Revisiting the Quantitative-Qualitative Debate: Implications for Mixed-Methods Research |
| |
Authors: | Sale Joanna E. M. Lohfeld Lynne H. Brazil Kevin |
| |
Affiliation: | (1) Institute for Work & Health; Health Research Methodology Program, Department of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, McMaster University, Canada;(2) Institute for Work & Health, 481 University Ave., Toronto, ON, Canada, M5G 2E9;(3) Department of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, McMaster University, St. Joseph's Hospital and Home, Canada;(4) Department of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, McMaster University, Canada |
| |
Abstract: | Health care research includes many studies that combine quantitative and qualitative methods. In this paper, we revisit the quantitative-qualitative debate and review the arguments for and against using mixed-methods. In addition, we discuss the implications stemming from our view, that the paradigms upon which the methods are based have a different view of reality and therefore a different view of the phenomenon under study. Because the two paradigms do not study the same phenomena, quantitative and qualitative methods cannot be combined for cross-validation or triangulation purposes. However, they can be combined for complementary purposes. Future standards for mixed-methods research should clearly reflect this recommendation. |
| |
Keywords: | mixed-methodology quantitative-qualitative debate qualitative methods quantitative methods scientific paradigms |
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录! |
|