scholarly journals The state of mixed methods research in nursing: A focused mapping review and synthesis

2020 ◽  
Vol 76 (11) ◽  
pp. 2798-2809
Author(s):  
Fiona E. Irvine ◽  
Maria T. Clark ◽  
Nikolaos Efstathiou ◽  
Oliver R. Herber ◽  
Fiona Howroyd ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 78 (6) ◽  
pp. 904-916 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn Hendren ◽  
Qian Eric Luo ◽  
Sanjay K. Pandey

2020 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
pp. 194-206
Author(s):  
Matthias Basedau

This article takes stock of the state of African Studies and argues that (1) research on Africa is strongly dominated by outside, non-African, mostly Western views; (2) there is a tendency towards undifferentiated views on “Africa,” which usually concentrate on negative aspects, overlooking progress in many areas; (3) methodologies that focus on causal identification are rarely used; and (4) the field focuses on micro-perspectives while few works examine the big picture and the longue durée. The article then argues that Comparative African Studies, which builds upon the concept of Comparative Area Studies, can address some of these challenges. A pronouncedly comparative perspective would help to systematically combine and contrast “outside” and “inside” perspectives in order to better identify causal relationships and general trends both within Africa and between Africa and other regions. Consequently, African Studies requires more resources and should more effectively engage in multi-disciplinary and mixed-methods research.


2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 255-276 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carla Ginn ◽  
◽  
Karen Benzies ◽  
Leslie-Anne Keown ◽  
Shelley Raffin Bouchal ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 283-295
Author(s):  
Katrin Niglas ◽  
◽  
Meril Ümarik ◽  
Maarja Tinn ◽  
Ivor Goodson ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tarun Khanna ◽  
Karim R. Lakhani ◽  
Shubhangi Bhadada ◽  
Nabil Khan ◽  
Saba Kohli Davé ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Jeasik Cho

This chapter discusses three ongoing issues related to the evaluation of qualitative research. First, the chapter considers whether a set of evaluation criteria is either determinative or changeable. Due to the evolving nature of qualitative research, it is likely that the way in which qualitative research is evaluated can change—not all at once, but gradually. Second, qualitative research has been criticized by newly resurrected positivists whose definitions of scientific research and evaluation criteria are narrow. “Politics of evidence” and a recent big-tent evaluation strategy are examined. Last, this chapter analyzes how validity criteria of qualitative research are incorporated into the evaluation of mixed methods research. The elements of qualitative research seem to be fairly represented but are largely treated as trivial. A criterion, the fit of research questions to design, is identified as distinctive in the review guide of the Journal of Mixed Methods Research.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document