Quality & Quantity

, Volume 45, Issue 6, pp 1253–1271

Assessing legitimation in mixed research: a new framework

  • Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie
  • R. Burke Johnson
  • Kathleen M. T. Collins

DOI: 10.1007/s11135-009-9289-9

Cite this article as:
Onwuegbuzie, A.J., Johnson, R.B. & Collins, K.M.T. Qual Quant (2011) 45: 1253. doi:10.1007/s11135-009-9289-9


In this article, we have merged or intersected two typologies: Greene’s (Res Sch 13(1):93–98, 2006) four-domain typology for developing a methodological or research paradigm in the social and behavioral sciences and Onwuegbuzie and Johnson’s (Res Sch 13(1):48–63, 2006) nine-component typology for assessing mixed research legitimation. We argue that merging or interconnecting these typologies present a framework for assessing legitimation in mixed research. Specifically, we demonstrate how the nine types of legitimation map onto Greene’s (Res Sch 13(1):93–98, 2006) four methodological domains and illustrate how legitimation in mixed research, rather than being viewed as a procedure that occurs at a specific step of the mixed research process, is better conceptualized as a continuous iterative, interactive, and dynamic process. Additionally, in presenting this framework, we hope to reduce misperceptions that some researchers have voiced about mixed research.


Research paradigmAssessing legitimationMixed researchDynamic process

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie
    • 1
  • R. Burke Johnson
    • 2
  • Kathleen M. T. Collins
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Educational Leadership and CounselingSam Houston State UniversityHuntsvilleUSA
  2. 2.College of EducationUniversity of South AlabamaMobileUSA
  3. 3.Department of Curriculum and InstructionUniversity of Arkansas at FayettevilleFayettevilleUSA