Research studies are increasingly complex: They draw on multiple methods to gather data, generate both qualitative and quantitative data, and frequently represent the perspectives of more than one stakeholder. The teams that generate them are increasingly multidisciplinary. A commitment to engaging community members in the research process often adds a further layer of complexity. How to approach a synthesizing analysis of these multiple and varied data sources with a large research team requires considerable reflection and dialogue. In this article, we outline the strategies used by one multidisciplinary team committed to a participatory action research (PAR) approach and engaged in a mixed method program of research to synthesize the findings from four subprojects into a conceptual framework that could guide practice in community mental health organizations. We also summarize factors that hold promise for increasing productivity when managing complex research projects.
Anderson, S.E., & Gansneder, B.M. (1995). Using electronic mail surveys and computer monitored data for studying computer mediated communication systems . Social Science Computer Review, 13(1), 33-46.
2.
Caracelli, V.J., & Greene, J.C. (1993). Data analysis strategies for mixed-method evaluation design. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15(2), 195-207.
3.
Charmaz, K. (2005). Grounded theory in the 21st century: Applications for advancing social justice studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research, 3rd ed. (pp. 507-536). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
4.
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
5.
Community University Research Alliance. (2005 ). International literature review. Waterloo, ON: Centre for Research and Education in Human Services .
6.
Community University Research Alliance. (2006 ). Conference proceedings. First CURA conference: Towards cultural empowerment. Waterloo, ON: Centre for Research and Education in Human Services.
7.
Creswell, J. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
8.
Dewa, C., Durbin, J., Wasylenki, D., Ochocka, J., Estabrook, S., Boydell, K., et al. (2002). Considering a multi-site study? How to take the leap and have a soft landing. Journal of Community Psychology, 30(2), 173-187.
9.
Ezzy, D. (2003). Qualitative analysis: Practice and innovation . London: Routledge.
10.
Fontana, A., & Frey, J.H. (2000). The interview: From structured questions to negotiated text. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research, 2nd ed. (pp. 645-672). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
11.
Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A.L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.
12.
Goering, P., & Streiner, D.L. (1996). Reconcilable differences: The marriage of qualitative and quantitative methods. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry41, 491-497.
13.
Grant, J. (2006). Multi-layered responses to cultural-linguistic diversity in mental health services: A report of key informant interviews. CURA internal document. Waterloo, ON: Centre for Research and Education on Human Services.
14.
Greene, J.C., Caracelli, V.J., & Graham, W.F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis , 11, 255-274.
15.
Guba, E.G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educational Resources Information Center Annual Review Paper, 29, 75-91.
16.
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59-82. Retrieved February 13, 2008, from fmx.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abtarct/18/1/58#BIBL
17.
Habermas, J. (1996). Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
18.
Hamilton, M.B. (2003). Online survey response rates and times. Retrieved February 13, 2008, from www.supersurvey.com/papers/supersurvey_white_paper_response_rates.pdf
19.
Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S.E. (2005) Three approaches to qualitative content analysis . Qualitative Health Research, 15, 1277-1288.
20.
Jacobson, N., Ochocka, J., Wise, J., Janzen, R., & Taking Culture Seriously Partners. (2007). Inspiring knowledge mobilization through a communications policy: The case of a Community University Research Alliance. Progress in Community Health Partnerships, 1(1).
21.
Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (2000). Participatory action research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research, 2nd ed. (pp. 567-605). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
22.
Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (2005). Participatory action research: Communicative action in the public sphere. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research, 3rd ed. (pp. 559-603). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
23.
Kirby, S.L., Greaves, L., & Reid, C. (2006). Experience research social change: Methods beyond the mainstream. Peterborough, ON: Broadview Press.
24.
Kittleson, M.J. (1995). A quasi-experimental assessment of the response rate via the postal service and e-mail. Health Values, 19(2), 27-39.
25.
Krefting, L. (1991). Rigor in qualitative research: The assessment of trustworthiness. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy , 45(3), 214-222.
26.
Kuzel, A. (1992) Sampling in qualitative inquiry. In B. Crabtree & W. Miller (Eds.), Doing qualitative research (pp. 31-44). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
27.
Kvale, S. (1995). The social construction of validity. Qualitative Inquiry, 1(1), 19-40.
28.
Marra, R.M., & Bogue, B. (2006). A critical assessment of online survey tools. Proceedings of the 2006 Women in Engineering Programs and Advocates Network Conference. Retrieved February 13, 2008, from www.igert.org/pdf/Critical_Assmt_Online_Tools_Wepan_070606.pdf
29.
Mehta, R., & Sivadas, E. (1995). Comparing response rates and response content in mail versus electronic mail surveys. Journal of the Market Research Society, 37(4), 429-439.
30.
Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
31.
Moorlag, E. (2006). Understandings and perspectives of mental health in a multicultural Canada: Focus group data from five cultural-linguistic groups. Taking culture seriously in community mental health CURA. Waterloo, ON: Centre for Education and Research on Human Services.
32.
Morse, J.M. (2003). Principles of mixed methods and multi-method research design. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 189-208). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
33.
Nelson, G., Ochocka, J., Griffin, K., & Lord, J. (1998). Nothing about me, without me: Participatory action research with self-help/mutual aid organizations for psychiatric consumer/ survivors. American Journal of Community Psychology, 26, 881-912.
34.
Neuber, K.A. (1980). Needs assessment: A model for community planning . Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
35.
Ochocka, J., & Janzen, R. (in press). Blending commitment, passion and structure: Engaging cultural-linguistic communities in collaborative research. In A. Williamson & R. DeSouza (Eds.), Researching with communities. Waitakere City, New Zealand: Wairua Press.
36.
Ochocka, J., Nelson, G., & Janzen R. (2005). Moving forward: Negotiating self and external circumstances in recovery. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal , 28(4), 315-322.
37.
Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
38.
Schuldt, B.A., & Totten, J.W. (1994). Electronic mail vs. mail survey response rates . Marketing Research, 6(1), 36-39.
39.
Shadish, W.R., Jr., Cook, T.D., & Leviton, L.C. (1991). Foundations of program evaluation: Theories of practice. Newbury Park, CA: Sage .
40.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
41.
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
42.
Thagard, P., & Shelley, C. (1997). Abductive reasoning: Logic, visual thinking and coherence. Retrieved February 13, 2008, from http://cogsci.uwaterloo.ca/Articles/Pages/%7FAbductive.html
43.
Tse, A. (1998). Comparing the response rate, response speed and response quality of two methods of sending questionnaires: E-mail vs. mail . Journal of the Market Research Society, 40(4), 353-361.
44.
Worren, N., Moore, K., & Elliott, R. (2002). When theories become tools: Toward a framework for pragmatic validity. Human Relations, 55(10), 1227-1250.
45.
Yun, G.W., & Trumbo, C.W. (2000). Comparative response to a survey executed by post, e-mail and web form. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication , 6(1). Retrieved February 13, 2008, from www.jcmc.indiana.edu
