The Role of the Implementation Matrix in Designing and Reporting Integration Decisions in a Mixed Methods Study

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to illustrate the process and insights gleaned from developing an implementation matrix to convey a concise, yet detailed representation of the project integration steps in a single diagram. The article is based on an explanatory sequential study conducted with 248 teachers exploring how beliefs shaped their use of technology. This article contributes to mixed methods research (MMR) by providing an example that can be used as guide by other researchers in developing and using the implementation matrix as a tool for communicating procedurally the mixed methods project integration steps for an explanatory sequential study. It also provides analytical insights gleaned and recommendations for how the implementation matrix can be developed and utilized.

Keywords

implementation matrix integration reporting mixed methods explanatory sequential design

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bazeley

(2018). Integrating analyses in mixed methods research. Sage.

Castro

F. G.

Kellison

J. G.

Boyd

S. J.

Kopak

(2010). A methodology for conducting integrative mixed methods research and data analyses. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(4), 342–360. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689810382916

Creswell

(2015). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Sage.

Engin

(2011). Research diary: A tool for scaffolding. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 10(3), 296–306. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691101000308

Fetters

(2020). The mixed methods research workbook: Activities for designing, implementing, and publishing projects. Sage.

Fetters

Guetterman

(2021). The Routledge reviewer’s guide to mixed methods analysis. Routledge.

Guetterman

T. C.

Fetters

M. D.

Creswell

J. W.

(2015). Integrating quantitative and qualitative results in health science mixed methods research through joint displays. The Annals of Family Medicine, 13(6), 554–561. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.1865

Guetterman

T. C.

Molina-Arizon

Fetters

M. D.

(2020). Virtual special issue on “integration in mixed methods research”. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 14(4), 430–435. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689820956401

Haynes-Brown

(2022). Using theoretical models in mixed methods research: An example from a study of how beliefs shape teachers’ use of technology. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 17(3), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F15586898221094970

10.

Haynes-Brown

Fetters

M. D.

(2021). Using joint display as an analytic process: An illustration using bar graphs joint displays from a mixed methods study of how beliefs shape secondary school teachers’ use of technology. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20(1609–4069), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406921993286

11.

Haynes-Brown

Shannon-Baker

(2021). Integrating video evidence in mixed methods research: Innovations, benefits, and challenges for research exploring how beliefs shape actions. Methods in Psychology, 5, 2–9, 100068. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.metip.2021.100068

12.

Hou

S.-I.

Fetters

M. D.

(2019). Mixed methods in public health research in Taiwan – using visual diagrams to communicate complex design procedures. Health Care for Women International, 40(5), 515–526, https://doi.org/10.1080/07399332.2018.1516769

13.

Johnson

R. E.

Grove

A. L.

Clarke

(2017). Pillar integration process: A joint display technique to integrate data in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 13(3), 301–320. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689817743108

14.

Judson

(2006). How teachers integrate technology and their beliefs about learning: Is there a connection? Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(3), 581–597. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/6046/.

15.

Mercer

(1995). The guided construction of knowledge: Talk amongst teachers and learners. Multilingual Matters.

16.

Schoonenboom

Johnson

R. B.

(2017). How to construct a mixed methods research design. Kolner Zeitschrift fur Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 69(Suppl 2), 107–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11577-017-0454-1