Combining Ethnography and Surveys

“Fractal Heuristics” for Mixed Methods Research: Applying Abbott’s “Fractal Distinctions” as a Conceptual Metaphor for Method Integration

“…A study on city-specific cultures of economic practice by Nina Baur and Hering (2017) illustrates the second variation of the qualitative–quantitative heuristic: identifying quantitative issues in qualitative research. As part of a multidisciplinary project on the “intrinsic logic of cities,” the study investigates local conventions of the hairdressing trade in four German and British cities.…”

“…The mixed methods design combines extensive ethnographic observation in each city ( n = 8 salons), a subsequent focused ethnography ( n = 12 salons), and a standardized survey of all salons in the four cities ( n = 624, 33% response rate). While the initial long-term ethnographies served to identify important dimensions of comparison (e.g., professional self-concepts, time-management strategies) and construct a typology of city-specific practices, the focused ethnographies and survey helped assess the external validity of these findings (Baur & Hering, 2017, p. 403). This complex multiphase design exemplifies the use of standardized large-n methods to identify issues of generalizability in a predominantly qualitative investigation—a research perspective that is sensitive to the quantitative questions within a qualitative approach.…”

“…To illustrate this heuristic, I turn to the study on city-specific cultures conducted by Nina Baur et al Even though this research brought together very heterogeneous and labor-intensive methods (ethnography, survey methods), each of them was implemented with great attention to method-specific standards. With regard to the data-collection process, the qualitative core component, an ethnography of eight salons in four British and German cities, not only included several months of participant observation but also complementary document analyses and an iterative switching between fieldwork and qualitative analyses (Baur & Hering, 2017). The subsequent standardized survey was conducted in a mixed-mode design (postal, online, telephone) to ensure data quality.…”

Linearity vs. Circularity? On Some Common Misconceptions on the Differences in the Research Process in Qualitative and Quantitative Research

“…However, although today many differentiated suggestions exist how to best organize a mixed methods research process (Schoonenboom and Johnson, 2017), mixed methods research in a way consolidates this simple distinction between "qualitative" and "quantitative" research, as in all attempts of mixing methods, qualitative and quantitative methods still seem distinct methods-which is exactly why it is assumed that they need to be "mixed." Moreover, many qualitative researchers complain that current suggestions for mixing methods ignore important principles of qualitative research and instead enforce the quantitative research logic on qualitative research processes, thus robbing qualitative research of its hugest advantages and transforming it into a lacking version of quantitative research , for some problems arising when trying to take qualitative research logics seriously in mixed methods research, see Akremi, 2017;Baur and Hering, 2017;Hense, 2017).…”