# data[].attributes.body
"A core assumption of this approach is that when an investigator combines statistical trends (quantitative data) with stories and personal experiences (qualitative data), this collective strength provides a better understanding of the research problem than either form of data alone. (pg 2)"
Or, to put it more succinctly : qual and quant are better together! I thought this was an important point about why researchers might want to use both quantitative and qualitative data since it is more work. But I have discovered working with quantitative data that it can be very unsatisfying, in that it often leads to more questions than it answers. And with qualitative data, it can be unsatisfying in another way because you wonder whether or not what you are seeing is limited to this small group, or whether there are larger trends or patterns.

"No topic in the field of mixed methods research is so confusing as the question of how to integrate the datasets (pg 6)."
Amen to this. Quantitative data and qualitative data can seem so removed from each other at times. The section following this quote provides an efficient explanation of integrating data.

# data[].attributes.body
Is an exploratory sequential design always one that starts with qualitative data and then builds to a quantitative data phase? Or could it also happen the other way around, or is that called something different?

# data[].attributes.body
About mixed methods (pg. 2): "the investigator gather both quantitative (closed-ended) and qualitative (open-ended) data, integrates the two, and then draws interpretations based on the combined strengths of both sets of data to understand research problems. "  I chose this quote because it is the clearest definition of what mixed methods is supposed to be.

About the philosophical perspective on our research (pg 8):
" our values and beliefs shape our orientation to research, how we gather data, the biases we bring to research, and whether we see our investigations as more emerging or fixed" . I chose this quote because it recognizes the human element and the impact it has on the researcher and everything they bring to the table.

# data[].attributes.body
Does using mixed methods impact the biases that come from each kind of research? I see that the use of both qualitative and quantitative methods could help lessen certain kinds of bias in the gathering or interpretation of the data. Are there kinds of bias that are more prevalent in mixed methods than using just the quantitative or qualitative method?

# data[].attributes.body
Pg. 3: “Mixed methods is not simply the addition of qualitative data to a quantitative design. Mixed methods can be employed in this way, but we can also add quantitative data to qualitative, and we need a rationale for doing it either way.

This underscores the need to truly understand the basis of whatever study one is conducting so that there is thoughtful integration of qualitative and quantitative designs. It’s critical that the manner and method by which both are employed properly meets the needs of the research being conducted.

Pg. 4: “….Thus, both approaches follow the general process of research: Identify a problem, determine research questions, collect data, analyze data, and interpret results. However, the means of carrying out each of these stages differs considerably between the two methods.”

This is a great reminder that while both qualitative and quantitative research have similar stages, the way each stage is carried out and the manner with which each stage is conducted will vary significantly depending on the type of study being conducted.

# data[].attributes.body
At what point in the research does it become readily apparent that one should use mixed-methods versus another design? Are there key words or key conditions that must exist to confirm that using a mixed-methods design is the right approach?

# data[].attributes.body
"A core assumption of this approach is that when an investigator combines statistical trends (quantitative data) with stories and personal experiences (qualitative data), this collective strength provides a better understanding of the research problem than either form of data alone."

"This mixed method design not only enhances explanation but also provides an opportunity for cross-validation of findings across techniques and across multiple institutions, which enhances generalizability of findings while also maintaining an emphasis on contextual differences."

# data[].attributes.body
Does mixed methods always lead with quantitative and then use qualitative to fill out the story?

# data[].attributes.body
"A core assumption of this approach is that when an investigator combines both statistical trends (quantitative data) with stories and personal experiences (qualitative data) , this collective strength provides a better understanding of the research problem than either types of data alone."

This makes sense to me; that this third way of conducting research emerged out of gaps that arise in just qual or quant research design.

"Mixed methods research is not simply a label that a researcher can assign to their methodology. Mixed methods research has distinct approaches about designs and procedures for conducting research, integrating the data, and drawing conclusions or inferences...It is a stand alone methodology in its own right."

I thought this section was helpful in clarifying what mixed methods research is not.

# data[].attributes.body
As we move into our second semester and get closer to our research methods classes this summer, my questions and thoughts are around when and how to determine what research design will work best for me. I appreciate the ground work in all the forms that we will have to help determine the answer.