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Denver, Colorado. Google Scholar | |
|
Gal, I., Ginsburg, L., Schau, C. (1997). Monitoring attitudes and beliefs in statistics education. In Gal, I., Garfield, J. B. (Eds.), The assessment challenge in statistics education (pp. 37-51). Amsterdam, Netherlands: IOS Press. Google Scholar | |
|
Gelo, O., Braakmann, D., Benetka, G. (2008). Quantitative and qualitative research: Beyond the debate. Integrative Psychological & Behavioral Science, 42, 266-290. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | |
|
Greene, J. C. (2008). Is mixed methods social inquiry a distinctive methodology? Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 2(1), 7-22. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11, 255-274. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | |
|
Hilton, S. C., Schau, C., Olsen, J. A. (2004). Survey of attitudes towards statistics: Factor structure invariance by gender and by administration time. Structural Equation Modeling, 11, 92-109. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Hurmerinta-Peltomaki, L., Nummela, N. (2006). Mixed methods in international business research: A value-added perspective. Management International Review, 46, 439-459. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Johnson, B., Turner, L. A. (2003). Data collection strategies in mixed methods. In Tashakkori, A., Teddlie, C. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in the social & behavioral research (pp. 297-319). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar | |
|
Loftsgaarden, D. O., Watkins, A. E. (1998). Statistics teaching in colleges and universities: Courses, instructors, and degrees in fall 1995. The American Statistician, 52, 308-314. Google Scholar | ISI | |
|
McKim, C. (2013, October). The value of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods: The value researchers report in their studies. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Northern Rocky Mountain Educational Research Association, Jackson Hole, WY. Google Scholar | |
|
McKim, C. (2014). Understanding undergraduate statistical anxiety. Journal of Research in Education, 24, 204-210. Google Scholar | |
|
Molina-Azorin, J. F. (2011). The use and added value of mixed methods in management research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 5(1), 7-24. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Morgan, D. L., Spanish, M. T. (1984). Focus groups: A new tool for qualitative research. Qualitative Sociology, 7, 253-270. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Morse, J. M., Chung, S. E. (2003). Toward holism: The significance of methodological pluralism. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2(3), 1-12. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | |
|
Nagel, T. (1986). The view from nowhere. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar | |
|
O’Cathain, A., Murphy, E., Nicholl, J. (2007). Why, and how, mixed methods research is undertaken in health services research in England: A mixed methods study. BMC Health Services Research, 7, 85. doi:10.1186/1472-6963-7-85 Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
O’Cathain, A., Murphy, E., Nicholl, J. (2010). Three techniques for integrating data in mixed methods studies. British Medical Journal, 314, 1147-1150. Google Scholar | |
|
Sale, J. E. M., Brazil, K. (2004). A strategy to identify critical appraisal criteria for primary mixed-methods studies. Quality & Quantity, 38, 351-365. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI | |
|
Schau, C., Stevens, J., Dauphinee, T. L., Del Vecchio, A. (1995). The development and validation of the survey of attitudes toward statistics. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 55, 868-875. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Schulze, S. (2003). Views of the combination of quantitative and qualitative research approaches. Progressio, 25(2), 8-20. Google Scholar | |
|
Sieber, S. D. (1973). The integration of fieldwork and survey methods. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1335-1359. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Stake, R. E. (2006). Multiple case study analysis. New York, NY: Guilford. Google Scholar | |
|
Tashakkori, A., Teddlie, C. (2003a). Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar | |
|
Tashakkori, A., Teddlie, C. (2003b). Issues and dilemmas in teaching research methods courses in social and behavioural sciences: US perspective. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 6, 61-77. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Toomela, A. (2008). Variables in psychology: A critique of quantitative psychology. Integrative Psychological & Behavioral Science, 42, 245-265. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | |
|
Viadero, D. (2005). “Mixed methods” research examined. Education Week. Retrieved from http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2005/01/26/20mixed.h24.html Google Scholar |
