Conducting Mixed Methods Research Systematic Methodological Reviews: A Review of Practice and Recommendations

Smith, Michelle Howell; Bazis, Pamela Shanahan

doi:10.1177/1558689820967626

Cited by 17 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 37 publications

(100 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to Mbuagbaw et al (2020) , methodological reviews are studies that report “on the design, conduct, analysis, or reporting of primary or secondary research-related reports” (p. 1). By examining the methodological characteristics of a sample of studies within a field identified systematically, reviews of this type can assist researchers in expanding their methodological repertoire, identifying existing methodological gaps, and improving future research practice ( Aguinis et al, 2020 ; Martin et al, 2020 ; Howell Smith and Shanahan Bazis, 2021 ). Methodological reviews are particularly important in MMR intervention research because some basic procedures of the methodology are still not being implemented properly, as revealed by a number of reviews (see Section “Introduction”).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of mixed methods research in intervention studies to increase young people’s interest in STEM: A systematic methodological review

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionMixed methods research intervention studies integrate quantitative evaluation approaches, such as randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental designs, with qualitative research to evaluate the effectiveness, efficacy, or other results of an intervention or program. These types of studies, which have attracted growing attention in recent years, enhance the scope and rigor of the evaluation. While various frameworks that summarize the justifications for carrying out these types of studies and provide implementation guidance have been published in the last few years in the health sciences, we do not know whether such frameworks have been properly implemented in the social and educational sciences. This review examined the methodological features and reporting practices of mixed methods intervention studies aimed at increasing young people’s interest in STEM.MethodsA systematic search was carried out in APA PsycNET, ERIC, ProQuest, Scopus, and Web of Science, and a hand search in 20 journals. We included peer-reviewed English-language articles that reported intervention studies with a quantitative component measuring outcomes specific to increasing secondary school students’ interest in STEM fields, a qualitative component conducted before, during, or after the quantitative component, and evidence of integration of both components. Qualitative content analysis and ideal-type analysis were used to synthesize the findings.ResultsWe found 34 studies; the majority published in the last ten years. Several patterns of mixed methods application were described in these studies, illustrating the unique insights that can be gained by employing this methodology. The reporting quality of the included studies was generally adequate, especially regarding the justification for using a mixed methods intervention design and the integration of the quantitative and qualitative components. Nonetheless, a few reporting issues were observed, such as a lack of detail in the presentation of the mixed methods design, an inadequate description of the qualitative sampling and analysis techniques, and the absence of joint displays for representing integration.DiscussionAuthors must pay attention to these issues to ensure that the insights obtained by the use of mixed methods research are effectively communicated.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of mixed methods research in intervention studies to increase young people’s interest in STEM: A systematic methodological review

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We conducted an MMR systematic methodological review (MMR-SMR) (Howell Smith and Shanahan Bazis, 2020) using a multi-phase search to identify empirical MMR studies that explicitly addressed one or more legitimation type(s). Phase I round 1 involved a search for potential studies between 2006 and 2017 using PsycINFO, Web of Science, and the Journal of Mixed Methods Research ( JMMR ) using search terms such as mixed method *, mixed-method *, mixed research , quantitative AND qualitative , inference, legitimation , quality , validity , credibility , and transferability .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advancing Quality Standards in Mixed Methods Research: Extending the Legitimation Typology

Perez

Smith

Babchuk

et al. 2022

Journal of Mixed Methods Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several scholars have proposed frameworks for assessing the quality of mixed methods research (MMR) studies. However, no general consensus has emerged. The legitimation typology developed by Onwuegbuzie and Johnson (2006) is one promising approach that addresses quantitative, qualitative, and MMR elements. The aim of this intrinsic, exploratory case study is to explore the use of the legitimation typology in empirical MMR studies and through interviews with the developers, MMR scholars, and researchers who applied the legitimation typology to an empirical MMR study. We conducted a systematic methodological review using multiple databases and identified 49 empirical MMR studies that addressed the legitimation typology. Using a critical case sampling approach defined by participants’ unique experiences with the legitimation typology, semi-structured interviews were conducted with five authors of empirical MMR studies, a mixed methods researcher who has written about the typology, and one of the authors of the original legitimation typology to expand on ways the legitimation typology is used in practice. Four overarching themes were identified: (a) comprehensive approach to assessing quality, (b) researchers’ interpretation of legitimation types, (c) value of divergent findings, and (d) strategies for applying the legitimation typology. This case study adds to the MMR literature by clarifying the use of emic-etic and conversion legitimations and by proposing a new legitimation type: divergent findings legitimation. Hence, this study elucidates the application of one quality framework (i.e., legitimation) in MMR and provides recommendations to the field to further advance discussions on quality criteria and their implementation in mixed methods research.

show abstract

“…The research conducted for this article falls within what Howell Smith and Shanahan Bazis (2021) refer to as a Mixed Methods Research Systematic Methodological Review. To represent work from the core of the field, I selected all articles published in the Journal of Mixed Methods Research ( JMMR ) from 2015 to 2019.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who Is on the Bandwagon? Core and Periphery in Mixed Methods Research

Morgan

2022

Journal of Mixed Methods Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The rapid growth of mixed methods research over the past two decades matches what Fujimura (1989) called a “bandwagon effect.” This study compares articles from the Journal of Mixed Methods Research, representing the core of the field, to a more peripheral set of randomly drawn articles. A content analysis of the two sets of articles shows strong differences, with the random sample dominated by convergent designs and lower integration between the qualitative and quantitative results. This research contributes to the field of mixed methods by showing systematic differences between articles published in its flagship journal versus a broad sample of articles from outside this core set. In addition, it offers recommendations for how to reduce this disparity.

show abstract

Conducting Mixed Methods Research Systematic Methodological Reviews: A Review of Practice and Recommendations

Cited by 17 publications

References 37 publications

Use of mixed methods research in intervention studies to increase young people’s interest in STEM: A systematic methodological review

Use of mixed methods research in intervention studies to increase young people’s interest in STEM: A systematic methodological review

Advancing Quality Standards in Mixed Methods Research: Extending the Legitimation Typology

Who Is on the Bandwagon? Core and Periphery in Mixed Methods Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About