Key scholars have lauded benefits of integrating mixed methods and grounded theory-or mixed methods-grounded theory (MM-GT)-yet there have been few attempts to ascertain in what ways researchers use MM-GT. Our aim was to systematically, but not exhaustively, examine applications of MM-GT and offer procedural guidelines. We identified 61 empirical MM-GT articles and developed a codebook for analysis. MM-GT was widely used across disciplines. Most published MM-GT provided little methodological detail regarding grounded theory, mixed methods, and their integration; theoretical development was noticeably absent; and the majority followed a convergent mixed methods design. This inquiry contributes to emerging discussions regarding the ways in which MM-GT can or should be used to more fully realize the potential of this approach.
Mixed methods–grounded theory (MM–GT) has emerged as a promising methodology that intersects the value of mixed methods with rigorous qualitative design. However, recent reviews have found that MM–GT empirical studies tend to lack procedural details. The purpose of this article is to apply the “best practices” for conducting MM–GT in a study designed to develop and then test a theoretical model for how undergraduate engineering students develop interest in the engineering PhD. This study contributes to the field of mixed methods research by (a) illustrating best practices for MM–GT, (b) providing an MM–GT scale development example, (c) demonstrating how an MM-GT scale could potentially bypass exploratory factor analysis and proceed directly to confirmatory factor analysis for testing psychometric properties, and showing how a joint display for data collection planning can be used to strengthen integration in an instrument development study.
Mixed methods research (MMR) methodologists research the use of MMR by conducting systematic methodological reviews (SMR). Unfortunately, there is little guidance on how to conduct these types of reviews. This MMR-SMR of MMR-SMRs identifies a comprehensive pool of published MMR-SMRs ( n = 80), isolating best practices that will guide future reviews thereby increasing their quality and utility to the field of MMR. We summarize our quantitative codes descriptively and integrate the qualitative themes alongside the relevant quantitative results. We contribute to the field mixed methods research by identifying potential topics for future MMR-SMR, summarizing current practices in writing MMR-SMRs, and providing recommendations to consider when publishing future MMR-SMR.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.