Assessing Triangulation Across Methodologies, Methods, and Stakeholder Groups: The Joys, Woes, and Politics of Interpreting Convergent and Divergent Data

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to develop triangulation coding methods for a large-scale action research and evaluation project and to examine how practitioners and policy makers interpreted both convergent and divergent data. We created a color-coded system that evaluated the extent of triangulation across methodologies (qualitative and quantitative), data collection methods (observations, interviews, and archival records), and stakeholder groups (five distinct disciplines/organizations). Triangulation was assessed for both specific data points (e.g., a piece of historical/contextual information or qualitative theme) and substantive findings that emanated from further analysis of those data points (e.g., a statistical model or a mechanistic qualitative assertion that links themes). We present five case study examples that explore the complexities of interpreting triangulation data and determining whether data are deemed credible and actionable if not convergent.

“It’s Like Stealing What Should be Theirs.” An Exploration of the Experiences and Perspectives of Parents and Educational Practitioners on Hebrew–English Bilingualism for Jewish Autistic Children

“…By employing such space triangulation, this study avoided research ‘parochialism’ in only reflecting one sub-culture or city. A second level of space triangulation was accomplished through data collection in mainstream and specialist autism schools, different stakeholder groups, denominations, and different geographical regions (Campbell et al, 2020 ; Patton, 1999 ). This means the research was not geographically, professionally or denominationally bound with respect to the UK context.…”

“…Nevertheless, the effect of this was mitigated by larger numbers of participants and by the fact that many participants wrote very detailed and full accounts. Furthermore, the written responses were bolstered by substantial semi-structured oral interview data, and the study benefitted from having a multimodal response which mitigated the weaknesses inherent in any one method through between-method triangulation (Campbell et al, 2020 ).…”

Changing the Criminal Justice System Response to Sexual Assault: An Empirical Study of a Participatory Action Research Project

“…To mitigate these problems, we used a multi‐method design ( methodological pluralism ) in which we supplemented self‐report interviews with observational methods. We conducted a formal triangulation assessment to gauge the accuracy and consistency of our data, which indicated excellent congruence across data types and stakeholder groups (Campbell, Goodman‐Williams, Feeney & Fehler‐Cabral, 2020). As such, feel reasonably confident about the quality of our data and strengths of our conclusion, and as such, we worked with stakeholder to consider how to use these findings to create change (instrumental use).…”

Can agriculture and conservation be compatible in a coastal wetland? Balancing stakeholders’ narratives and interactions in the management of El Hondo Natural Park, Spain

“…In addition, a section to expand the reasons for selecting an answer option has been provided for each question. Data collection has been triangulated following the recent works from Natow (2020) and Campbell et al (2020), in which have been considered (1) multiple data sources containing different perspectives (from different stakeholders' groups), and (2) complementary qualitative methods and sources (including the interview and the questionnaire but also research observation by consulting the local newspapers and field notes).…”