Editor’s Introduction

How Mixed Methods Research Continues to Inform and Enhance Qualitative Research?

This second special issue reflects the great potential that we see for mixed methods research for contributing to innovations within qualitative research by bringing together cross-disciplinary work of authors from Canada, South Africa, Trinidad and Tobago, and the United States. Indeed, publications are increasingly focused on the innovative intersections of qualitative and mixed methods research; key among the nine such resources published in 2015 are Ethics in Ethnography: A Mixed Methods Approach (LeCompte & Schensul, 2015) and Qualitative Networks: Mixed Methods in Sociological Research (Bellotti, 2015).

At the heart of this second special issue is a focus on continuing the conversations began in the 2015 publication of Volume 14, Issue 2 in International Journal of Qualitative Methods (IJQM) illustrating the use of mixed methods for informing and enhancing qualitative research. The following six manuscripts began life as one of 70 submissions, representing 20 countries across six continents relating to diverse topics across disciplines/fields (e.g., education, health, communication, evaluation, and social services) in response to our call for abstracts for a special issue. Following a rigorous review process, we invited 20 authors to write manuscripts. The next step, the peer review process, warrants some explanation about the excellent work made possible by our remarkable reviewers. This essential role is further explored in our closing editorial focused on the feedback provided based on six criteria (i.e., relevance, quality of information, quality of writing, conforming to American Psychological Association guidelines, adherence to ethical standards, and suggestions for improvement). We are delighted to present the second group of six manuscripts embodying the superb efforts of all our authors in attending to the thoughtful feedback from our reviewers.

The opening article—“Qualitative and Mixed Methods Social Media Research: A Review of the Literature”—provides a meaningful perspective on which to launch this special issue about how qualitative and mixed methods research approaches have been used in social media research. Specifically, Snelson reports her findings of a content analysis of 55 articles published between 2007 and 2013. An overall increase in social media use in general and specifically the use of Facebook has resulted in greater interest in learning about how humans interact with social media and the content posted. Familiar methods have been used for data collection (e.g., interviews and surveys) for the majority of the studies, with few examples of innovative methods (e.g., network analysis). Approximately one half of the studies (n = 23) had procedures similar to what Creswell and Plano Clark (2011) refer to as the convergent parallel design, with the other studies involving the use of Creswell and Plano Clark’s either exploratory sequential or explanatory sequential designs. Yet, authors of these articles did not use those terms to describe the designs. Taken together, these findings describing the recent status of mixed methods research within social media research are important for informing the emerging field of research of the mixed methods research literature.

In the next article, Feltham-King and Macleod use an illustrative example to forward supplementing discourse analysis with the quantification allowed in content analysis. To that end, the example draws on the analysis of 300 newspaper articles, published in 25 national and regional South African newspapers between 1978 and 2005 using a combination of Foucauldian discourse analysis and directed content analysis based on social constructionist theory. The key findings described in their article, “How Content Analysis May Complement and Extend the Insights of Discourse Analysis: An Example of Research on Constructions of Abortion in South African Newspapers 1978-2005,” point to a deepened analysis of the material—specifically how a critical engagement highlighted variability and contingency over time in addition to discourses being deployed.

The next two empirical articles highlight novel approaches to mixed methods research. In the first empirical article, “Comprehending the Macro Through the Lens of The Micro: The Use of PIRLS 2006 Findings to Inform Comparative Case Studies Across the South African Achievement Scale,” Zimmerman and Smit describe a study exploring how teachers engaged with learning literacy instruction using a partially mixed equal status design (cf. Leech & Onwuegbuzie, 2009). An initial quantitative phase involved teacher and school survey data linked to a nationally representative learner sample (n = 14,299) for the PIRLS 2006 to generate a description of Grade 4 teachers’ instruction practices and schooling conditions. Then, seven case studies were purposively sampled to compare high PIRLS achievement classes against cases with poor achievement classes. Important understanding involved the limitations for interpretation of the data sources and methods.

Another empirical example of using mixed methods research approaches within existing qualitative strategies of inquiry into wicked problems is afforded by the article “Using Mixed Methods to Facilitate Complex, Multi-Phased Health Research.” Strudsholm, Meadows, Vollman, Thurston, and Henderson describe the benefits of using mixed methods approaches in research designed to address issues in complex research projects. In their methodological reflection, they outline the challenges that they had in working across seven disciplines in a national project.

The penultimate article, focused on the use of social networks in teaching and learning, is offered by authors Kamalodeen and Jameson-Charles. Their article, “A Mixed Methods Research Approach to Exploring Teacher Participation in an Online Social Networking Website,” reports an exploration of how 35 secondary school teachers in Trinidad and Tobago participated in an educational online social networking site. The inferences generated from the integration of online data with questionnaires and interviews have implications for resource allocation. An important direction for future research was the challenge they encountered that teachers were more likely to read than to create postings.

The final manuscript, “Using the Cognitive Pre-Testing Method to Gain Insight into Participants’ Experiences: An Illustration and Methodological Reflection,” provides the reader with a new way of thinking about cognitive pretesting methods. Specifically, Koskey reports a study capturing the think alouds of middle and high school student participants while completing a survey and advances it as providing an additional technique to gain insight into their experiences with the science content that they were learning in school.

We are pleased to share these articles because of the usefulness for advancing innovative examples from global perspectives to societal questions. As guest coeditors, we are indebted to the authors and peer reviewers of manuscripts for their willingness to participate in this important endeavor.