Critiques about the development in mixed-methods research (MMR) by some of its protagonists mention the following: ignorance of earlier developments, too much focus on designs rather than issues, more a metaphor than a mode of research, the belief in paradigms, and too much focus on methods instead of theoretical and methodological issues. Myths and mantras in the MMR literature are discussed here. For overcoming the limitations of MMR becoming evident in these critiques, myths, and mantras, triangulation is discussed. A revitalization of this concept in recent formulations (triangulation 3.0; systematic triangulation of perspectives) outlines triangulation as a framework of a critical and reflexive MMR.
ArchibaldM. M. (2016). Investigator triangulation: A collaborative strategy with potential for mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 10, 228-250. doi:10.1177/1558689815570092
2.
BazeleyP.KempL. (2012). Mosaics, triangles, and DNA: Metaphors for integrated analysis in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6, 55-72.
3.
BernardH. R. (1988). Research methods in cultural anthropology. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
4.
BrymanA. (1992). Quantitative and qualitative research: Further reflections on their integration. In BrannenJ. (Ed.), Mixing methods: Quantitative and qualitative research (pp. 57-80). Aldershot, UK: Avebury.
5.
BrymanA. (2004). Social research methods (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
6.
BrymanA. (2006). Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: How is it done?Qualitative Research, 6, 97-113.
7.
BrymanA. (2007). The research question in social research: What is its role?International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 10, 5-20.
8.
BrymanA. (2008a). The end of the paradigm wars? In AlasuutariP.BickmanL.BrannenJ. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of social research methods (pp. 13-25). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
9.
BrymanA. (2008b). Why do researchers integrate/combine/mesh/blend/mix/merge/fuse quantitative and qualitative research. In BergmanM. M. (Ed.), Advances in mixed methods research (pp. 87-100). London, England: SAGE.
10.
CampbellD.FiskeD. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod-matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81-105.
11.
CreswellJ. W. (2009). Editorial: Mapping the field of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 3, 95-108.
12.
CreswellJ. W. (2015). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
13.
DenzinN. K. (1978). The research act. Chicago, IL: Aldine. (Original work published 1970)
14.
DenzinN. K. (1989). The research act (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
15.
DenzinN. K. (2010). Moments, mixed methods, and paradigm dialogs. Qualitative Inquiry, 16, 419-427.
16.
ErzbergerC.KelleU. (2003). Making inferences in mixed methods: The rules of integration. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 457-488). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
17.
FieldingN. G.FieldingJ. L. (1986). Linking data. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
18.
FlickU. (1992). Triangulation revisited: Strategy of or alternative to validation of qualitative data. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 22, 175-197.
FlickU. (2008). Managing quality in qualitative research. London, England: SAGE.
21.
FlickU. (2011). Mixing methods, triangulation and integrated research: Challenges for qualitative research in a world of crisis. In DenzinN. K.GiardinaM. (Eds.), Qualitative inquiry and global crises (pp. 132-152). Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
22.
FlickU. (Ed.). (2014). Challenges for qualitative inquiry as a global endeavor [Special issue]. Qualitative Inquiry, 20, 1059-1127.
23.
FlickU. (2015). Introducing research methodology—A beginners’ guide to doing a research project (2nd ed.). London, England: SAGE.
24.
FlickU. (in press). Triangulation. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (5th ed.). London, England: SAGE.
25.
FlickU.Garms-HomolováV.HerrmannW.KuckJ.RöhnschG. (2012). “I can’t prescribe something just because someone asks for it . . .”: Using mixed methods in the framework of triangulation. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6, 97-110.
26.
GreeneJ. C. (2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
27.
GreeneJ. C. (2008). Is mixed methods social inquiry a distinctive methodology?Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 2, 7-22.
28.
GreeneJ. C. (2015). Preserving distinctions within the multimethod and mixed methods research merger. In Hesse-BiberS.JohnsonR. B. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of mixed method and multi-method research (pp. 606-615). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
29.
GreeneJ. C.CaracelliV. J. (1997). Defining and describing the paradigm issues in mixed-method evaluation. In GreeneJ. C.CaracelliV. J. (Eds.), Advances in mixed-method evaluation: The challenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms (pp. 5-18). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
30.
GreeneJ. C.CaracelliV. J.GrahamW. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation design. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11, 255-274.
31.
GuestG. (2013). Describing mixed methods research: An alternative to typologies. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 7, 141-151.
32.
Hesse-BiberS. (2010a). Feminist approaches to mixed methods research: Linking theory and praxis. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 169-192). London, England: SAGE.
Hesse-BiberS. (2015). Mixed methods research: The “thing-ness” problem. Qualitative Health Research, 25, 775-788.
35.
Hesse-BiberS.JohnsonR. B. (Eds.). (2015). Oxford handbook of mixed method and multi-method research. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
36.
Hesse-BiberS.RodriguezD.FrostN. A. (2015). A qualitatively driven approach to multimethod and mixed methods research. In Hesse-BiberS.JohnsonR. B. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of mixed method and multi-method research (pp. 3-20). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
37.
HunterA.BrewerJ. (2006). Foundations of multi method research—Synthesizing styles. London, England: SAGE.
38.
HunterA.BrewerJ. (2015). Designing multi method research. In Hesse-BiberS.JohnsonR. B. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of mixed method and multi-method research (pp. 185-205). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
39.
JahodaM.LazarsfeldP. F.ZeiselH. (1971). Marienthal: The sociology of an unemployed community. Chicago, IL: Aldine-Atherton. (Original work published 1933)
40.
JohnsonR. B.OnwuegbuzieA. J.TurnerL. A. (2007). Towards a definition of mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1, 112-133.
41.
KelleU.ErzbergerC. (2004). Quantitative and qualitative methods: No confrontation. In FlickU.KardorffE. V.SteinkeI. (Eds.), A companion to qualitative research (pp. 172-177). London, England: SAGE.
42.
KnoblauchH.FlickU.MaederC. (Eds.). (2005). The state of the art of qualitative research in Europe. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 6(3), Article 3. Retrieved from http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/3
43.
KuhnT. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
44.
LazarsfeldP. F. (1960). Vorspruch zur neuen Auflage 1960 [Prologue to the new edition 1960]. In JahodaM.LazarsfeldP.ZeiselH. (Eds.), Die Arbeitslosen von Marienthal (pp. 11-23). Frankfurt, Germany: Suhrkamp.
45.
LewisO. (1953). Controls and experiments in field work. In KroeberA. L. (Ed.), Anthropology today: An Encyclopedic Inventory (pp. 452-475). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
46.
LincolnY. S.GubaE. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. London, England: SAGE.
47.
MaxwellJ. A. (2016). Expanding the history and range of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 10, 12-27.
48.
MaxwellJ. A.ChmielM.RogersS. (2015). Designing integration in mixed method and multi method research. In Hesse-BiberS.JohnsonR. B. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of mixed method and multi-method research (pp. 223-239). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
49.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M. (1984). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
50.
MorganD. L. (2007). Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: Methodological implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1, 48-76.
51.
MorganD. L. (2014). Integrating qualitative and quantitative methods: A pragmatic approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
52.
MorseJ. M. (2010). Simultaneous and sequential qualitative mixed method designs. Qualitative Inquiry, 16, 483-491.
53.
MorseJ. M.NiehausL. (2009). Mixed method design: Principles and procedures. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
54.
ÖhlénJ. (2010). Review: Janice M. Morse and Linda Niehaus (2009): Mixed method design—Principles and procedures (21 paragraphs). Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 12(1), Article 15. Retrieved from http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs1101159
55.
PeltoP. J. (2015). What is so new about mixed methods?Qualitative Health Research, 25, 734-745.
56.
Plano ClarkV. L.BadieeM. (2010). Research questions in mixed methods research. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 275-304). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
57.
PolanyiM. (1966). The tacit dimension. London, England: Routledge.
58.
SandelowskiM. (2014). Unmixing mixed-methods research. Research in Nursing & Health, 37, 3-8.
59.
SilvermanD. (1985). Qualitative methodology and sociology. Aldershot, UK: Gower.
60.
SymondsJ.GorardS. (2010). Death of mixed methods? Or the rebirth of research as a craft. Evaluation & Research in Education, 23, 121-136.
61.
TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (2003a). The past and the future of mixed model research: From “data triangulation” to “mixed model designs.” In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 671-701). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
62.
TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.). (2003b). The SAGE handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
63.
TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.). (2010). The SAGE handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
64.
TeddlieC.TashakkoriA. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. London, England: SAGE.
65.
WebbE. J.CampbellD. T.SchwartzR. D.SechrestL. (1966). Unobstrusive measures: Nonreactive research in the social sciences. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
66.
WhyteW. F. (1955). Street corner society (Enlarged ed.). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
