Journal of Mixed Methods Research

Longitudinal research is well suited for investigating phenomena that change over time. With the growing acceptance of mixed methods, researchers are combining qualitative and quantitative approaches within longitudinal research. However, little attention has been paid to how researchers integrate longitudinal mixed methods databases. The purpose of this methodological review was to describe how researchers combine mixed methods and longitudinal approaches in practice and delineate dimensions and issues inherent within these complex designs. We examined published empirical studies from the health sciences that self-identified as longitudinal and mixed methods. Our results identify major dimensions, variations, and issues for designing longitudinal mixed methods research and suggest recommendations for researchers interested in using this complex approach.

This article uses a Kuhnian framework to explain the adoption of the transformative paradigm in pragmatically informed mixed methods research. We argue that pragmatism represents a model of “normal science” among many mixed methods researchers and that Kuhn’s concept of the scientific anomaly provides an instructive metaphor for understanding what we interpret to be a failure of pragmatic mixed methods researchers to adequately account for the axiological foundation for their work. The transformative paradigm thus can be read as providing pragmatic researchers with an axiological “fix” that sidesteps the larger question of how to establish a philosophically consistent means of specifying research value. We discuss this argument in light of pragmatist philosophy, the recent history of mixed methods research, and the future development of the field.

While qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) has often been portrayed as an alternative to mainstream statistical methods, there is a growing debate on how the techniques can be combined. This article shows how, using a sequential design, the integration of a large-N survival analysis with a smaller-N QCA yielded new insights about the reasons for project delay in a multiproject organization. While the regression served to trace significant explanatory variables and their net effects, the QCA nuanced these findings by demonstrating how variables combine across distinct categories of cases. As a result, the differing logics underlying externally and internally generated delays were elucidated. Implications for our understanding of multiproject organizing and for mixed methods research are discussed.

This community-based concurrent mixed methods study identified specific cases of discrimination and explored HIV stigma. In-depth interviews were conducted with individuals experiencing discrimination, and a quantitative survey was conducted in the immediate neighborhood. Focus group discussions were held with opinion makers. Survey respondents not attending school and believing in mosquito-borne HIV transmission had twice the odds of having fear of contracting HIV through noninvasive contact. In contrast, correct knowledge of mother-to-child HIV transmission was associated with judgmental attitudes, and knowledge of the role of condoms in HIV prevention was associated with shame. Qualitative investigations corroborated these findings, documented the denial of rights of people living with HIV, and revealed that discrimination resulting from fear of contagion directed against women had a moral dimension. Thematic issues and communication strategies were identified and translated into an intervention development.