Multimethodology

src: gpmfirst.com

Multimethodology or multimethod research includes the use of more than one method of data collection or research in a research study or a series of related studies. The mixed methods research is more specific because it includes mixing qualitative and quantitative data, methods, methodologies, and/or paradigms in the study or a series of related studies. One can argue that mixed-method research is a special case of multimethod research. Another applicable, but less commonly used, label for multi- or mixed research is methodological plurality . All these approaches to professional and academic research emphasize that monomethod research can be improved through the use of various data, methods, methodologies, perspectives, positions, and paradigms..

The term 'multimethodology' was used from the 1980s and in 1989 Multimethod Research: A Synthesis of Styles by John Brewer and Albert Hunter (Sage Publications). During the 1990s and now, the term 'mixed research methods' has become more popular for this research movement in behavioral, social, business, and health sciences. This pluralistic research approach has been popular since the 1980s.

Video Multimethodology

Riset metode multi dan campuran

There are three broad classes of research studies currently labeled "mixed research methods" (Johnson, Onwuegbuzie, & Turner, 2007)

Quantitative driven approach/design where research studies, in essence, are quantitative studies with qualitative data/methods added to complement and enhance quantitative studies by adding value and answers deeper, wider, and more complete or more complex for research questions; quantitative quality criteria are emphasized but high quality qualitative data should also be collected and analyzed;

A qualitative driven approach/design in which the research study is, in essence, a qualitative study with quantitative data/methods added to complement and enhance the qualitative study by adding added value and deeper, wider, and more complete or more complex for research questions; qualitative quality criteria are emphasized but high quality quantitative data should also be collected and analyzed (Hesse-Biber, 2010);

Interactive or similar status design in which the same research studies emphasize (interactively and through integration) quantitative and qualitative data, methods, methodologies, and paradigms. This third design is often done through the use of a team consisting of an expert in quantitative research, an expert in qualitative research, and an expert in mixed-method research to assist with continuous dialogue and integration. In this type of mixed study, the quality criteria of quantitative and qualitative methods and mixtures are emphasized. The use of these multiple quality criteria is seen in the concept of multiplier legitimacy (Johnson & Christensen, 2014; Onwuegbuzie & Johnson, 2006). The following is the definition of this important type of validity or legitimacy: the multiple-fold legitimacy "refers to the extent to which the mixed methods of the researcher successfully overcome and resolve all relevant types of validity, including the types of quantitative and qualitative validity discussed earlier in this chapter as well as dimensions In other words, the researcher should identify and address all relevant validity issues facing a particular research study.Accessful handling of the related validity issues will help the researcher generate the kind of conclusions and meta-conclusions that should be made in a mixed study "(Johnson & Johnson, 2014; page 311).

Mixed priority design where the main study results come from the integration of qualitative and quantitative data during the analysis (Creamer, 2017).

One major similarity between mixed and qualitative and quantitative methodologies taken separately is that researchers need to maintain a focus on the original purpose behind their methodological choices. The main difference between the two, is the way some authors distinguish between them, suggesting that there is a logic inherent in one that is different from the other. Creswell (2009) suggests that in quantitative research, researchers begin with problem statements, switch to hypotheses and null hypotheses, through instrumentation into discussions about data collection, population, and data analysis. Creswell proposes that for qualitative studies the flow of logic begins with a goal for research, moving through research questions that are discussed as data gathered from smaller groups and then sound how they will be analyzed.

A research strategy is a procedure for achieving a specific intermediate research objective - such as sampling, data collection, or data analysis. We may therefore be talking about sampling strategies or data analysis strategies. The use of strategies to improve construct validity (a form of methodological triangulation) is now routinely supported by methodologists. In short, mixing or integrating research strategies (qualitative and/or quantitative) in any research conducted now is considered a common feature of good research.

The research approach refers to a set of integrated research principles and general procedural guidelines. A broad, holistic (but general) approach to methodological guidance or roadmap associated with a particular research motive or analytic interest. Two examples of analytic interests are population frequency distribution and prediction. Examples of research approaches include experiments, surveys, correlational studies, ethnographic research, and phenomenological inquiry. Each approach is ideal for addressing specific analytic interests. For example, experiments are ideal for dealing with nomothetic explanations or possible causes; survey - description of population frequency, correlation - prediction study; ethnography - description and interpretation of cultural processes; and phenomenology - descriptions of the essence of phenomena or life experiences.

In the single approach design SAD ) (also called "monomethod design") only one analytic interest is pursued. In mixed or multi-mix design (MAD) two or more analytic interests are pursued. NOTE: the design of multiple approaches may include all "quantitative" approaches such as combining surveys and experiments; or entirely "qualitative" approaches such as combining ethnographic and phenomenological investigations, and mixed-approach designs include the above mix (eg, a mixture of quantitative and qualitative data, methods, methodologies, and/or paradigms).

A word of warning about the term "multimethodology". It has become a very common place to use the terms "method" and "methodology" as a synonym (as with the above entries). However, there is a convincing philosophical reason to distinguish the two. "Method" connotes how to do something - a procedure (such as data collection methods). "Methodology" means the discourse of the method - that is, the discourse on the adequacy and appropriateness of a combination of specific research principles and procedures. The term methodology and biology share a common suffix " logy ." Just like bio- logy is the discourse of life - all kinds of life; so too, methodo- logy is the discourse of the method - all kinds of methods. It seems unproductive, therefore, to talk about multi-biology or multi-methodology. However, it is very productive to talk about different biological perspectives or from various methodological perspectives.

Maps Multimethodology

Desire

Cases for multimethodology or mixed methods of research as a strategy for intervention and/or research are based on four observations:

1. The narrow view of the world is often misleading, so approaching subjects from different perspectives or paradigms can help gain a holistic perspective.
2. There are different levels of social research (ie: biology, cognitive, social, etc.), and different methodologies may have certain strengths with respect to one of these levels. Using more than one should help to get a clearer picture of the social world and make a more adequate explanation.
3. Many existing practices have incorporated methodologies to solve specific problems, but have not quite theorized.
4. Multimetodology fits with pragmatism.

src: gpmfirst.com

Feasibility

There are also some dangers to research approaches of multimethodological or mixed methods. Some of these issues include:

1. Many paradigms conflict with each other. However, once an understanding of the differences is present, it can be an advantage to see many sides, and possible solutions that can emerge on their own.
2. Multimethod research methods and mixed methods can be performed from many paradigmatic perspectives, including pragmatism, dialect pluralism, critical realism, and constructivism.
3. Cultural issues affect the worldview and analysis. Knowledge of the new paradigm is not enough to overcome potential biases; it must be learned through practice and experience.
4. People have cognitive abilities that affect them for certain paradigms. Logical thinkers can more easily understand and use quantitative methodologies. It's easier to move from quantitative to qualitative, and not vice versa.

src: www.econcero.com

Software

Some qualitative research software analysis applications support multiple levels of quantitative integration, and the following software or web applications focus on mixed method research:

• Dedoose is a web-based qualitative analysis application and a mixed-method research tool developed by UCLA professors, and is the successor of EthnoNotes.
• MAXQDA is a qualitative data analysis and mixed software developed by the VERBI Software. Consult. Sozialforschung GmbH. The functionality of mixed methods includes guided creation for Shared View.
• NVivo is a qualitative and mixed data analysis software tool developed by QSR International.
• QDA Miner is a qualitative data analysis and mixed software developed by Provalis Research.
• Quirkos

src: gpmfirst.com

Conclusion

Multimethodology and mixed research methodologies are desirable and viable because they provide a more complete view, and because the needs during different phases of an intervention (or research project) make very specific demands on a common methodology. While it is demanding, it is more effective to choose the right tool for an existing job.

This can be used when you want to build from one phase of research to another. You may first want to explore the data qualitatively to identify aid in the development of an instrument or to identify the concept/variable to be tested in a quantitative study or the next phase of a study. You engage in the study of mixed methods when you want to build a quantitatively controlled design, a qualitatively controlled design, or an interactive design/status equal. Each has advantages and disadvantages. For more information on designing some research methods and mixed methods, see the following design and other typologies (anti-typology): Brewer & amp; Hunter (2006); Creamer (2017); Creswell & amp; Plano Clark (2011); Greene (2007); Guest (2013); Johnson & amp; Christensen (2014); Morgan (2014); Morse & amp; Niehaus (2009); Muscat et al. (2012); and Teddlie & amp; Tashakkori (2009).

src: gpmfirst.com

Criticism

Multimethodology is criticized by adherents of incompatibility - especially post-structuralist and post-modernist theses. Critics argue that mixed method research is inherently wrong because quantitative and qualitative approaches are different and inherently diverse research paradigms.

src: www.blueprintsys.com

See also

• Perestroika Movement (political science)
• Post-autistic economy
• Qualitative data analysis software with computer help

src: gpmfirst.com

References

src: slideplayer.info

Further reading

• Andres, Lesley (2012). "Designing and Conducting Survey Research". London: Sage. Survey of research from the perspective of mixed methods.
• Brannen, Julia. 2005. "Mixing Method: The Entry of Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches into the Research Process." International Journal of Social Research Methodology 8: 173-184.
• Brewer, J., & amp; Hunter, A. (2006). Foundation research multimethod: Synthesizing styles. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Creamer, E. G. (2017). Introduction to integrated mixed method research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Creswell, J. W., & amp; Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Design and conduct mixed methods research. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
• Curry, L & amp; Nunez-Smith M. (2014). Mixed Methods in Health Sciences Research: A Practical Primer. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
• Greene, J. C. (2007). Mixed method in social investigation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
• Guest, G. (2013). Describes mixed-method research: An alternative to typology. Journal of Mixed Method Research, 7, 141-151.
• Hesse-Biber, S. (2010b). Appear methodology and practice methods in the field of research of mixed methods. Qualitative Inquiry, 16 (6), 415-418.
• Johnson, R. B., & amp; Christensen, L. B. (2014). Educational research: quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches (5th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
• Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & amp; Turner, L. A. (2007). Towards a Mixed Method Research Definition. Journal of Mixed Method Research, 1, 112-133.
• Lowenthal, P. R., & amp; Leech, N. (2009). Online mixed study and learning: Strategies for improvement. In T. T. Kidd (Ed.), Online education and adult learning: New limits for teaching practice (pp.Ã, 202-211). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
• Mingers J., Brocklesby J., "Multimethodology: Toward a Framework for Mixing Methodology", Omega , Volume 25, Number 5, October 1997, pp.Ã, 489-509 (21)
• Morgan, D. L. (2014). Integrating qualitative & amp; Quantitative methods: Pragmatic approach. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
• Morse, J. M., & amp; Niehaus, L. (2009). Mixed method design: Principles and procedures. Press Left Coast.
• Muscat, M., Blackman, D., & amp; Muscat, B. (2012). Mixed methods: Combine expert interviews, cross-impact analysis and scenario development. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 10 (1): 9-21. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2269508
• Niglas, Katrin. 2004. "Combined Use of Quantitative and Quantitative Methods in Educational Research." http://www.tlulib.ee/files/arts/95/nigla32417030233e06e8e5d471ec0aaa32e9.pdf
• Pepe, A. & amp; Castelli, S. (2013) A cautionary tale about research methods in parenting in education. International Journal of Parents in Education, 7 (1), pp 1-6.
• Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & amp; Johnson, R. B. (2006). The problem of "Validity" in Mixed Method Research. Research in Schools, 13 (1), 48-63.
• Onwuegbuzie, Anthony and Leech, Nancy; 2005. "Taking" Q "Out of Research: Teaching Methodology Research Program Without Dividing Between Quantitative and Qualitative Paradigms." Quality and Quantity 39: 267-296.
• Schram, Sanford F., and Brian Caterino, eds., Creating Political Science Materials: Arguing Knowledge, Research, and Methods (New York: New York University Press, 2006).
• Teddlie, C., & amp; Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundation research mixed methods: Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in social science and behavior. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

src: master-trainers.com.my

External links

• Network Mixed Methods for Behavioral, Social, and Health Sciences
• [1]

Source of the article : Wikipedia