BiestaG. (2010). Pragmatism and the philosophical foundations of mixed methods research. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 95-118). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
2.
CreswellJ. W.Plano ClarkV. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
3.
FeilzerM. Y. (2010). Doing mixed methods research pragmatically: Implications for the rediscovery of pragmatism as a research paradigm. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(1), 6-16.
4.
FettersM. D. (2018, August). Yin and Yang: An Eastern philosophy for mixed methods made in heaven. Paper presented at the Mixed Methods International Research Association Meeting, Vienna, Austria.
5.
GreeneJ. C.HallJ. N. (2010). Dialectics and pragmatism: Being of consequence. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 119-143). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
6.
Hesse-BiberS. N.KellyC. (2010). Post-modernist approaches to mixed methods research. In Hesse-BiberS. N. (Ed.), Mixed methods research: Merging theory with practice (pp. 154-173). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
7.
JohnsonR. B. (2017). Dialectical pluralism: A metaparadigm whose time has come. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 11(2), 156-173.
8.
MaxwellJ. A.MittapalliK. (2010). Realism as a stance for mixed methods research. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 145-167). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
9.
MertensD. (2007). Transformative paradigm: Mixed methods and social justice. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(3), 212-225.
10.
Molina-AzorinF. J.FettersM. D. (2017). The Journal of Mixed Methods Research starts a new decade: The first 10 years in review. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 11(2), 143-155. doi:10.1177/1558689817696365
11.
MorganD. (2007). Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: Methodological implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 48-76.
12.
SchoonenboomJ. (2017). A performative paradigm for mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/1558689817722889
13.
Shannon-BakerP. (2016). Making paradigms meaningful in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 10(4), 319-334.
14.
TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (2003). Handbook on mixed methods in the behavioral and social sciences. Sage.
15.
WangR. R. (2012). Yinyang: The way of heaven and earth in Chinese thought and culture. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.