The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Using mixed methods research designs in health psychology: an illustrated discussion from a pragmatist perspective

Using mixed methods research designs in health psychology: an illustrated discussion from a pragmatist perspective
Using mixed methods research designs in health psychology: an illustrated discussion from a pragmatist perspective
PURPOSE:
To outline some of the challenges of mixed methods research and illustrate how they can be addressed in health psychology research.

METHODS:
This study critically reflects on the author's previously published mixed methods research and discusses the philosophical and technical challenges of mixed methods, grounding the discussion in a brief review of methodological literature.

RESULTS:
Mixed methods research is characterized as having philosophical and technical challenges; the former can be addressed by drawing on pragmatism, the latter by considering formal mixed methods research designs proposed in a number of design typologies. There are important differences among the design typologies which provide diverse examples of designs that health psychologists can adapt for their own mixed methods research. There are also similarities; in particular, many typologies explicitly orient to the technical challenges of deciding on the respective timing of qualitative and quantitative methods and the relative emphasis placed on each method. Characteristics, strengths, and limitations of different sequential and concurrent designs are identified by reviewing five mixed methods projects each conducted for a different purpose.

CONCLUSIONS:
Adapting formal mixed methods designs can help health psychologists address the technical challenges of mixed methods research and identify the approach that best fits the research questions and purpose. This does not obfuscate the need to address philosophical challenges of mixing qualitative and quantitative methods. Statement of contribution What is already known on this subject? Mixed methods research poses philosophical and technical challenges. Pragmatism in a popular approach to the philosophical challenges while diverse typologies of mixed methods designs can help address the technical challenges. Examples of mixed methods research can be hard to locate when component studies from mixed methods projects are published separately. What does this study add? Critical reflections on the author's previously published mixed methods research illustrate how a range of different mixed methods designs can be adapted and applied to address health psychology research questions. The philosophical and technical challenges of mixed methods research should be considered together and in relation to the broader purpose of the research.
1359-107X
5-20
Bishop, Felicity L.
1f5429c5-325f-4ac4-aae3-6ba85d079928
Bishop, Felicity L.
1f5429c5-325f-4ac4-aae3-6ba85d079928

Bishop, Felicity L. (2015) Using mixed methods research designs in health psychology: an illustrated discussion from a pragmatist perspective. British Journal of Health Psychology, 20 (1), 5-20. (doi:10.1111/bjhp.12122).

Record type: Article

Abstract

PURPOSE:
To outline some of the challenges of mixed methods research and illustrate how they can be addressed in health psychology research.

METHODS:
This study critically reflects on the author's previously published mixed methods research and discusses the philosophical and technical challenges of mixed methods, grounding the discussion in a brief review of methodological literature.

RESULTS:
Mixed methods research is characterized as having philosophical and technical challenges; the former can be addressed by drawing on pragmatism, the latter by considering formal mixed methods research designs proposed in a number of design typologies. There are important differences among the design typologies which provide diverse examples of designs that health psychologists can adapt for their own mixed methods research. There are also similarities; in particular, many typologies explicitly orient to the technical challenges of deciding on the respective timing of qualitative and quantitative methods and the relative emphasis placed on each method. Characteristics, strengths, and limitations of different sequential and concurrent designs are identified by reviewing five mixed methods projects each conducted for a different purpose.

CONCLUSIONS:
Adapting formal mixed methods designs can help health psychologists address the technical challenges of mixed methods research and identify the approach that best fits the research questions and purpose. This does not obfuscate the need to address philosophical challenges of mixing qualitative and quantitative methods. Statement of contribution What is already known on this subject? Mixed methods research poses philosophical and technical challenges. Pragmatism in a popular approach to the philosophical challenges while diverse typologies of mixed methods designs can help address the technical challenges. Examples of mixed methods research can be hard to locate when component studies from mixed methods projects are published separately. What does this study add? Critical reflections on the author's previously published mixed methods research illustrate how a range of different mixed methods designs can be adapted and applied to address health psychology research questions. The philosophical and technical challenges of mixed methods research should be considered together and in relation to the broader purpose of the research.

Full text not available from this repository.

More information

e-pub ahead of print date: 18 November 2014
Published date: February 2015
Organisations: Psychology

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 375241
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/375241
ISSN: 1359-107X
PURE UUID: 01bd553d-63a3-4fae-a88c-26d486876e96
ORCID for Felicity L. Bishop: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-8737-6662

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 18 Mar 2015 13:26
Last modified: 03 Dec 2019 01:51

Export record

Altmetrics

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×