The Methodology and Practices of Mixed Methods Research:Consensuses, Controversies and Reflection
-
摘要: 混合方法研究是指结合量化研究与质性研究的要素进行的研究,其已经逐步发展为一种独立的方法论。混合方法研究兴起于对范式不兼容的反思与批判,并随后选择了实用主义作为其范式,这奠定了混合方法研究的合法性基础。但是在实际运用中,人们对于为何选择混合方法研究以及如何开展混合方法研究,仍存有误区与困境。国内研究者丞待加强对混合方法研究的评介应用与反思。Abstract: Mixed methods research (MMR) is a kind of research that combines the elements of bothquantitative and qualitative approaches, which not onlycombinesdifferent specific methods but also attempts to integrate theunderlying philosophies and theories. MMR was introduced in the late of 1950s, and became a distinctive methodology with the development of its underlying theoriesand applied processesduring the Paradigm War in the 1980s. Since the 1990s, MMR has developed into a relatively complete methodology as well as a popular research design. Advocates harshly criticize the viewpoint that different paradigms and methodsare notcompatible. They argue that: a) MMR reveals the continuity of paradigmsin that different paradigms do not oppose completely; b) even if different paradigms might beincompatible, specific methods still can be mixed; c) MMR has complementary advantages over quantitative or qualitative research. Thecriticisms provide space for the development of MMR. Moreover, pragmatism, as a widely acceptedparadigm, provides MMR with anunderlying philosophy. However, many researchers question the selection of pragmatism as the paradigm of MMR, as pragmatism seems to be a perfect excuse for researchers to escape reflectingits underlying philosophy. In practice, researchers should first respond to why they choose the design of MMR (DMMR). In particular, they should clarify the process and function of the integration.The integration tends tooccurwhere the qualitative research and the quantitative research joinor when researchers attempt to reachthe conclusions from different parts. It can promote the research or mutual attestation, complementation or innovative conclusions. Based on the sequence, and status of the qualitativeand quantitative research as well as the process and function of integration, DMMR can be divided intothree categories: parallel design, quantitative-qualitative sequence design, and qualitative-quantitative sequence design. Researchers may reorganize the three designs according toparticularresearch questions and research conditions. Currently, researchers still have to face the problems with data collection and analysis, data translation, conclusion integration, and the judgment of inference quality when they choose DMMR. In addition, they shouldfirst prove the rationality of the choice of MMR and provide a panoramic research process and conclusion in the articles. Finally, an investigation is conductedon35 MMRsfrom 330 educational doctoral dissertations, which reveals that few researchers prove the rationality of DMMR or try to integrate the conclusions from different approaches. Thedoctoral candidates seem to choose MMR because MMR has become a fashion, not that they need to integrate different solutions to their research questions more efficiently. In sum, Chinese researchers should pay more attention to addressing MMR in a moresystematic way.
-
Key words:
- mixed methods /
- researchmethodology /
- paradigm /
- research design
-
表 1 量化研究与质性研究的范式差异
实证主义/后实证主义范式 建构主义范式 研究方法 量化方法 质性方法 认识论 客观论 主观论 认识主体和认识对象是独立的 认识主体与认识对象是不可分割的 价值论 研究是价值中立的 研究受到价值的限定 本体论 存在唯一的现实 现实是多元的、建构的 方法论 演绎 归纳 存在因果关系,超越时空的通则化是可能的 不可能区分原因与结果,不存在超越时空的通则化 参考Creswell(2009)与程天君(2014)的研究整理而成。 -
[1] Alise M. A., & Teddlie C. 2010. A continuation of the paradigm wars? Prevalence rates of methodological approaches across the social/behavioral sciences. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(2): 103-126. doi: 10.1177/1558689809360805 [2] Bryman A. 2006. Paradigm peace and the implications for quality. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 9(2): 111-126. doi: 10.1080/13645570600595280 [3] Creswell J. W. 2009. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage. [4] Creswell J. W., & Clark V. L. P. 2001. Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage. 23-24. [5] Denzin N. K. 1973. The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. New York: Praeger. [6] 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(3): 255-274. doi: 10.3102/01623737011003255 [7] Guba E. G. 1990. The Alternative Paradigm Dialog. In E. Guba (Ed.). The Paradigm Dialogue (pp. 17-27). Newbury Park: Sage. [8] Johnson R. B., & Onwuegbuzie A. J. 2004. Mixed methods research: a research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7): 14-26. doi: 10.3102/0013189X033007014 [9] Johnson R. B., Onwuegbuzie A. J., & Turner L. A. 2007. Toward a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of mixed methods research, 1(2): 112-133. doi: 10.1177/1558689806298224 [10] Maxwell J. A. 2016. Expanding the history and range of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 10(1): 12-27. doi: 10.1177/1558689815571132 [11] Onwuegbuzie A. J., & Johnson R. B. 2006. The validity issue in mixed research. Research in the Schools, 13(1): 48-63. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/showciting?cid=6467457 [12] Patton M. Q. 1990. Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park: Sage. 10. [13] Tashakkori A., & Teddlie C. 1998. Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage. 9. [14] Teddlie C., & Tashakkori A. 2003. Major issues and controversies in the use of mixed methods in the social and behavioral sciences. In C. Teddlie & A. Tashakkori (Eds.). Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 3-50). Thousand Oaks: Sage. [15] Teddlie C., & Tashakkori A. 2010. Overview of contemporary issues in mixed methods research. In Tashakkori A, Teddlie C. (Eds.). Sage Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp.1-41). Thousand Oaks: Sage. [16] 陈向明. 2000.质的研究方法与社会科学研究.北京:教育科学出版社. 3-4. [17] 程天君. 2014.从"纯粹主义"到"实用主义"—教育社会学研究方法论的新动向.教育研究与实验, (1): 5-12. http://mall.cnki.net/magazine/Article/YJSY201401002.htm [18] 杜威. 1998. 哲学的改造(许崇清译). 北京: 商务印书馆. 93. [19] 胡月琴, 甘怡群. 2008.青少年心理韧性量表的编制和效度验证.心理学报, 40(8): 902-912. http://www.doc88.com/p-1803005673669.html [20] 胡中锋, 黎雪琼. 2006.论教育研究中质的研究与量的研究的整合.华南师范大学学报(社会科学版), (6): 94-100. http://kns.cnki.net/KCMS/detail/detail.aspx?filename=hnsb200606014&dbname=CJFD&dbcode=CJFQ [21] 李刚. 2010.校长教学领导评价框架的建构与应用—混合方法研究的路径(硕士学位论文).北京师范大学, 北京. [22] 舒斯特曼, 李军学. 2011.实用主义对我来说意味着什么:十条原则.世界哲学, (6): 38-44. http://kns.cnki.net/KCMS/detail/detail.aspx?filename=zxyc201106006&dbname=CJFD&dbcode=CJFQ