This article presents a hybrid methodological technique that fuses elements of experimental design with qualitative strategies to explore mediated communication. Called the “qualitative experiment,” this strategy uses focus groups and in-depth interviews within randomized stimulus conditions typically associated with experimental research. This mixed methods research draws on the advantages of qualitative inquiry to better understand meaning construction and gain a more holistic reading of response differences between varied groupings of mediated content.
BenoitW. L.HolbertR. L. (2008). Empirical intersections in communication research: Replication, multiple quantitative methods, and bridging the quantitative–qualitative divide. Journal of Communication, 58, 615-628.
2.
BirdS. E.DardenneR. W. (1997). Myth, chronicle, and story: Exploring the narrative qualities of news. In BerkowitzD. (Ed.), Social meanings of news (pp. 333-350). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
3.
BradyB.O’ReganC. (2009). Meeting the challenge of doing an RCT evaluation of youth mentoring in Ireland: A journey in mixed methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 3(3), 265-280.
4.
BrannenJ. (2005). Mixing methods: The entry of qualitative and quantitative approaches into the research process. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8, 173-184.
5.
BrewerJ.HunterA. (1989). Multimethod research: A synthesis of style. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
6.
CampbellD. T.FiskeD. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81-105.
7.
CannellaG. S.LincolnY. S. (2004). Epilogue: Claiming a critical public social science—Reconceptualizing and redeploying research. Qualitative Inquiry, 10, 298-309.
8.
CaracelliV. J.GreeneJ. C. (1997). Crafting mixed method evaluation designs. In GreeneJ. C.CaracelliV. J. (Eds.), Advances in mixed-method evaluation: The challenges and benefits of integrated diverse paradigms (pp. 19-32). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
9.
CarmelE.CrawfordS.ChenH. (1992). Browsing in hypertext: A cognitive study. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 22, 865-884.
10.
CooperC.BrownJ.AzmetiaM.ChaviraG. (2005). Including Latino immigrant families, schools and community programs as research partners on the good path of life. In WeisnerT. S. (Ed.), Discovering successful pathways in children’s development: Mixed methods in the study of childhood and family life (pp. 359-386). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
11.
CreswellJ. W. (1994). Research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. London, England: Sage.
12.
CreswellJ. W.Plano ClarkV. (2010). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). London, England: Sage.
13.
CreswellJ. W.ShopeR.Plano ClarkV.GreenD. O. (2006). How interpretive qualitative research extends mixed methods research. Research in the Schools, 13(1), 1-11.
14.
DarntonR. (1975). Writing news and telling stories. Daedalus, 104, 175-194.
15.
EricssonK. A.SimonH. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data (Rev. ed.). Cambridge: MIT Press.
16.
EvelandW.DunwoodyS. (2000). Examining information processing on the World Wide Web using think aloud protocols. Media Psychology, 2, 219-244.
17.
FestingerL.RieckenH. W.SchachterS. (1956). When prophecy fails. Minneapolis: University of Minneapolis Press.
18.
FontanaA.FreyJ. (2005). The interview: From neutral stance to political involvement. In DenzinN.LincolnY. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 695-728). London, England: Sage.
19.
GoldenbergC.GallimoreR.ReeseL. (2005). Using mixed methods to explore Latino children’s literacy development. In WeisnerT. S. (Ed.), Discovering successful pathways in children’s development: Mixed methods in the study of childhood and family life (pp. 21-46). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
20.
GonzalezM. C. (2000). The four seasons of ethnography: A creation-centered ontology for ethnography. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 24, 623-650.
21.
GraberD. A. (1990). Seeing is remembering: How visuals contribute to learning from television news. Journal of Communication, 40, 134-155.
22.
GrimesT. (1990). Encoding TV news messages into memory. Journalism Quarterly, 67, 757-766.
23.
HillJ. R.HannafinM. J. (1997). Cognitive strategies and learning from the World Wide Web. Educational Technology Research & Development, 45, 37-64.
24.
HyndmanD. (2002). Indigenous representation of the T’boli and the Tasaday lost tribe controversy in postcolonial Philippines: Interpreting the eroticized, effeminizing gaze in National Geographic. Social Identities, 8(1), 45-66.
25.
JohnsonR. B.OnwuegbuzieA. J.TurnerL. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 112-133.
26.
KovachB.RosenstielT. (2007). The elements of journalism: What news people should know and the people should expect. New York, NY: Three Rivers Press.
27.
KruegerR. A.CaseyM. A. (2000). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
28.
KvaleS.BrinkmanS. (2009). Interviews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. London, England: Sage.
29.
LangA. (1995). Defining audio/video redundancy from a limited-capacity information processing perspective. Communication Research, 22(1), 86-115.
30.
LazarsfeldP. (1944). The controversy over detailed interviews. Public Opinion Quarterly, 8, 38-60.
31.
LemusD. (2005). The use of mixed methods in organizational communication research: An analysis of the last ten years. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, New York, NY.
32.
LincolnY. S. (2010). What a long, strange trip it’s been . . . ”: Twenty-five years of qualitative and new paradigm research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16, 3-9.
33.
LindlofT. R.TaylorB. C. (2002). Qualitative communication research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
34.
LundsgaardeH. P.FischerP. J.SteeleD. J. (1981). Human problems in computerized medicine. Lawrence: University of Kansas.
35.
LutzC. A.CollinsJ. L. (1993). Reading National Geographic. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
36.
MasonJ. (2006). Mixing methods in a qualitatively driven way. Qualitative Research, 6(1), 9-25.
37.
MaxwellJ. A.LoomisD. (2003). Mixed methods design: An alternative approach. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 241-271). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
38.
MaxwellJ. A.SandlowL. J.BashookP. G. (1986). Combining ethnographic and experimental methods in evaluation research: A case study. In FettermanD. M.PitmanM. A. (Eds.), Educational evaluation: Ethnography in theory, practice, and politics (pp. 121-143). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
39.
MendelsonA. L. (2001). Effects of novelty in news photographs on attention and memory. Media Psychology, 3, 119-157.
40.
MendelsonA. L.Darling-WolfF. (2009). Readers’ interpretations of visual and verbal narratives of a National Geographic story on Saudi Arabia. Journalism, 10, 798-818.
41.
MertonR. K. (1987). The focused interview and focus groups: Continuities and discontinuities. Public Opinion Quarterly, 51, 550-566.
42.
MertonR. K.KendallP. L. (1946). The focused interview. American Journal of Sociology, 51, 541-557.
43.
MoorsA. (1996). On appearance and disappearance: Representing women in Palestine under the British Mandate. Thamyris, 3, 279-310.
44.
MorganD. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research. London, England: Sage.
45.
NielsenJ. (1999). Designing web usability: The practice of simplicity. Indianapolis, IN: New Riders Publishing.
46.
NordstromA. D. (1992). Wood nymphs and patriots: Depictions of Samoans in the National Geographic magazine. Visual Sociology, 7(2), 49-59.
47.
ParameswaranR. (2002). Local culture in global media: Excavating colonial and material discourses in National Geographic. Communication Theory, 12(3), 287-315.
48.
PattonM. Q. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
49.
SandelowskiM. (2000). Combining qualitative and quantitative sampling, data collection, and analysis techniques in mixed-method studies. Research in Nursing & Health, 23, 246-255.
50.
SandelowskiM. (2010). What’s in a name? Qualitative description revisited. Research in Nursing & Health, 33, 77-84.
51.
SchuttR. K. (1999). Investigating the social world: The process and practice of research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
52.
SteetL. (2000). Veils and daggers: A century of National Geographic’s representation of the Arab World. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
53.
StraussA.CorbinJ. (1998). The basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). London, England: Sage.
54.
TramH. (2010). The pipeline to publication: Student research output in mass communication journals (1999-2008). Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 64, 395-413.
55.
TremayneM.DunwoodyS. (2001). Interactivity, information processing, and learning on the World Wide Web. Science Communication, 23, 111-134.
56.
TrumboC. W. (2004). Research methods in mass communication research: A census of eight journals 1990-2000. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 81, 417-436.
57.
VivianoF. (2003). Kingdom on edge: Saudi Arabia. National Geographic Magazine, 204(4), 2-41.
58.
WantaW.RoarkV. (1994). Responses to photographs. Visual Communication Quarterly, 1(2), 12-13.
59.
WeaverD. H. (1987). Thoughts on an agenda for mass communication research. In GurevitchM.LevyM. R. (Eds.), Communication research in the 1990s: New directions and new agendas?Newbury, Park, CA: Sage.
