Mixed qualitative and quantitative studies are becoming popular in social sciences research and are recognized as legitimate project designs. However, diverse definitions and applications are common and little consensus exists about exactly what constitutes a mixed methods approach. In this article, the authors provide an overview of various approaches to mixed methods and present the findings derived from a survey of mixed methods research published between 2000 and 2005 in nine occupational therapy journals. The results from this survey indicate that, although the use of mixed methods is relatively common (14% of all research articles published), there are several methodological issues to be considered. These include the subordinate positioning of qualitative findings and lack of justification for using mixed methods. Recommendations are offered to conceptually advance future applications and guide occupational therapy researchers considering the use of mixed methods.
AltmanD. (1991). Practical statistics for medical research. London: Chapman & Hall.
2.
BabbieE. (1999). The practice of social research (8th ed). Toronto, Ontario: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
3.
BaumF. (1995). Researching public health: Behind the qualitative-quantitative methodological debate. Social Science Medicine, 40, 459–468.
4.
BejerholmU.EklundM. (2004). Time use and occupational performance among persons with schizophrenia. Occupational Therapy in Mental Health, 20(1), 27–47.
5.
BrymanA. (2006). Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: How is it done?Qualitative Research, 6, 97–113.
6.
CameronD.LeslieM.TeplickyR.PollockN.StewartD.ToalC.. (2001). The clinical utility of the test of playfulness. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 68, 104–111.
7.
ChanP.ChowS. (2005). Reliability and validity of the test of visual-perceptual skills (non-motor)—revised for Chinese preschoolers. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 59, 369–376.
8.
CreswellJ. W.ClarkPlano V. L.GutmannM. L.HansonW. E. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 209–240). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
9.
DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (1994). Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
10.
DePoyE.GitlinL. N. (1998). Introduction to research: Understanding and applying multiples strategies (2nd ed.). Toronto, Ontario: Mosby.
11.
Dixon-WoodsM.BonasS.BoothA.JonesD. R.MillerT.SuttonA. J.. (2006). How can systematic reviews incorporate qualitative research? A critical perspective. Qualitative Research, 6, 27–44.
FinlayL. (1998). Reflexivity: An essential component for all research?British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 61, 453–456.
14.
FisherA.Savin-BadenM. (2002). Modernizing fieldwork. Part 1: Realizing the potential. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 65, 229–236.
15.
GageN. (1989). The paradigm wars and their aftermath: A “historical” sketch of research and teaching since 1989. Educational Researcher, 18, 4–10.
16.
GitlowL.FleckyK. (2005). Integrating disability studies concepts into occupational therapy education using service learning. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 59, 546–553.
17.
GreeneJ. C.CaracelliV. J. (2003). Making paradigmatic sense of mixed methods practice. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioural research (pp. 91–110). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
18.
GreeneJ. C.CaracelliV. J.GrahamW. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11, 255–74.
19.
HansonW. E.CreswellJ. W.ClarkPlano V. L.PetskaK. S.CreswellJ. D. (2005). Mixed methods research designs in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 224–235.
20.
HeatherF. (2003). Pro-motion: A positive way forward for clients with severe and enduring mental health problems living in the community, part 2. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 66, 25–30.
21.
HouseE. R.HoweK. R. (1999). Values in evaluation and social sciences research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
22.
IkiuguM.RossoH. (2005). Understanding the occupational human being as a complex, dynamical, adaptive system. Occupational Therapy in Health Care, 19(4), 43–65.
23.
KuhnT. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago.
24.
MalterudK. (2001). Qualitative research: Standards, challenges, and guidelines. The Lancet, 358, 483–88.
25.
MasonJ. (2006). Mixing methods in a qualitatively driven way. Qualitative Research, 6, 9–25.
26.
MaxeyS. J. (2003). Pragmatic threads in mixed methods research in the social sciences: The search for multiple modes of inquiry and the end of the philosophy of formalism. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioural research (pp. 51–90). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
27.
MaxwellJ. A.LoomisD. M. (2003). Mixed method design: An alternative approach. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioural research (pp. 241–272). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
28.
MertensD. M. (2003). Mixed methods and the politics of human research: The transformative-emancipatory perspective. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioural research (pp. 135–166). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
29.
MertensD. M. (2005). Research and evaluation in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
30.
MilesM.HubermanM. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded source book (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
31.
MoghaddanF. M.WalkerB. R.HarréR. (2003). Cultural distance, levels of abstraction, and the advantages of mixed methods. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioural research (pp. 111–134). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
32.
MolkeD. K.Laliberte-RudmanD.PolatajkoH. (2004). The promise of occupational science: A developmental assessment of an emerging academic discipline. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 71, 269–281.
33.
Morgan-EllisJ.AlexanderV. D.CroninA.DickinsonM.FieldingJ.SleneyJ.. (2006). Triangulation and integration: Processes, claims and implications. Qualitative Research, 6, 45–59.
34.
MorseJ. M. (2003). Principles of mixed methods and multimethod research design. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioural research (pp. 189–208). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
35.
MortensonW. B.MillerW. C.BoilyJ.SteeleB.CrawfordE.DesharnaisG. (2006). Overarching principles and salient findings for inclusion in guidelines for power mobility use within residential care facilities. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 42, 199–208.
36.
MortensonW. B.MillerW. C.BoilyJ.SteeleB.OdellL.CrawfordE.. (2005). Perceptions of power mobility use and safety in residential facilities. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 72, 142–152.
PopayJ. (2003). Qualitative research and the epidemiological imagination: A vital relationship. Gaceta Sanitaria, 17, 58–63.
39.
RaphaelD. (1996). Measuring quality of life: Eleven debates. In RenwickR.BrownI.NaglerM. (Eds.), Quality of life in health promotion and rehabilitation: Conceptual approaches, issues, and applications (pp. 146–170). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
40.
SandelowskiM. (2000). Combining qualitative and quantitative sampling, data collection and analysis techniques in mixed-method studies. Research in Nursing and Health, 23, 246–255.
41.
Streubert-SpezialeH. J.CarpenterD. R. (2003). Qualitative research in nursing: Advancing the humanistic imperative (3rd ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincott, Williams, & Wilkins.
42.
TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. (Applied Social Research Methods, No. 46). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
43.
TeddlieC.TashakkoriA. (2003). Major issues and controversies in the use of mixed methods in the social sciences. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioural research (pp. 3–50). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
