Chapter 7: Summary, conclusion, and recommendations
4.4 Research approach
4.4.3 Mixed-methods approach
The mixed methods research approach originated from the multi-trait, multi-method approach of Campbell and Fiske’s work in 1959 (Teddlie and Tashakkori, 2009:31). Mixed methods research approach has gained acceptability and popularity with a “significant number of studies arguing its virtues in terms of greater understanding and/or validation of results” (Bazeley, 2004:1410).
Harwell (2011:151) argued that the qualitative and quantitative debate has coincided with the rapid development of mixed methods, which combine qualitative and quantitative research approaches
“in ways that ostensibly bridge their differences in the service of addressing a research question”.
Caruth (2013:112) agrees to this and further asserted that “mixed-methods research evolved in response to the observed limitations of both quantitative and qualitative designs”. The current study was mindful of the fact that, the growth of mixed methods research approach has been
133
accompanied by a “debate over the rationale for combining what has previously been regarded as incompatible methodologies” (Hall, 2013:71).
Mixed methods research can be defined as “the combination of qualitative and quantitative approaches to research” (Bazeley, 2004:14). Mixed methods research approach therefore
“combines quantitative and qualitative research techniques, methods, approaches, concepts, or language into a single study” (Johnson and Onwuegbuzie, 2004:17). Hall (2013:71) maintained that the term ‘mixed methods’ is used to “refer to the use of two or more methods in a research project yielding both qualitative and quantitative data”. These definitions imply that it is a “method of both quantitative and qualitative designs in the same research study” (Caruth, 2013:113).
This approach has been recognised as the number three methodological movement over the last twenty years (Hall, 2013:71). Venkatesh, Brown, and Bala (2013:22) therefore refer to it as the
"third methodological movement". Although, mixed methods approach is a more complex research approach, “it has the potential to offer more robust research” (Caruth, 2013:112). According to Harwell (2011:151), mixed methods research approach, “combines qualitative and quantitative methods in ways that draw on the strengths of both traditions of inquiry”. Creswell (2006:5) also maintained that mixed methods approach is a research design that has philosophical assumptions and method of inquiry, with the philosophical assumptions guiding the direction of the collection and analysis of data.
Although “both qualitative and quantitative methods are useful and legitimate in social research”
(Babbie, 2011:25), Greene (2007:xiii) maintained that combining both approaches provides the
“opportunity to compensate for inherent method weaknesses, capitalise on inherent method strengths, and offset inevitable method biases”. The rational for combining qualitative and quantitative research approaches “is to maintain the strengths and ameliorate the weaknesses in both designs” (Caruth, 2013:113).Mixed methods approach is therefore a clear step away from the boundaries and practices of qualitative and quantitative traditions and it seems firmly rooted in research (Harwell, 2011:152).
134
Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches is gaining acceptance among the research community and it is thought that mixed methods approach “presents a more enhanced insight into the research problem(s) and question(s) than using one of the methods independently” (Caruth, 2013:113). Creswell (2006:5) noted that mixed methods approach “focuses on collecting, analysing, and mixing both quantitative and qualitative data in a single study”. The current study adopted mixed methods approach since it provides “flexibility, creativity, and resourcefulness”
(Greene, Kreider, and Mayer, 2004:277) for a study. The mixed methods approach, through triangulation also helped the study to examine “the consistency of findings, such as those obtained through different instruments, and which might include interviews and surveys” (Harwell, 2011:152).
The central premise of the combination of quantitative and qualitative approaches is that it provides a better understanding of the research problems (Creswell, 2006:5). Caruth (2013:114-115) argued that mixed methods approach can be characterised from other designs according to the following:
• they offer a rationale for using both qualitative and quantitative approaches;
• they include gathering quantitative and qualitative data;
• they consider priority by indicating which method design data carries more emphasis;
• they consider sequence of data gathering;
• they match the data analysis to a specific design type; and
• they diagram the procedures used in the study.
In the current study, the quantitative approach was dominant and the qualitative was complementary. Combining both qualitative and quantitative data yielded a more complete data analysis for the current study (Nieuwenhuis, 2010:66). As opined by Caruth (2013:113), combining the methods “can complement each other, offer richer insights, and result in more questions of interest for future studies”. The use of the mixed method approach triangulated both qualitative and quantitative approaches for the current study and this helped in verifying the reliability of the research tools as well as the validity of the data collected (McNeill and Chapman, 2005:23).
135 4.5 Research design
Identifying a study’s research design is important since “it communicates information about key features of the study” (Harwell, 2011:148). Parahoo (1997:142) defines a research design as “a plan that describes how, when and where data are to be collected and analysed”. Mouton (2001:55) opined that a research design is a plan or blueprint of how one intends to conduct a research. To corroborate, Burns and Grove (2003:195) asserted that a research design is “a blueprint for conducting a study with maximum control over factors that may interfere with the validity of the findings”. This implies that a research design consists of the structure of a study (De Vaus, 2002:16).
Polit, Beck and Hungler (2001:167) are of the view that, a research design is the researcher’s overall plan “for answering the research question or testing the research hypothesis”. Research design helps a researcher to answer the research questions identified for a study objectively.
Selecting a research design of a multiple methods research depends on the “objectives of the study and the questions of the research” (Salehi and Golafshani, 2010:188). The two most commonly used designs are case study and survey. The current study applied the survey design which was suitable for this study. Both research designs are however, explained below.