Commentary—After Triangulation, What Next
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12811414 |
|---|---|
| Authors | David L Morgan (0000-0001-6014-7643, Portland State University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2018 |
| Volume | 13 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 6-11 |
| Publication date | 2018-12-10 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Mixed Methods Research (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1558-6898 • E-ISSN: 1558-6901 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/1558689818780596 |
| OpenAlex | W2904264648 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 26 |
| References cited | 8 |
This commentary agrees with the editors’ recent decision to do away with triangulation as a term in mixed methods research, but before doing so, it argues for a review of its original popularity, and a careful consideration of what should replace it. Triangulation depends on the comparison of results from qualitative and quantitative studies that attempt to answer the same research question(s), so there are three possible outcomes: convergence, complementarity, and divergence. After reviewing each of these alternatives, I present an approach that cross-tabulates tests of hypotheses as quantitative results and themes as qualitative results, based on the extent to which those results are convergent, complementary, or divergent
Complementarity (molecular biology · Convergence (economics · Divergence (linguistics · Economics · Epistemology · Linguistics · Management science · Popularity · Qualitative research · Social science · Sociology · Triangulation · Computer Science · Evaluation and Performance Assessment · Health Policy Implementation Science · Mathematics · Philosophy · Psychology · Psychometric Methodologies and Testing · Social Psychology
Psychosocial Experiences in an Australian Rural Cancer Service
Evaluating the Impact of Online Training Addressing Challenging Behaviors of Children With Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities in Saudi Arabia
Variations in household water affordability and water insecurity
Physiological instruments meet mixed methods in Media Accessibility
Home language use in mathematics classrooms supports processing, not just input–output work
A mixed-methods investigation of coping, adaptation and health-related quality of life in individuals experiencing endometriosis
Teacher wellbeing in England
Searching for qualitatively driven mixed methods research
Recommendations for improving research quality
Are schools doing enough? An exploration of how primary schools in England support the well‐being of their teachers
Squeezing dried fruits
Contested Spaces
A failure to converge? The use of convergent designs in mixed methods research
Combining Q methodology and interviews using mixed methods integration
Innovative participatory evaluation methodologies to assess and sustain multilevel impacts of two community-based physical activity programs for women in Colombia
Impact of Blackboard Learning System on Cognitive-Communication and Culture in Saudi Arabia
A Vignette-Based Transformative Multiphase Mixed Methods Interventional Study Featuring Venn Diagram Joint Displays
In This Issue
Response to David Morgan on Triangulation
In This Issue
Exploring Limitations in Mixed Methods Research (MMR)
To them, we're just kids from the hood”
Operationalizing Transformative Tourism
Beyond Local Case Studies in Political Ecology
Responding to the call of the NHS Nightingale, but at what cost? An auto-ethnography of a volunteer frontline mental health trainer's experiences during the Covid-19 pandemic
The Development and Application of the Qualitative Triangulation Framework (QTF) for Exploring Tension Within and Across Qualitative Data Sets
Linking Data
Integrating Qualitative and Quantitative Methods
Toward a Conceptual Framework for Mixed-Method Evaluation Designs
The Journal of Mixed Methods Research Starts a New Decade
The Journal of Mixed Methods Research Starts a New Decade
Triangulation Revisited
Naturalistic inquiry
Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix
| Unique citing works | 26 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 3.25 |
| Citation span | 2018 - 2026 (9) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 26 |