While typically North American and Anglo-European stances have dominated discussion on different paradigms advanced about mixed method research, recently there has been a call for examination of other cultural worldviews. This article contributes to the field of mixed methods research by presenting a worldview based on collective inquiry, whereby different perspectives are woven together to create new knowledge. Fa’afaletui, a Samoan research framework, literally means “‘ways of’ [fa’a] ‘weaving together’ [tui] deliberations of different groups or ‘houses’ [fale].” It is derived from the Pacific philosophy of connectiveness and a collective holistic approach. We give a case example of how this framework is directing our research.
AnaeM.Moewaka BarnesH.McCreanorT.WatsonP. (2002). Towards promoting youth mental health in Aotearoa/New Zealand: Holistic “houses” of health. International Journal of Mental Health Promotion, 4(2), 5-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623730.2002.9721855
2.
Australian Institute of Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Studies. (2012). Guidelines for Ethical Research in Australian Indigenous Studies. Canberra: pp20.
3.
BazeleyP.KempL. (2012). Mosaics, triangles, and DNA: Metaphors for integrated analysis in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6(1), 55-72. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689811419514
4.
BonderB. (2001). Culture and occupation: A comparison of weaving in two traditions. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 68(5), 310-319. https://doi.org/10.1177/000841740106800507
5.
BuchA. (2018). Socio-materiality and modes of inquiry. In Book of Abstracts 2018 Forum on Philosophy, Engineering & Technology (pp. 110-111). University of Maryland.
6.
ChilisaB. (2012). Indigenous research methodologies. Sage.
7.
BurleyD. V.ConnaughtonS. P.ClarkG. (2018). “Early cessation of ceramic production for ancestral Polynesian society in Tonga.”PloS one, 13(2): e0193166-e0193166.
CreswellJ. W.Plano ClarkV. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage.
10.
CreswellJ. W.FettersM. D.IvankovaN. V. (2004). Designing a mixed methods study in primary care. Annals of Family Medicine, 2(1), 7-12. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.104
11.
CreswellJ. W.PothC. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage.
12.
CrottyM. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process. Sage.
13.
DanermarkB. (2002). Interdisciplinary research and critical realism. The example of disability research. Journal of Critical Realism, 5(1), 56-64. https://doi.org/10.1558/aleth.v5i1.56
14.
DenscombeM. (2008). Communities of practice: A research paradigm for the mixed methods approach. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 2(3), 270-283. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689808316807
15.
DeweyJ.BentleyA. (1949). Knowing and the known. Beacon Press.
16.
EastwoodJ. G.KempL. A.JalaludinB. B. (2016). Realist theory construction for a mixed method multilevel study of neighbourhood context and postnatal depression. Springerplus, 5(1), Article 1081. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-2729-9
17.
Ete-RaschE.NelsonK. (2013). Management of skin infections in Pacific children prior to hospitalisation. Journal of Primary Health Care, 5(1), 43-51. https://doi.org/10.1071/HC13043
18.
FettersM. D.CurryL.CreswellJ. (2013). Achieving integration in mixed methods designs-principles and practices. Health Services Research, 48(6 Pt 2), 2134-2156. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12117
19.
FettersM. D.FreshwaterD. (2015). The 1 + 1 = 3 integration challenge. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 9(2), 115-117. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689815581222
20.
FettersM. D.Molina-AzorinJ. F. (2017). The Journal of Mixed Methods Research starts a new decade: The mixed methods research integration trilogy and its dimensions. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 11(3), 291-307. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689817714066
21.
FettersM. D.Molina-AzorinJ. (2018). A call for expanding philosophical perspectives to create a more “worldly” field of mixed methods: The example of yinyang philosophy. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 13(1), 15-18. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689818816886
22.
GillI.DalbethN.OfanoaM.Goodyear-SmithF. (2020). Interventions to improve the uptake of urate-lowering therapy for patients with gout: A systematic review. British Journal of General Practice Open, 4(3). https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgpopen20X101051
23.
Goodyear-SmithF. (2017). Collective enquiry and reflective action in research: Towards a clarification of the terminology. Family Practice, 34(3), 268-271. https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmw098
24.
Ibarretxe-AntuñanoI. (2013). The relationship between conceptual metaphor and culture. Intercultural Pragmatics, 10(2), 315-339. https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2013-0014
25.
JagoshJ.MacaulayA. C.PluyeP.SalsbergJ.BushP. L.HendersonJ.SirettE.WongG.CargoM.HerbertC. P.SeiferS. D.GreenL. W.GreenhalghT. (2012). Uncovering the benefits of participatory research: Implications of a realist review for health research and practice. Milbank Q, 90(2), 311-346. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0009.2012.00665.x
26.
JanamainT.JacksonC.DunbarJ. (2014). Co-creating value in research: Stakeholders’ perspectives. Medical Journal of Australia, 201(S3), S44-S46. https://doi.org/10.5694/mja14.00273
27.
JohnsonR. B. (2015). Dialectical pluralism: A metaparadigm whose time has come. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 11(2), 156-173. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689815607692
28.
LakoffG. (2014). Mapping the brain’s metaphor circuitry: Metaphorical thought in everyday reason. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 958. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00958
LamontR.FishmanT.Fuimaono SandersP.‘OfanoaM.Goodyear-SmithF. (2020). View from the canoe: Co-designing research Pacific-style. Annals of Family Medicine, 18(2), 172-175. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2497
31.
LamontR.FishmanT.Goodyear-SmithF. (2018). Travelling companions: A story told by a patient and her doctor. British Journal of General Practice, 68(671), 282. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp18X696425
32.
LandauM. J.MeierB. P.KeeferL. A. (2010). A metaphor-enriched social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 136(6), 1045-1067. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020970
LeeM.-Y.GreeneG. J. (1999). A social constructivist framework for integrating cross-cultural issues in teaching clinical social work. Journal of Social Work Education, 35(1), 21-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.1999.10778944
35.
McCarthyA.ShabanR.StoneC. (2011). Fa’afaletui: A framework for the promotion of renal health in an Australian Samoan community. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 22(1), 55-62. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043659610387154
36.
Ministry of Health. (2008). Pacific peoples and mental health: A paper for the Pacific health and disability action plan review (p. 43).
Panel on Research Ethics. (2015). TCPS 2: Chapter 9 (research involving the First Nations, Inuit and Métis Peoples of Canada). Government of Canada.
40.
PetersL. D.PresseyA. D.VanharantaM.JohnstonW. J. (2013). Constructivism and critical realism as alternative approaches to the study of business networks: Convergences and divergences in theory and in research practice. Industrial Marketing Management, 42(3), 336-346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2013.02.003
Pulotu-EndemannF. (2001). Fonofale Model of Health. 15. Wellington, (NZ): Mental Health Commission.
44.
SchoonenboomJ. (2017). A performative paradigm for mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 13(3), 284-300. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689817722889
45.
Shannon-BakerP. (2016). Making paradigms meaningful in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 10(4), 319-334. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689815575861
46.
Sommer HarritsG. (2011). More than method? A discussion of paradigm differences within mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 5(2), 150-166. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689811402506
47.
Suaalii-SauniT.Fulu-AiolupoteaS. M. (2014). Decolonising Pacific research, building Pacific research communities and developing Pacific research tools: The case of the talanoa and the faafaletui in Samoa. Asia Pacific Viewpoint, 55(3), 331-344. https://doi.org/10.1111/apv.12061
48.
TamaseseK.PeteruC.WaldegraveC.BushA. (2005). Ole Taeao Afua, the new morning: A qualitative investigation into Samoan perspectives on mental health and culturally appropriate services. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 39(4), 300-309. https://doi.org/10.1080/j.1440-1614.2005.01572.x
49.
TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (2008). Quality of inferences in mixed methods research: Calling for an integrative framework. Sage.
50.
VakalahiH. F. O. (2011). Commentary: Embracing culture as essential to Pacific people. Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology, 5(2), 85-89. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1834490900000623
