Abstract
The adoption of mixed methods research is expanding into many different fields, including my own of entomology. Creswell and Plano Clark (2018) have described mixed methods as being in a reflection and refinement period. This developmental state was noted by the authors several years ago as well (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011), with discussions focused on philosophical issues, procedures, and the adoption and use of mixed methods. A decade ago, the first volume of this very journal celebrated the new era of evolution and refinement of mixed methods (Tashakkori & Creswell, 2007). This text provides researchers with a novel path for continued refinement as it is a guide to acknowledge and harness, rather than circumvent, complex, dynamic, and emergent research conditions.
This text is divided into three sections, with appendices following. Part I, “Getting Started with Essential Foundations,” speaks to the practical dilemmas faced by mixed methods researchers, posits complexity science as a lens for approaching mixed methods research, and introduces conditions of complexity (chapters 1-3). Integrative thinking is proposed as a launch pad for transcending traditional mixed methods practice and allowing innovation in research. The opportunities afforded by complexity science principles are described within a mixed methods setting. The bulk of the text resides in Part II, “Realizing Innovation in Guiding Practices,” where six adaptive mixed methods research practices to navigate mixed methods research with a complexity-sensitive approach are presented. Adaptive research is a set of approaches influenced by complexity science and integrative thinking that concede the unpredictable and evolving context of some systems where traditional mixed methods cannot. The first practice, which helps avoid the hazards of assuming stable study conditions, is assessing complexity conditions using five dimensions of complexity as a framework (chapter 4). The second practice considers the implications of framing effects on research problems (chapter 5). It offers an iterative framing process focused on mixing purposes and outlines several strategies for framing and communicating the significance of a research problem. The third practice provides space to consider how a study might be influenced by social, interpersonal, and personal contexts and how to describe and adjust within such a research system (chapter 6). The fourth practice encourages a descriptive design approach to convey framing, logic, ethical, and procedural considerations taken by a researcher, and considers the hazards of trying to fit a study into an existing design typology (chapter 7). The fifth practice focuses on creating conditions that allow a mixed methods research team to achieve integrative interactions, critical for addressing complex research questions (chapter 8). The sixth, and final, practice is a generative evidence approach. Chapter 9 examines six sources of evidence of methodological rigor across qualitative, quantitative, and mixed (integrated) strands in complex contexts, including explicit accounts of participant samples and displays of findings representations. Part III, “Onward Considerations for Adaptive Practices,” leaves readers with a final case for adaptive research, reviews challenges to be had with a complexity-sensitive approach, and suggests actions to help the advancement of the mixed methods field (chapter 10).
The audience for this book is appropriately broad, written for those interested in, conducting, teaching about, and even reviewing mixed methods research. Poth notes that the foundations of mixed methods research are covered in other resources and that readers should have some familiarity of mixed methods design and integration. Although this text might be a difficult introduction to mixed methods research, it provides a unique opportunity and worthwhile investment to strengthen one’s research approach in novel ways. Those still learning about mixed methods might leave time to confront the tradition of reducing and controlling research conditions, and time to recognize, “changeable research conditions as the ‘new’ normal” (p. 27). Poth’s background as a mixed methods researcher, instructor, mentor, and reviewer is inherent in the book’s design. Readers should leverage the various learning features (outlined in the Pedagogical Guide), review the six featured studies highlighted throughout the chapters, and endeavor to take advantage of the many reflective prompts in the text and online.
Working through Poth’s book rattled my own research underpinnings. Many readers may identify with the perceived task of making research “fit” into traditional design typologies. Researchers have proposed alternatives to typology-based approaches to mixed methods (Guest, 2013). “Mixed methods research practices predicated on linear thinking, control, predictability, and stability are limited in their usefulness because the world in which we operate as researchers is simply too complex” (p. 61). Indeed, the merits of exploring traditional, simple designs provides an example for new researchers to follow. However, Poth points out, “Once researchers are trained in selecting mixed methods research designs from typologies, it is difficult to convince them of the need for a different approach” (p. 182). This text provides a resource to avoid this pitfall.
Poth sheds a spotlight directly on the tendency of researchers to attempt to control and reduce complexity. In situations where mixed methods typologies might stunt the growth of a research pursuit, this text provides guidance and thus breathing room on how to embrace complexity and continue exploration into complex situations. Even those pursuing less complex research problems will benefit from a more thoughtful approach to research. Innovation in Mixed Methods Research is a reminder that sometimes in research, just as in life, change is the only constant.
