The diverse culture, identities, and practices across the Caribbean provide rich insight into the contextual nature of “knowing” and “being” within the region. While this diversity is rooted in the shared colonial history, it transcends to embrace Indigenous strengths and ways from the region. These qualities are essential in defining how research should be conducted with Caribbean people and communities. Traditional mixed methods approaches have evolved to include Indigenous methodologies but remain inadequately adapted for Caribbean-specific research contexts. This paper advocates for a qualitatively driven mixed methods approach that is culturally responsive to the Caribbean context and accounts for the region’s colonial legacy, decolonization efforts, and defining qualities, such as spirituality. Key methodological tenets include researcher positionality and cultural responsiveness.
AlexanderE.PasqueP. A. (2022). The future: Advancing innovations of culturally sustaining research and researchers. In Advancing culturally responsive research and researchers (pp. 239–253). Routledge.
2.
BeckfordG. L. (1999). Persistent poverty: Underdevelopment in plantation economies of the third world. University of the West Indies Press.
3.
BockingS. (2023). Indigenous knowledge and perspectives. In Handbook of the historiography of the Earth and environmental sciences (pp. 1–24). Springer International Publishing.
4.
BothaL. (2012). Mixing methods as a process towards Indigenous methodologies. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 14(4), 313–325. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2010.516644
5.
BremnerL.BowmanN. (2021). Roots and relations: Celebrating good medicine in Indigenous evaluation. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation / La Revue canadienne d’évaluation de programme, 36(2), 109–112. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.72865.en
6.
BrissettN. O. (2025). Delinking development: Material and epistemic justice and Caribbean reparations. In Transforming development in education (pp. 113–137). Edward Elgar Publishing.
7.
BrissettN. O. M.JulesT. D. (2023). (Re)thinking material and epistemic futures: Caribbean reparations, development, and education. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 28(3), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2023.2217088
8.
CajeteG. (2015). Indigenous community: Rekindling the teachings of the seventh fire. Living Justice Press.
9.
CamfieldL. (2024). What challenges for global development research are posed by a more decolonial approach? Colonial genealogies and responses. The European Journal of Development Research, 37(2), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41287-024-00676-3
10.
CasimirJ. (1992). The Caribbean: One and divisible. United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean.
11.
ChilisaB. (2020). Indigenous research methodologies (2nd ed.). Sage.
12.
ChilisaB.BowmanN. (2023). The why and how of the decolonization discourse. Journal of Multidisciplinary Evaluation, 19(44), 2–10. https://doi.org/10.56645/jmde.v19i44.919
13.
ChilisaB.MertensD. M. (2021). Indigenous made in Africa evaluation frameworks: Addressing epistemic violence and contributing to social transformation. American Journal of Evaluation, 42(2), 241–253. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214020948601
14.
ChilisaB.TshekoG. N. (2014). Mixed methods in Indigenous research: Building relationships for sustainable intervention outcomes. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 8(3), 222–233. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689814527878
15.
CramF.TibbittsK. A.LaFranceJ. (Eds.), (2018). Indigenous evaluation [special issue] (159). New Directions in Evaluation.
16.
DarkwaE. (2024). Beyond binary boundaries: Exploring the complexities of insider versus outsider paradox in Indigenous research. International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, 5(11), 908–918. www.ijrpr.com.ISSN2582-7421
17.
David-ChavezD.GavinM. (2018). A global assessment of Indigenous community engagement in climate research. Environmental Research Letters, 13(12), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aaf300.
18.
David-ChavezD. M.ValdezS.EstevezJ. B.Meléndez MartínezC.Garcia JrA. A.JosephsK.TroncosoA. (2020). Community-based (rooted) research for regeneration: Understanding benefits, barriers, and resources for Indigenous education and research. AlterNative: An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples, 16(3), 220–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/1177180120952896
19.
De LisleJ. (2011). The benefits and challenges of mixing methods and methodologies: Lessons learnt from implementing qualitatively led mixed methods research designs in Trinidad and Tobago. Caribbean Curriculum, 18, 87–120. https://journals.sta.uwi.edu/ojs/index.php/cc/article/view/580
20.
De LisleJ. (2020). Valuing multiple and mixed methods for educational policy research in the Caribbean: Illustrative cases privileging epistemological diversity. Caribbean Curriculum, 26(1), 26–64. https://journals.sta.uwi.edu/ojs/index.php/cc/article/view/5289
21.
DillardC. B. (2000). The substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen: Examining an endarkened feminist epistemology in educational research and leadership. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 13(6), 661–681. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518390050211565
22.
EsnardT. (2023). Deepened coloniality, heightened structuralism: Implications for intellectual thought and praxis in the Caribbean. In NehringD.BrunilaK. (Eds.), Affective capitalism in academia: Revealing public secrets (pp. 47–63). Policy Press. https://doi.org/10.51952/9781447357865.ch003
23.
FergusonS.StewartS.Cohen MillerA. (Eds.). (2024). How to Use Caribbean Decolonizing Methods: Lessons for Liming [How-to Guide]. Sage Research Methods: Diversifying and Decolonizing Research. SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529692389
24.
Fernández SantanaA. (2023). Liming methodology as a culturally affirming approach to research in Caribbean contexts. In NakhidC.Nakhid-ChatoorM.Fernández SantanaA.Wilson-ScottS. (Eds.), Affirming methodologies: Research and education in the Caribbean (pp. 33–57). Routledge.
25.
GhoshW. (2023). Decolonizing English literary study in the anglophone Caribbean. In QuaysonA.MukherjeeA. (Eds.), Decolonizing the English literary curriculum (pp. 457–473). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009299985.026
HallS. (2001). Negotiating Caribbean identities. In MeeksB.LindahlF. (Eds.), New Caribbean thought: A reader (pp. 24–39): University of West Indies Press.
28.
HarrisJ. (2022). Mixed methods research in developing country contexts: Lessons from field research in six countries across Africa and the Caribbean. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 16(2), 165–182. https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898211032825
29.
HeldM. B. (2019). Decolonizing research paradigms in the context of settler colonialism: An unsettling, mutual, and collaborative effort. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 18, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406918821574
30.
KwameA. (2017). Reflexivity and the insider/outsider discourse in Indigenous research: My personal experiences. AlterNative: An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples, 13(4), 218–225. https://doi.org/10.1177/1177180117729851
31.
LallaB.RobertsN.Walcott-HackshawE.YoussefV. (Eds.), (2013). Methods in Caribbean research: Literature, discourse, culture. University of the West Indies Press.
Longman-MillsS.MitchellC.AbelW. (2019). The psychological trauma of slavery: The Jamaican case study. Social and Economic Studies, 68(3–4), 264–279. https://www.jstor.org/stable/45299241
34.
Maragh-LloydR.Corsbie-MassayC. L. (2021). Embodying resistance: Understanding identity in a globalized digital future through the lens of mixed and multiracial Caribbeans. Journal of International and Intercultural Communication, 15(3), 235–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/17513057.2021.1940243
35.
MertensD. M. (2023). Mixed methods research. Bloomsbury Press.
36.
MertensD. M.HallJ.WilsonA. T. (2025). Program evaluation theory and practice. Guilford.
37.
MillerD.SlaterD. (2020). The internet: An ethnographic approach. Routledge.
38.
NakhidC. (2021). A culturally affirming approach to research methodology through the Caribbean practice of liming and ole talk. In Groves PriceP. (Ed.), Oxford research encyclopedias. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.1630
39.
NakhidC.MoscaJ.Nakhid-SchusterS. (2019). Liming as research methodology, Ole Talk as research method-A Caribbean methodology. Journal of Education & Development in the Caribbean, 18(2), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.46425/j118024995
40.
Nakhid-ChatoorM. (2023). Cultural affirmation through meaning construction of rituals and practices within the Caribbean. In NakhidC.Nakhid-ChatoorM.Fernández SantanaA.Wilson-ScottS. (Eds.), Affirming methodologies: Research and education in the Caribbean (1st ed., pp. 187–202). Routledge.
41.
NdimandeB. S. (2018). Unravelling the neocolonial epistemologies: Decolonizing research toward transformative literacy. Journal of Literacy Research, 50(3), 383–390. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X18784699
42.
ParasharS. (2019). Research brokers, researcher identities and affective performances: The insider/outsider conundrum. Civil Wars, 21(2), 249–270. https://doi.org/10.1080/13698249.2019.1634304
43.
PasqueP. A.AlexanderE. (2022). Introduction: The importance of culturally responsive research and culturally responsive researchers. In Advancing culturally responsive research and researchers (pp. 1–12). Routledge.
44.
PerryK. K. (2024). Epistemic silences, subversive politics: Post-disaster economic assessments as technologies of persistent coloniality and route to an emancipatory climate justice agenda in the Caribbean. Climate and Development, 16(9), 798–810. https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2024.2370926
45.
ReynoldsT. (2006). Caribbean families, social capital and young people’s diasporic identities. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 29(6), 1087–1103. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870600960362
46.
SmithS. J.PenadosF.GahmanL. (2022). Desire over damage: Epistemological shifts and anticolonial praxis from an indigenous‐led community health project. Sociology of Health & Illness, 44(S1), 124–141. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.13410
47.
Stephens-PeaceK. (2024). Liming as Black methodology: Black early career scholars engage Black humanity in research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 23, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069241282848
WilsonS.NakhidC.Fernandez-SantanaA.Nakhid-ChatoorM. (2019). An interrogation of research on Caribbean social issues: Establishing the need for an Indigenous Caribbean research approach. AlterNative: An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples, 15(1), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/1177180118803692
51.
Wilson-ScottS. (2023). Conclusion. In NakhidC.Nakhid-ChatoorM.Fernández SantanaA.Wilson-ScottS. (Eds.), Affirming methodologies: Research and education in the Caribbean (1st ed., pp. 203–211). Routledge.
