Assessing legitimation in mixed research: a new framework
- First Online:
- 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.
KeywordsResearch paradigm Assessing legitimation Mixed research Dynamic process
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.