The Journal of Mixed Methods Research Starts a New Decade

Abstract

In our previous editorial we noted that the Journal of Mixed Methods Research (JMMR) has completed 10 years of publication, and we are taking the entire 11th year to celebrate and reflect (Fetters & Molina-Azorin, 2017). In addition to the ''In This Issue'' feature that highlights the contributions of this issue's articles, in this editorial we reflect on the first decade by reviewing JMMR's purpose and its level of impact in the social sciences, and assess through content analysis the first 10 years of JMMR (2007-2016). Specifically, we describe the main features of editorials and manuscripts of JMMR, the multidisciplinary and international characteristics of JMMR, and some other aspects, such as reviews and JMMR's most cited and most read articles.

A Call for Expanding Philosophical Perspectives to Create a More “Worldly” Field of Mixed Methods: The Example of Yinyang Philosophy

“…The flurry of the Journal of Mixed Methods Research editorials about paradigms in the first decade of publication in the field of mixed methods (Molina-Azorin & Fetters, 2017) alludes to the critical role and value of the identification of philosophical underpinnings to ground the field and the dialogue continues (Shannon-Baker, 2016). Early on, pragmatism emerged as a worldview to unify the use of qualitative and quantitative work (Biesta, 2010; Feilzer, 2010; Morgan, 2007).…”

Rebuttal—Conceptualizing Integration During Both the Data Collection and Data Interpretation Phases: A Response to David Morgan

“…Morgan's discussion focuses on interpreting merged data after data collection. As discussed in the integration trilogy (Fetters and Molina-Azorin, 2017b), we wish to emphasize that a key to advancing conceptualization of ''integration'' in the context of mixed methods research requires consideration during all phases of research. Moreover, we assert mixed analysis benefits from forethought and articulation of the researcher's intent during the design phase prior to the merging of data.…”

“…multiple possible outcomes of different methods.” Morgan discusses three outcomes of merging mixed methods data, namely, convergence, complementarity, and divergence. Essentially, we agree with these three outcomes: convergence also sometimes called confirmation, when qualitative and quantitative findings lead to the same interpretation; complementarity when the compared qualitative and quantitative data illustrate different, nonconflicting interpretations, though to this we would add expansion when the compared qualitative and quantitative data provide both a central overlapping as well as a broader nonoverlapping interpretation (a hybrid of the situation of confirmation and complementarity); and divergence also known as discordance when the qualitative and quantitative data lead to conflicting interpretations (Fetters, Curry, & Creswell, 2013; Fetters & Molina-Azorin, 2017b).…”

Distinct Yet Synergetic Contributors to Mixed Methods Research: Intersections for MMIRA and JMMR

“…Previous JMMR editors have made significant contributions to widening the voices heard within the MMR community, and the current JMMR editorial board, associate editors, and editors provide broad representation of MMR scholars, disciplines, and geographic regions. As part of looking back, the current editors also previously described the diversity of articles from around the globe and encouraged submissions from all countries and disciplines (Molina-Azorin & Fetters, 2017). If you want to become more involved, JMMR welcomes in particular MMIRA members as reviewers.…”