A sequential design utilizing identical samples was used to classify mixed methods studies via a two-dimensional model, wherein sampling designs were grouped according to the time orientation of each study's components and the relationship of the qualitative and quantitative samples. A quantitative analysis of 121 studies representing nine fields in the social or health sciences revealed that more studies utilized a sampling design that was concurrent (66.1%) than sequential (33.9%). Also, identical sampling designs were the most prevalent, followed by nested sampling, multilevel sampling, and parallel sampling, respectively. Qualitative analysis suggested that across a number of studies the researchers made statistical generalizations that were not sufficiently warranted—culminating in interpretive inconsistency and contributing to crises of representation, legitimation, integration, and politics.
Altman, D.G. (1991). Practical statistics for medical research. London: Chapman and Hall.
2.
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing (Rev. ed.). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
3.
Baumgartner, T.A., Strong, C.H., & Hensley, L.D. (2002). Conducting and reading research in health and human performance (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
4.
Bernard, H.R. (1995). Research methods in anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira.
5.
Bracht, G.H., & Glass, G.V. (1968). The external validity of experiments. American Educational Research Journal, 5, 437-474.
6.
Campbell, D.T. (1957). Factors relevant to the validity of experiments in social settings. Psychological Bulletin,54, 297-312.
7.
Campbell, D.T., & Stanley, J.C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand-McNally .
8.
Caracelli, V.W., & Greene, J.C. (1993). Data analysis strategies for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15, 195-207.
9.
Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales . Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 37-46.
10.
Cohen, J. (1962). The statistical power of abnormal social psychological research: A review. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology , 65, 145-153.
11.
Cohen, J. (1965). Some statistical issues in psychological research . In B. B. Wolman (Ed.), Handbook of clinical psychology (pp. 95-121). New York: McGraw-Hill.
12.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
13.
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155-159.
14.
Collins, K.M.T., Onwuegbuzie, A.J., & Jiao, Q.G. (2006). Prevalence of mixed methods sampling designs in social science research. Evaluation and Research in Education , 19(2), 83-101.
15.
Collins, K.M.T., Onwuegbuzie, A.J., & Sutton, I.L. (2006). A model incorporating the rationale and purpose for conducting mixed methods research in special education and beyond. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 4, 67-100.
16.
Constas, M.A. (1992). Qualitative data analysis as a public event: The documentation of category development procedures. American Educational Research Journal, 29, 253-266.
17.
Cook, T.D., & Campbell, D.T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Chicago : Rand-McNally.
18.
Creswell, J.W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19.
Creswell, J.W. (2002). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
20.
Creswell, J.W., & Plano Clark, V.L. (2007). Design and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
21.
Curtis, S., Gesler, W., Smith, G., & Washburn, S. (2000). Approaches to sampling and case selection in qualitative research: Examples in the geography of health. Social Science and Medicine, 50, 1001-1014.
22.
Daley, C.E., & Onwuegbuzie, A.J. (2004). Attributions toward violence of male juvenile delinquents: A concurrent mixed methods analysis. Journal of Social Psychology, 144, 549-570.
23.
dela Cruz, F.A., Brehm, C., & Harris, J. (2004). Transformation in family nurse practitioner students' attitudes toward homeless individuals after participation in a homeless outreach clinic. Journal of the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners , 16, 547-554.
24.
Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y.S. (2005). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 1-32). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
25.
Drennan, J. (2002). An evaluation of the role of the clinical placement coordinator in student nurse support in the clinical area. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 40, 475-483.
26.
Firestone, W.A. (1993). Alternative arguments for generalizing from data, as applied to qualitative research. Educational Researcher , 22(4), 16-23.
27.
Flick, U. (1998). An introduction to qualitative research: Theory, method and applications. London: Sage.
28.
Forsbach, T., & Thompson, A. (2003). The impact of childhood cancer on adult survivors' interpersonal relationships. Child Care in Practice, 9, 117-128.
29.
Gordon, D.G. (2002). Discipline in the music classroom: One component contributing to teacher stress. Music Education Research, 4, 158-165.
30.
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.
31.
Halpern, E.S. (1983). Auditing naturalistic inquiries: The development and application of a model. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington.
32.
Harwood, E.M., Erickson, D.J., Fabian, L.E.A., Jones-Webb, R., Slater, S., & Chaloupka, F.J. (2003). Effects of communities, neighborhoods and stores on retail pricing and promotion of beer. Journal ofStudies on Alcohol, 64, 720-726.
33.
Hood, J.C. (2006). The teaching against the text: The case of qualitative methods. Teaching Sociology, 34, 207-223.
34.
Hurley, M.M. (2001). Reviewing integrated science and mathematics: The search for evidence and definitions from new perspectives. School Science and Mathematics, 101, 259-270.
35.
Igo, L.B., Bruning, R., & McCrudden, M.T. (2005). Exploring differences in students' copy-and-paste decision making and processing: A mixed-methods study . Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 103-116.
Johnson, R.B., & Onwuegbuzie, A.J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher , 33(7), 14-26.
38.
Johnson, R.B., Onwuegbuzie, A.J., & Turner, L.A. (2005, April). Mixed methods research: Is there a criterion of demarcation? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal , Canada.
39.
Kemper, E.A., Stringfield, S., & Teddlie C. (2003). Mixed methods sampling strategies in social science research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 273-296). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
40.
Kennedy, M. (1979). Generalizing from single case studies. Evaluation Quarterly, 3, 661-678.
41.
Kneebone, R.L., Nestel, D., Moorthy, K., Taylor, P., Bann, S., Munz, Y., et al. (2003). Learning the skills of flexible sigmoidoscopy—The wider perspective. Medical Education, 37(Suppl. 1), 50-58.
42.
Krueger, R.A. (2000). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA : Sage.
43.
Kvale, S. (1995). The social construction of validity. Qualitative Inquiry, 1, 19-40.
44.
Langford, B.E., Schoenfeld, G., & Izzo, G. (2002). Nominal grouping sessions vs. focus groups. Qualitative Market Research, 5, 58-70.
45.
Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
46.
Mactavish, J.B., & Schleien, S.J. (2004). Re-injecting spontaneity and balance in family life: Parents' perspectives on recreation in families that include children with developmental disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 48(Part 2), 123-141.
47.
Maxwell, J.A. (1992). Understanding and validity in qualitative research . Harvard Educational Review, 62, 279-299.
48.
Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R . L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13-103). Old Tappan, NJ: Macmillan.
49.
Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons' responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50, 741-749.
50.
Mihalas, S., Powell, H., Onwuegbuzie, A.J., Suldo S., & Daley, C.E. (2005). A call for greater use of mixed methods in school psychology research. Manuscript submitted for publication.
51.
Miles, M., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
52.
Minor, L.C., Onwuegbuzie, A.J., Witcher, A.E., & James, T.L. (2002). Preservice teachers' educational beliefs and their perceptions of characteristics of effective teachers. Journal of Educational Research, 96, 116-127.
53.
Morgan, D.L. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research (2nd ed., Qualitative Research Methods Series 16 ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
54.
Morse, J.M. (1994). Designing funded qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 220-235). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
55.
Morse, J.M. (1995). The significance of saturation. Qualitative Health Research, 5, 147-149.
56.
Newman, I., Ridenour, C.S., Newman, C., & DeMarco, G.M.P. (2003). A typology of research purposes and its relationship to mixed methods. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 167-188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
57.
O'Cathain, A., Nicholl, J., Sampson, F., Walters, S., McDonnell, A., & Munro, J. (2004). Do different types of nurses give different triage decisions in NHS Direct? A mixed methods study. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 9, 226-233.
58.
Onwuegbuzie, A.J. (2007). Mixed methods research in sociology and beyond . In G. Ritzer (Ed.), The Blackwell encyclopedia of sociology (Vol. VI, pp. 2978-2981). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
59.
Onwuegbuzie, A.J., & Collins, K.M.T. (in press). A typology of mixed methods sampling designs in social science research. The Qualitative Report.
60.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Daniel, L. G. (Eds.). (2006). New directions in mixed methods research [Special issue]. Research in the Schools, 13(1).
Onwuegbuzie, A.J., & Johnson, R.B. (2006). The validity issue in mixed research. Research in the Schools, 13(1), 48-63.
63.
Onwuegbuzie, A.J., & Leech, N.L. (2004). Enhancing the interpretation of ``significant'' findings: The role of mixed methods research. The Qualitative Report, 9(4), 770-792. Retrieved November 8, 2005, from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR9-4/onwuegbuzie.pdf
64.
Onwuegbuzie, A.J., & Leech, N.L. (2005a, March). Generalization practices in qualitative research: Trends in the literature. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the EasternEducational Research Association, Sarasota, FL.
65.
Onwuegbuzie, A.J., & Leech, N.L. (2005b). Taking the ``Q'' out of research: Teaching research methodology courses without the divide between quantitative and qualitative paradigms. Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, 39, 267-296.
66.
Onwuegbuzie, A.J., & Leech, N.L. (2007). A call for qualitative power analyses: Considerations in qualitative research. Quality & QuantityInternational Journal of Methodology, 41(1): 105-121.
67.
Onwuegbuzie, A.J., & Teddlie, C. (2003). A framework for analyzing data in mixed methods research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 351-383). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
68.
Parkhurst, P.E., et al. (1972). Evaluation of videodisc modules: A mixed methods approach. East Lansing, MI: National Center for Research on Teacher Learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 348014)
69.
Patton, M.Q. (1990). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Sandelowski, M. (1995). Focus on qualitative methods: Sample sizes in qualitative research. Research inNursing & Health, 18, 179-183.
72.
Schmidt, F.L. (1996). Statistical significance testing and cumulative knowledge in psychology: Implications for the training of researchers. Psychological Methods, 1, 115-129.
73.
Schmidt, F.L., & Hunter, J.E. (1997). Eight common but false objections to the discontinuation of significance testing in the analysis of research data. In L. L. Harlow, S. A. Mulaik , & J. H. Steiger (Eds.), What if there were no significance tests? (pp. 37-64). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
74.
Schmidt, F.L., Hunter, J.E., & Urry, V.E. (1976). Statistical power in criterion-related validation studies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 473-485.
75.
Schrum, L., Skeele, R., & Grant, M. (2002-2003). One college of education's effort to infuse technology: A systematic approach to revisioning teaching and learning . Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35, 256-271.
76.
Sedlmeier, P., & Gigerenzer, G. (1989). Do studies of statistical power have an effect on the power of studies? Psychological Bulletin, 105, 309-316.
77.
Shadish, W.R., Cook, T.D., & Campbell, D.T. (2001). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
78.
Shaver, J.P., & Norton, R.S. (1980a). Populations, samples, randomness, and replication in two social studies journals. Theory and Research in Social Education, 8(2), 1-20.
79.
Shaver, J.P., & Norton, R.S. (1980b). Randomness and replication in ten years of the American Educational Research Journal. Educational Researcher , 9(1), 9-15.
80.
Smith, M.L., & Glass, G.V. (1987). Research and evaluation in education and the social sciences. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
81.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
82.
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches (Applied Social Research Methods Series, Vol. 46). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
83.
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (Eds.). (2003a). Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
84.
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2003b). The past and future of mixed methods research: From data triangulation to mixed model designs. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 671-701). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
85.
Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2003). Major issues and controversies in the use of mixed methods in the social and behavioral sciences. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 3-50). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
86.
Teddlie, C., & Yu, F. (2007). Mixed methods sampling: A typology with examples . Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1, 77-100.
