Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

From Mixed-Methods Research to a Journal Article

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Writing for Publication

Part of the book series: Springer Texts in Education ((SPTE))

Abstract

Mixed methods research has been referred to as the “third paradigm” because, at its best, it is a skillful blend of the first two research paradigms: quantitative and qualitative. This chapter begins with the validity issues that need to be addressed when seamlessly merging research methods with distinctively different philosophies and methods. It then supports the reader in writing each component of a mixed methods research article. The chapter includes: activities that build insight into the third paradigm, specific examples drawn from the published literature, and guidelines for composing each component of the written report. The chapter concludes with identifying suitable outlets for mixed methods research and supplying criteria for evaluation of the mixed methods journal article.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • American Educational Research Association. (2006). Standards for reporting on empirical social science research in AERA publications. Educational Researcher, 35(6), 33–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Psychological Association Publications and Communications Board Working Group on Journal Article Reporting Standards. (2008). Reporting standards for research in psychology: Why do we need them? What do they need to be? American Psychologist, 63(9), 839–851.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Educational Research Association. (2009). Standards for reporting on humanities- oriented research in AERA publications. Educational Researcher, 38(6), 481–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Annesley, T. M. (2010a). Bars and pies make better desserts than figures. Clinical Chemistry, 56(9), 1394–1400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Annesley, T. M. (2010b). Bring your best to the table. Clinical Chemistry, 56(10), 1528–1534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Annesley, T. M. (2010c). If an IRDAM journal is what you choose, then sequential results are what you use. Clinical Chemistry, 56(8), 1226–1228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Annesley, T. M. (2010d). “It was a cold and rainy night”: Set the scene with a good introduction. Clinical Chemistry, 56(5), 708–713.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Annesley, T. M. (2010e). Put your best figure forward: Line graphs and scattergrams. Clinical Chemistry, 56(8), 1229–1233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Annesley, T. M. (2010f). Show your cards: The results section and the poker game. Clinical Chemistry, 56(7), 1066–1070.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Annesley, T. M. (2010g). The abstract and the elevator talk: A tale of two summaries. Clinical Chemistry, 56(4), 521–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Annesley, T. M. (2010h). The discussion section: Your closing argument. Clinical Chemistry, 56(11), 1671–1674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Annesley, T. M. (2010i). The title says it all. Clinical Chemistry, 56(3), 357–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Annesley, T. M. (2010j). Who, what, when, where, how, and why: The ingredients in the recipe for a successful methods section. Clinical Chemistry, 56(6), 897–901.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arnon, S., & Reichel, N. (2007). Who is the ideal teacher? Am I?—Similarity and difference in perception of students of education regarding the qualities of a good teacher and of their own qualities as teachers. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 13(5), 441–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arnon, S., & Reichel, N. (2009). Closed and open-ended question tools in a telephone survey about “The Good Teacher”: An example of a mixed method study. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 3(2), 172–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bannink, A., & Van Dam, J. (2007). Bootstrapping reflection on classroom interactions: Discourse contexts of novice teachers’ thinking. Evaluation and Research in Education, 20(2), 81–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benge, C., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Mallette, M. H., & Burgess, M. L. (2010). Doctoral students’ perceptions of barriers to reading empirical literature: A mixed analysis. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 5, 55–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernardi, L., Keim, S., & von der Lippe, H. (2007). Social influences on fertility: A comparative mixed-methods study in Eastern and Western Germany. Journal of Mixed-Methods Research, 1(1), 23–47. doi:10.1177/23456789062922381-27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bondi, M., & Sanz, R. L. (Eds.). (2014). Abstracts in academic discourse: Variation and change. New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boote, D. N., & Beile, P. (2005). Scholars before researchers: On the centrality of the dissertation literature review in research preparation. Educational Researcher, 34(6), 3–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. I., Fishco, V. V., & Hanna, G. (1993). Nelson-Denny reading test: Manual for scoring and interpretation, forms G and H. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, L., Benge, C., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Mallette, M. H. (2012). Doctoral students’ reasons for reading empirical research articles: A mixed analysis. The Journal of Effective Teaching, 12(3), 5–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. T. (1957). Factors relevant to the validity of experiments in social settings. Psychological Bulletin, 54(4), 297–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D., & Stanley, J. (1963, 1966). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago, IL: Rand-McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, K. M. T., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Sutton, I. L. (2006). A model incorporating the rational and purpose for conducting mixed methods research in special education and beyond. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 4(1), 67–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W., Fetters, M. D., & Ivankova, N. V. (2004). Designing a mixed methods study in primary care. Annals of Family Medicine, 2(1), 7–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2013a). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2013b). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W., & Tashakkori, A. (2007). Developing publishable mixed methods manuscripts. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 107–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dellinger, A. B., & Leech, N. L. (2007). Toward a unified validation framework in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(4), 309–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ely, M., Vinz, R., Downing, M., & Anzul, M. (1997). On writing qualitative research: Living by words. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flecha, R. (2014). Using mixed methods from a communicative orientation: Researching with grassroots Roma. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 8(3), 245–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gliner, J. A., Morgan, G. A., & Leech, N. L. (2009). Research methods in applied settings: An integrated approach to design and analysis (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene, J. C. (2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry (Vol. 9). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11, 255–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action: Reason and the rationalization of society (Vol. 1). Boston: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayden, H. E., & Chiu, M. M. (2015). Reflective teaching via a problem exploration–teaching adaptations–resolution cycle: A mixed methods study of preservice teachers’ reflective notes. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 9(2), 133–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, E. (2003). Mixed methods and moving to opportunity. The Educational Exchange, IX(3), 14–15. Retrieved December 12, 2015, from http://www.hfrp.org/evaluation/the-evaluation-exchange/issue-archive/

  • Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2004). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 112–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kallemeyn, L., Schiazza, D., Ryan, A. M., Peters, J., & Johnson, C. (2013). Ambitious U.S. history teachers bringing professional development into the classroom: A mixed methods study. Research in the Schools, 20(1), 39–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knaggs, C. M., Sondergeold, T. A., & Schardt, B. (2015). Overcoming barriers to college enrollment, persistence, and perceptions for urban high school students in a college preparatory program. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 9(1), 7–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leech, N. L. (2012). Writing mixed research reports. American Behavioral Scientist, 56(6), 866–881.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2010). Guidelines for conducting and reporting mixed research in the field of counseling and beyond. Journal of Counseling and Development, 88(1), 61–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2011). Mixed research in counseling: Trends in the literature. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling, 44, 169–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leech, N. L., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Combs, J. P. (2011). Writing publishable mixed research articles: Guidelines for emerging scholars in the health sciences. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 5(1), 7–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayring, P. (2007). On generalization in qualitatively oriented research. Retrieved January 13, 2016, from http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/291/641

  • Mack, C. (2012). How to write a good scientific paper: Title, abstract, and keywords. The Journal of Micro/Nanolithography, MEMES, and MOEMS, 11(12), 020101.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCrudden, M. T., Magliano, J. P., & Schraw, G. (2010). Exploring how relevance instructions affect personal reading intentions, reading goals and text processing: A mixed methods study. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(4), 229–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mertens, D. (2010). Transformative mixed methods research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(6), 469–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milardo, R. M. (2015). Crafting scholarship in the behavioral and social sciences: Writing, reviewing, and editing. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2013). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morse, J. M. (2010). Procedures and practice of mixed method design: Maintaining control, rigor, and complexity. In A. Tashakkori & E. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 339–352). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Newman, I., Ridenour, C. S., Newman, C., & De Marco, G. M. P. (2003). A typology of research purposes and its relationship to mixed methods. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 167–188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Cathain, A., Murphy, E., & Nicholl, J. (2007a). Integration and publications as indicators of “yield” from mixed methods studies. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 147–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Cathain, A., Murphy, E., & Nicholl, J. (2007b). Why, and how, mixed methods research is undertaken in health services research: A mixed methods study. BMC Health Services Research, 7(1), 85. doi:10.1186/1472-6963-7-85. Retrieved from http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6963/7/85

  • O’Cathain, A., Murphy, E., & Nicholl, J. (2008). Multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, or dysfunctional? Team working in mixed-methods research. Qualitative Health Research, 18(11), 1574–1585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2003). Expanding the framework of internal and external validity in quantitative research. Research in the Schools, 10, 71–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Collins, K. M. T., Leech, N. L., Dellinger, A. B., & Jiao, Q. G. (2010). A meta-framework for conducting mixed research syntheses for stress and coping researchers and beyond. In G. S. Gates, W. H. Gmelch, & M. Wolverton (Series Eds.), & K. M. T. Collins, A. J. Onwuegbuzie, & Q. G. Jiao (Vol. Eds.), Toward a broader understanding of stress and coping: Mixed methods approaches (pp. 169–211). The Research on Stress and Coping in Education Series (Vol. 5). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Combs, J. P. (2011). Data analysis in mixed research: A primer. International Journal of Education, 3(1), E13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Daniel, L. G. (2004). Reliability generalization: The importance of considering sample specificity, confidence intervals, and subgroup differences. Research in the Schools, 11(1), 60–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2004). Enhancing the interpretation of “significant” findings: The role of mixed methods research. The Qualitative Report, 9(4), 770–792.

    Google Scholar 

  • Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2005). On becoming a pragmatic researcher: The importance of combining quantitative and qualitative research methodologies. International Journal of Social Research Methodology: Theory and Practice, 8(5), 375–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2006). Linking research questions to mixed methods data analysis procedures. The Qualitative Report, 11(3), 474–498.

    Google Scholar 

  • Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2007). A call for qualitative power analyses. Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, 41(1), 105–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Leech, N. L., & Collins, K. M. T. (2012). Qualitative analysis techniques for the review of the literature. The Qualitative Report, 17(Art. 56), 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Onwuegbuxie, A. J., Collins, K. M. T., Leech, N. L., Dellinger, A. B., & Jiao, Q. C. (2007, April). Mixed methods + literature reviews = mixed research syntheses: A framework for conducting and writing rigorous, comptehensive, and insightful literature reviews. Paper presented at American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Witcher, A. E., Collins, K. M. T., Filer, J. D., Wiedmaier, C. D., & Moore, C. W. (2007). Students’ perceptions of characteristics of effective college teachers: A validity study of a teaching evaluation form using a mixed-methods analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 44(1), 113–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parylo, O. (2012). Qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods: An analysis of research design in articles on principal professional development (1998–2008). International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 6(3), 297–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parylo, O., & Zepeda, S. J. (2014). Describing an ‘effective’ principal: Perceptions of the central office leaders. School Leadership & Management: Formerly School Organisation, 34(5), 518–537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reichel, N., & Arnon, S. (2005). Three portraits of teachers in the view of students of teaching: The ideal teacher, the teacher of teachers and the image of the student him/herself as a teacher. Dapim, 40, 23–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandelowski, M. (2003). Tables or tableaux? Writing and reading mixed methods research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 321–350). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwab, J. (1973). The practical translation into curriculum. School Review, 81, 501–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tashakkori, A., & Creswell, J. W. (2007). Exploring the nature of research questions in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(3), 207–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taskakkori, A. M., & Teddlie, C. B. (Eds.). (2010). Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Journal and Book Series Editor Springer, Indiana, PA, USA

    Mary Renck Jalongo

  2. Teaching & Learning, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA

    Olivia N. Saracho

Authors
  1. Mary Renck Jalongo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Olivia N. Saracho
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Renck Jalongo, M., Saracho, O.N. (2016). From Mixed-Methods Research to a Journal Article. In: Writing for Publication. Springer Texts in Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31650-5_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31650-5_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-31648-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-31650-5

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation