BarnhardtC.ReyesK.Vidal-RodriguezA.RamosM. (2018). A transformative mixed
methods assessment of educational access and opportunity for undocumented
college students in the Southeastern United StatesJournal of Mixed Methods Research,
12(4), doi: 10.1177/1558689816652764
2.
BergmanM. M. (2008). Advances in mixed methods research:
Theories and applications. London,
England:
Sage.
3.
BergmanM. M. (2011). Mixed
methods. In BadieBBerg-SchlosserD.MorlinoL. (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of political
science (pp. 1586-1590).
London, England:
Sage.
4.
BergmanM. M. (2018). The century of migration and
the contribution of mixed methods research. Journal
of Mixed Methods Research, 12(4),
371-373. doi: 10.1177/1558689818801737
5.
FettersM. F.Molina-AzorinJ.
F. (2018). JMMR has a new
‘‘Commentaries’’ feature. Journal of Mixed Methods
Research, 12(2),
130-132. doi:10.1177/1558689818764744
6.
FauserM. (2018). Mixed methods and multisited
migration research: Innovations from a transnational
perspective. Journal of Mixed Methods
Research, 12(4),
394-412. doi:10.1177/1558689817702752
7.
GamlenA.McIntyreC. D. R. (2018). Mixing methods to explain
emigration policies: A post-positivist perspective.
Journal of Mixed Methods Research,
12(4),
374-393. doi: 10.1177/1558689818782822
8.
HammersleyM. (2018). Commentary—On the
“indistinguishability thesis”: A response to Morgan.
Journal of Mixed Methods Research,
12(3),
256-259. doi:10.1177/1558689818772764
9.
KaczmarczykP.SalamońskaJ. (2018). Why we still need
ethnosurveys in migration research: Empirical evidence from
Poland. Journal of Mixed Methods Research,
12(4),
458-476. doi: 10.1177/1558689818796370
10.
MertensD. M. (2015). Mixed methods and wicked
problems. Journal of Mixed Methods
Research, 9(1),
3-6. doi:10.1177/1558689814562944
11.
MertensD. M.Hesse-BiberS. (2012). Triangulation and mixed
methods research: Provocative positions. Journal of
Mixed Methods Research, 6(2),
75-79. doi:10.1177/1558689812437100
12.
Molina-AzorinJ.
F.FettersM. F. (2018). Future special issues at
theJournal of Mixed Methods Research,
12(4),
369-370. doi: 10.1177/1558689818800897
13.
MorganD. L. (2018a). Living with blurry
boundaries: The value of distinguishing between qualitative and quantitative
research. Journal of Mixed Methods
Research, 12(3),
268-279. doi:10.1177/1558689816686433
14.
MorganD. L. (2018b). Rebuttal—Response from
David Morgan. Journal of Mixed Methods
Research, 12(3),
260-261. doi:10.1177/1558689818772764
15.
SandelowskiM. (2018). A reluctant but necessary
rebuttal to a rebuttal. Journal of Mixed Methods
Research, 12(4),
366-368. doi:10.1177/1558689818799427
16.
SchraufR.W. (2018) Mixed methods designs for
making cross-cultural comparisons. Journal of Mixed
Methods Research, 12(4),
477-494. doi: 10.1177/1558689817743109
17.
Sorde MartiT.MertensD. M. (2014). Mixed methods research with
groups at risk: New developments and key debates.
Journal of Mixed Methods Research,
8(3), 207-211.
doi:10.1177/1558689814527916
18.
WagnerK. D.SyvertsenJ. L.VerdugoS. R.MolinaJ. L.StrathdeeS. A. (2018). A mixed methods study of the
social support networks of female sex workers and their primary
noncommercial male partners in Tijuana, Mexico.
Journal of Mixed Methods Research,
12(4),
437-457. doi:10.1177/1558689816688974
