Synergizing Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches
Integrating Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methods
When integrating qualitative and quantitative approaches, unlike mere supplementation or complementation, the focus shifts from joint application to the intersection of triangulation. This requires specific tools for both quantitative and qualitative methods, often observed by researchers. However, this deeper integration may risk certain methodological renunciations.
Integration must also account for the implications of self-observation, as every investigative technique inherently involves a reduction of other techniques present in the research design.
Key Challenges in Mixed Methods Research Integration
The problems shared by virtually all forms of articulating quantitative and qualitative practices fall into four main categories:
Economic Considerations in Integrated Research
Utilizing more media or techniques naturally results in higher costs.
Time Constraints in Mixed Methods Application
Some forms of articulation, such as complementation, allow for the simultaneous application of different techniques because they start from a low level of articulation. However, this changes when standards are in place for articulation between techniques and research perspectives. In such cases, the design for applying one approach may have to await the results of another empirical approach. This problem can extend to the use of, for example, participant observation, which is why integration is preferably established between surveys and open interviews or discussion groups.
Researcher Competencies and Practical Limitations
The conflict between quantitativists and qualitativists often conceals individual skill limitations. We must consider the material conditions under which most research is conducted. Researchers are often employed on short-term contracts for specific studies, leaving no space or time to acquire new skills. Refusing a single job offer can lead to professional ostracism.
Key Methodological Insights on Integration
Many methodological problems persist. In conclusion:
Distinguishing Integration Levels: Joint vs. Triangulation
There is no discussion of “joint” in isolation, but rather “joint integration,” forming a continuum that reaches its highest level in what has been termed “joint integration.” Supplementation is a technique used, but its data are analyzed only from its immediate application in practice, which occupies the central place in the design and therefore leads to an underuse of skills. Sieber poses this as a way to adjust the additional technique to the principal one, in order to support it. For its part, complementation tends towards juxtaposition, leaving the integration of produced data outside the center of its design.
We cannot speak of integration within triangulation. A greater degree of integration between research techniques and methods is chained in what is called “joint integration,” since the results of one approach are integrated into the design of other approaches.
Articulation in integration arises with limitations, such as overcoming some of the limitations of complementation and the chained joint itself. It can therefore be placed at a higher degree than the integration between research methods and dimensions.
Flexibility in Quantitative-Qualitative Application
As a mere characteristic of all research, one cannot set rigid rules, or even temporary ones, on the use of quantitative and qualitative practices. Each particular study requires a practical debate on joint use and integration.
Addressing Controversies in Qualitative Data Use
The introduction of qualitative material is often controversial and confusing. The presentation of qualitative material that appears as a reduction in principle does not seem logical.
Enhancing Research Reliability Through Method Diversity
As results from the application of various methods converge, research gains certainty regarding its findings. When results do not match, the divergence is always insightful, generating doubts about the observations. This raises the question that something must change in the observation, either the theory or the empirical approach.
Current Acceptance of Quantitative-Qualitative Articulation
Quantitative-qualitative articulation is now an accepted current in methodological reflection, and its use is common.