Data Integration in Mixed-Methods Research: Exploring Approaches, Occurrence of Joint Displays, and Design-Specific Intentions

• In Event: The Current State of Mixed-Methods Research: A Systematic Review and Panel Discussion

Abstract

Objectives
This paper focuses on data integration in mixed methods research. The specific research questions include: In what ways are researchers integrating the qualitative and quantitative data? How often are joint displays presented in mixed methods studies? If a joint display is presented, does it appear to be intentionally selected for that specific mixed methods research design?

Perspectives
In a systematic methodological review, Morgan (2023) compared the degree of integration present in mixed methods studies published in the MMR flagship journal, the Journal of Mixed Methods Research, to mixed methods studies published in social science journals (N = 273). In finding that over one-third of the articles published outside “the core of the field,” did not integrate the qualitative and quantitative at all, Morgan concluded that there is a disconnect between methodological experts and those who publish outside the field. Only three of the articles in the sample included a joint display of integration.

To provide a systematic method of integration, Johnson et al. (2017) introduced the Pillar Integration Process, a strategic method for integration (listing, matching, and checking) that leads to PILLAR building (Johnson et al., 2017). The researcher completes the initial strategies separately for each strand, matching the quantitative and qualitative data to construct an understanding that details the insights and inferences that can be made based on the data.

Joint displays offer a structured, visual method to represent integration of the data, methods, or results. Guetterman et al. (2015) identify several principles of a mixed methods joint display: label the results by methodology, align the display to both research design and method of integration, and specify conclusions drawn from the integration. Younas et al. (2020) echo these principles, explicating further that the decisions researchers make when creating these displays must be intentional and aligned to the research design.

A recent movement in the creation of a joint display is the inclusion of visuals (e.g., bar graphs, boxplots) within the figure (Guetterman et al., 2021). The authors suggest that the introduction of visuals improve the communication of the integration.

Methodology and Data Sources
Within this review, the analysts applied several categories to capture how authors conveyed the conceptualization of their mixed methods studies within the publications. These categories included: (1) the type of integration represented in the paper, (2) the presence of a joint display to communicate evidence of integration, (3) the use of visual elements in the joint display, and (4) the appropriate joint display for the specified mixed methods design.

Initial Results
Initial review results found that, if included, integration is presented at the surface level. Several researchers presented joint displays; these were mostly located in the results sections.

Scholarly Significance
Integration of the qualitative and quantitative data is a hallmark of mixed methods research (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018; Leko et al, 2023). Doyle et al. (2016) discuss four positions of possible integration: in the design, methods, results, and discussion. This paper contributes to our understanding of this crucial component of MMR.

Author

• Timothy Guetterman, University of Michigan