![]() ![]() Keywords: Mixed methods, quantitative, qualitative, design, survey, case study. It started with a cross-sectional survey, followed by a qualitative study to explore community. A mixed methods sequential explanatory study employed in evaluating a South African Government Victim Empowerment Programme for addressing the gender-based violence is used to illustrate these methodological debates. This study used a sequential explanatory mixed method design. Explanatory sequential design of mixed methods research incorporates both quantitative and qualitative research tradition. Key among these concerns are: the methodological overview of priority, implementation, and mixing in the sequential explanatory design, practical guidance of addressing those issues as well as the steps for graphically representing the procedures in a mixed methods study. This paper addresses some technical issues associated with the mixed methods sequential explanatory design. Researchers who opt for mixed methods sequential explanatory study have to consider certain methodological issues. Despite its simplicity and popularity, the implementation of this mixed methods design is not easy. This design implies collecting and analysing first quantitative and then qualitative data in two successive phases within a single study. Notwithstanding the myriad of mixed methods research designs reported in the literature, the sequential explanatory design seem to be highly popular among health, social and behavioural researchers. However, when used in combination, quantitative and qualitative methods complement each other leading to a more dynamic analysis which draws on each other’s strength. The logic for mixing both kinds of data within a single study is based on the fact that neither quantitative nor qualitative methods in isolation are adequate to clearly highlight the trends and finer details of a situation. Simply put, mixed methods is a procedure for collecting, analysing, and “mixing” or integrating both quantitative and qualitative data at some stage of the research process within a single study for the purpose of gaining a better understanding of the research problem. Therefore, mixed method designs are based on four key decisions surrounding the use of quantitative and qualitative strands: (a) the level of interaction. By design, this approach employs rigorous quantitative research assessing magnitude and frequency of constructs and rigorous qualitative research exploring the meaning and understanding of constructs and intentionally integrates these methods to draw on the strengths of each. The methodology implemented was a mixed methods content analysis and the design focused on a sequential explanatory. By definition, mixed methods research is a research methodology which focuses on research questions that call for real-life contextual understandings, multi-level perspectives, and cultural influences. Methods in Psychology, 8, 100117.Abstract:In the past two decades there has been a growing number of health, social and behavioural sciences researchers employing mixed-methods research designs in their studies. Flip it: An exploratory (versus explanatory) sequential mixed methods design using Delphi and differential item functioning to evaluate item bias. Fan, Y., Bright, D., Stone, G., Matney, G., & Bostic, J. Implications are discussed for advancing data integration techniques and using mixed methods to improve instrument development. The 2 × 2 Concordance Integration Typology (a) crystallized instances where additional refinements were potentially needed and (b) provided for evaluating the distribution of bias across the set of items as a whole. A worked example from the development of the Problem-Solving Measures Grades 6–8 Computer Adaptive Tests supported using an exploratory sequential design to inform item refinement. Rationale for study design: This sequential explanatory mixed methods study includes a case-based survey (quantitative phase). We introduce the 2 × 2 Concordance Integration Typology as a systematic way to examine agreement and disagreement across the qualitative and quantitative findings using a concordance joint display table. An exploratory sequential design is illustrated as an additional approach using a Delphi technique in Phase I and Rasch DIF analyses in Phase II. Use of Delphi before quantitative field testing to screen for potential sources leading to item bias is lacking in the literature. An explanatory sequential mixed methods design using Delphi is a common approach to gain experts' insight into why items might have exhibited differential item functioning (DIF) for a sub-group, indicating potential item bias. The Delphi method has been adapted to inform item refinements in educational and psychological assessment development. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |