Integrating QCA and HLM for Multilevel Research on Organizational Configurations

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 324-342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johannes Meuer ◽  
Christian Rupietta
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Hierarchical Linear Modeling ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Qualitative Comparative Analysis ◽  
Linear Modeling ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative Methods ◽  
Organizational Configurations ◽  
Mixed Designs ◽  
Generic Strategies

Mixed methods systematically combine multiple research approaches—either in basic parallel, sequential, or conversion designs or in more complex multilevel or integrated designs. Multilevel mixed designs are among the most valuable and dynamic. Yet current multilevel designs, which are rare in the mixed methods literature, do not strongly integrate qualitative and quantitative approaches for use in one study. This lack of integration is particularly problematic for research in the organization sciences because of the variety of multilevel concepts that researchers study. In this article, we develop a multilevel mixed methods technique that integrates qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) with hierarchical linear modeling (HLM). This technique is among the first of the multilevel ones to integrate qualitative and quantitative methods in a single research design. Using Miles and Snow’s typology of generic strategies as an example of organizational configurations, we both illustrate how researchers may apply this technique and provide recommendations for its application and potential extensions. Our technique offers new opportunities for bridging macro and micro inquiries by developing strong inferences for testing, refining, and extending multilevel theories of organizational configurations.

A Systematic Methodological Review of Hierarchical Linear Modeling in Mixed Methods Research

2020 ◽  
pp. 155868982093788
Author(s):  
Kirstie L. Bash ◽  
Michelle C. Howell Smith ◽  
Pam S. Trantham
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Hierarchical Linear Modeling ◽  
Mixed Methods Research ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Linear Models ◽  
Mixed Methods Study ◽  
Linear Modeling ◽  
Methodological Review ◽  
Design Choice

The use of advanced quantitative methods within mixed methods research has been investigated in a limited capacity. In particular, hierarchical linear models are a popular approach to account for multilevel data, such as students within schools, but its use and value as the quantitative strand in a mixed methods study remains unknown. This article examines the role of hierarchical linear modeling in mixed methods research with emphasis on design choice, priority, and rationales. The results from this systematic methodological review suggest that hierarchical linear modeling does not overshadow the contributions of the qualitative strand. Our study contributes to the field of mixed methods research by offering recommendations for the use of hierarchical linear modeling as the quantitative strand in mixed methods studies.

Mixed Methods Research

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daphne C. Watkins
Keyword(s):  
Social Work ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Data Integration ◽  
Social Workers ◽  
Mixed Methods Research ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Social Work Research ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative Methods ◽  
Single Study

Mixed methods research integrates both qualitative and quantitative methods into a single study to produce a more inclusive and expansive understanding of a topic. This article defines mixed methods in social work research, and discusses design notation, language, popular mixed methods designs, and data integration. Using mixed methods provides an opportunity for social workers to take advantage of the strengths of both qualitative and quantitative approaches and to offset their weaknesses. It is important that social workers engaged in mixed methods research maximize the interpretation of their findings and articulate the advantages of using mixed methods over qualitative or quantitative methods alone. Given the unique features of the profession, it is imperative that social workers carve out a distinctive mixed methods niche for social work researchers and practitioners.

scholarly journals Practical mixed methods strategies used to integrate qualitative and quantitative methods in community-based primary health care research

2019 ◽  
Vol 36 (5) ◽  
pp. 666-671 ◽  
Author(s):  
Navdeep Kaur ◽  
Isabelle Vedel ◽  
Reem El Sherif ◽  
Pierre Pluye
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Primary Health Care ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Qualitative Synthesis ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative Methods ◽  
Primary Health

Abstract Background Mixed methods (MM) are common in community-based primary health care (CBPHC) research studies. Several strategies have been proposed to integrate qualitative and quantitative components in MM, but they are seldom well conceptualized and described. The purpose of the present review was to identify and describe practical MM strategies and combinations of strategies used to integrate qualitative and quantitative methods in CBPHC research. Methods A methodological review with qualitative synthesis (grouping) was performed. Records published in English in 2015 were retrieved from the Scopus bibliographic database. Eligibility criteria were: CBPHC empirical study, MM research with detailed description of qualitative and quantitative methods and their integration. Data were extracted from included studies and grouped using a conceptual framework comprised of three theoretical types of MM integration, the seven combinations of these types and nine practical strategies (three per type of integration) and multiple combinations of strategies. Results Among the 151 articles reporting CBPHC and MM studies retrieved, 54 (35.7%) met the inclusion criteria for this review. The included studies provided examples of the three theoretical types of MM integration, the seven combinations of these types as well as the nine practical strategies. Overall, 15 combinations of these strategies were observed. No emerging strategy was observed that was not predicted by the conceptual framework. Conclusions This review can provide guidance to CBPHC researchers for planning, conducting and reporting practical strategies and combinations of strategies used for integrating qualitative and quantitative methods in MM research.

Article Commentary: Mixed Methods in Visitor Studies Research

2000 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven S. Yalowitz ◽  
Marcella D. Wells
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Quantitative Research ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Visitor Studies ◽  
Quantitative Research Methods ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative Methods ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Research Studies

In visitor studies, there has been some debate about the use of qualitative versus quantitative research methods. Many evaluators understand the advantages and disadvantages of both methods, but deciding on the most appropriate method can still be problematic. This article summarizes the tenets of both qualitative and quantitative methods and provides examples of visitor studies for each. It also reviews several research studies that have successfully used mixed methods to evaluate visitors.

scholarly journals Mixed-methods approaches in health research in Nepal

2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 415-416
Author(s):  
Padam Simkhada ◽  
E Van Teijlingen ◽  
SP Wasti ◽  
Brijesh Sathian
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Social Care ◽  
High Income ◽  
Care Research ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative Methods ◽  
Single Study ◽  
Health And Social Care

Combining and integrating a mixture of qualitative and quantitative methods in one single study is widely used in health and social care research in high-income countries. This editorial adds a few words of advice to the novice mixed-methods researcher in Nepal.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/nje.v4i5.11993 Nepal Journal of Epidemiology 2014; 4(5):415-16  

scholarly journals Bricolage research in history education as a scholarly mixed-methods design

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Heather Sharp
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Quantitative Research ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
History Education ◽  
Data Gathering ◽  
Mixed Methods Design ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative Methods ◽  
Discipline Area

Research using a mixed-methods design is increasingly becoming the norm, crossing the myriad of educational fields of research, including history education. While commonly interpreted as a combining of qualitative and quantitative methods, mixed methods in history education can also extend to a bricolage approach, whereby the epistemological aspect of research is explicitly used to frame a study incorporating a combination of interdisciplinary methodologies and theoretical underpinnings. It extends beyond the often asserted binary of qualitative and quantitative research. In considering directions of qualitative research in the broad discipline area of education, the work of researchers such as Kincheloe (2005) and Denzin and Lincoln (2005) is used throughout this paper within a qualitative research context based on the work of Kincheloe and Tobin (2006). Adopting their approach of investigating the complexity of the lived world means placing research within a number of contexts. Research can be framed – from conceptualization to data gathering to analysis – in a range of contexts, appropriately matched between stage of research and underpinning theories. This paper reports on how bricolage can be used to frame research in history education.

Retroductive Theorizing: A Contribution of Critical Realism to Mixed Methods Research

2021 ◽  
pp. 155868982110498
Author(s):  
Ferdinand C. Mukumbang
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Mixed Methods Research ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Critical Realism ◽  
Pragmatic Approach ◽  
Hypothesis Formation ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative Methods ◽  
Broad Complex

Mixed methods studies in social sciences are predominantly employed to explore broad, complex, and multifaceted issues and to evaluate policies and interventions. The integration of qualitative and quantitative methods in social sciences most often follows the Peircean pragmatic approach—abductive hypothesis formation followed by deductive and inductive testing/confirmation—with limited theorizing properties. This paper contributes to the field of mixed methods research in social sciences by explicating a two-way interaction process between mixed methods data and [social] theory in a pluralistic inferencing approach espoused by critical realism—retroductive theorizing. The paper further illustrates how through retroductive theorizing, critical realism offers a more epistemologically and ontologically grounded alternative for integrating qualitative and quantitative methods compared to pragmatism.

scholarly journals Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Sports Fan Research

1997 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Jones
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Mixed Methods Approach ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative Methods ◽  
Sports Fandom ◽  
Sports Fan

Sports fandom consists of cognitive and affective, as well as behavioural components. Existing sports fan research utilises either strong qualitative, or more often, strong quantitative methodologies. The strengths and weaknesses of each approach are outlined, developing the argument that the use of a single methodology often fails to explore all of these components. The use of a mixed methods approach is suggested to counteract this weakness and to enhance research into the sports fan.

Mixed Methods Program Evaluation

2019 ◽  
pp. 304-320
Author(s):  
Deepthiman Gowda ◽  
Tayla Curran ◽  
Dorene F. Balmer
Keyword(s):  
Program Evaluation ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Evaluation Method ◽  
Narrative Medicine ◽  
Health Humanities ◽  
Mixed Methods Approach ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative Methods ◽  
Mixed Methods Evaluation

Program evaluations explore the effectiveness and feasibility of new programs. An evaluation method using a mixed methods approach combines qualitative and quantitative data; this approach enables triangulation of data to provide more comprehensive understanding of a program and increase the trustworthiness of evaluation findings. Mixed methods evaluation can be resource intensive and requires expertise in both qualitative and quantitative methods. Program evaluation questions should be informed by program stakeholders and by the concerns of the field. In this chapter, the authors describe how to conduct a mixed methods program evaluation and explore its benefits and limitations. The authors draw on their experience of using a mixed methods approach to evaluate a year-long narrative medicine program in primary care clinics. Though not appropriate for all health humanities program evaluation, a mixed methods evaluation offers rich, multidimensional understandings of programs.

scholarly journals Innovations in Mixed Methods Evaluations

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 423-442 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence A. Palinkas ◽  
Sapna J. Mendon ◽  
Alison B. Hamilton
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Mixed Methods Research ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Intervention Program ◽  
Rapid Assessment ◽  
Evaluation Research ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative Methods ◽  
Implementation Studies ◽  
Effectiveness Studies

Mixed methods research—i.e., research that draws on both qualitative and quantitative methods in varying configurations—is well suited to address the increasing complexity of public health problems and their solutions. This review focuses specifically on innovations in mixed methods evaluations of intervention, program or policy (i.e., practice) effectiveness, and implementation. The article begins with an overview of the structure, function, and process of different mixed methods designs and then provides illustrations of their use in effectiveness studies, implementation studies, and combined effectiveness–implementation hybrid studies. The article then examines four specific innovations: procedures for transforming (or “quantitizing”) qualitative data, application of rapid assessment and analysis procedures in the context of mixed methods studies, development of measures to assess implementation outcomes, and strategies for conducting both random and purposive sampling, particularly in implementation-focused evaluation research. The article concludes with an assessment of challenges to integrating qualitative and quantitative data in evaluation research.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document