Mixed research

Mixed Research

Mixed research is a sort of research in which the researcher collects data, analyzes it, integrates the findings, and draws conclusions using both qualitative and quantitative designs in either a single study or a series of studies. The practice’s popularity has grown as a result of its numerous benefits. This study will address the advantages and disadvantages of a mixed research design in health administration.

Advantages and Disadvantages

The quantitative research approach assumes that research hypotheses can be observed and measured. However, constructing hypotheses remains a difficult undertaking because there is a risk of producing a biased hypothesis that may jeopardize the outcome (Krauss, 2005). Qualitative research, on the other hand, is informed by the knowledge that there exist different deductions which are influenced by individualistic point of view, meaning and beliefs. However, the study design is limited as it comprises a small sample size as well as an absence of generalizability. Mixed research methods, thus, exploits the strengths as well as counter the effects of weaknesses of both designs therefore ideal in addressing complicated, multifaceted healthcare administrative interventions. A case example involves bridging the research limitations in the study of American Indian chronic pain management where racial misclassification and insufficient information in an individual’s database forms limitation.

Triangulation

Mixed research method also provides for triangulation. Triangulation refers to the adoption of various research approaches: different methods, researchers as well as varying sources of data in examining similar phenomenon (Tariq & Woodman, 2013). A major benefit of triangulation is the use of different approaches as well as techniques and research methods that provide more accurate result since there is a consistent result, provided reliable information was acquired in each study method. The same case example applied triangulation design through the adoption of a multilevel approach that involved the analysis of quantitative data collected at the national level against qualitative data collected at the patient level. The results of both levels were contrasted, compared and then blended for enhanced interpretations.

Disadvantages

Blending qualitative and quantitative research is more often problematic due to the perception that the duo comes from different and incompatible paradigms. Proponents argue that it is not possible neither is it desirable to mix the two paradigms since the two represents conflicting viewpoints and the manner in which information for evaluation are gathered (Doorenbos, 2014). Opponents, on the contrary hold that provided the outcome informs the research practice, then incommensurability is a non-issue especially in health policy formulations.

Moreover, mix research method is time-consuming as it requires the combination of qualitative and quantitative research methods. There is also higher need for professionalism to efficiently combine the qualitative and quantitative methods suggesting that one individual is incapable of undertaking the research. It will thus require a group where roles are delegated to minimize time wastage.

Another challenge is the difficulty in realizing ideal integration from different data sources as it requires intense, innovative thinking to navigate various data types as well as establish any existing links. What is needed to undertake effective mixed research method, therefore, relates to evaluating the study results and question whether the combination of different data has enhanced understanding (Tariq & Woodman, 2013).

Conclusion

Mixed research methods saves time and cost, limited in biased results as well as provides for research triangulation that produces consistent result. However, the research method is marred by massive integration difficulties, time consuming as well as data integration problems. Recruitment of competent research professionals however, makes the method the most proffered.

References

Doorenbos, A. Z. (2014). Mixed methods in nursing research: An overview and practical examples. 看護研究, 47(3), 207-217.

Krauss, S. E. (2005). Research paradigms and meaning making: A primer. The qualitative report, 10(4), 758-770.

Tariq, S., & Woodman, J. (2013). Using mixed methods in health research. JRSM short reports, 4(6), 2042533313479197.