Triangulation (social sciences)

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Triangulation is a research strategy in empirical social research in which different methods or perspectives are applied to the same phenomenon or different types of data are used to research a phenomenon in order to compensate for the weaknesses of the other with the strengths of one approach. Research designs with the targeted combination of methods are also called mixed-method designs .

The goal is mostly to achieve a higher validity of the research results and to reduce systematic errors . However, a number of authors are of the opinion that triangulation would only provide a richer, but not necessarily a more valid, picture of empirical reality. A minority of researchers, predominantly from hermeneutic research traditions , reject triangulation entirely on epistemological grounds.

Triangulation is mostly used today in qualitative social research , within whose paradigms the greatest development of triangulation has taken place over the past 40 years. In terms of the history of ideas, however, it is anchored in quantitative social research .

history

Triangulation in Geodesy

The combination of different methods and data in social research was already practiced in the 19th century, for example in Lenin's 1898 published The Development of Capitalism in Russia . Such combining was practiced throughout the first half of the 20th century - for example in the classic study Die Arbeitslosen von Marienthal ; the metaphorical term "triangulation" used for this today was not imported from geodesy into the social sciences until the 1950s .

At the beginning of the 1960s, quantitatively oriented researchers such as Paul Lazarsfeld in particular were advocates of combinations of methods, although qualitative sociologists such as Howard S. Becker also preferred "different types of evidence" because of their greater credibility, but without calling it "triangulation". It was not until the late 1960s, however, that triangulation gained more and more importance as an explicitly pursued research strategy and in the general methodological literature due to the rise of grounded theory .

A typological systematization of different forms of triangulation did not emerge until the 1970s. From the middle of that decade, triangulation found its way into many standard textbooks on empirical social research, without, however, teaching systematic methodical approaches. From the mid-1980s onwards, the first systematic criticisms of triangulation emerged, which in parts of the research community led to their justification for legitimation being shifted away from the usual validity concepts. In the course of the integrated method training in the social sciences, which has been increasingly promoted since the beginning of the new millennium, triangulation continued to gain in importance. However, strong ideological contradictions between quantitative and qualitative social research have so far prevented a faster increase in the use of triangulation.

distribution

Parallel to the importance of qualitative methods in the various social science disciplines, triangulation is particularly widespread in their strongholds such as ethnography ; In contrast, it is less common in more quantitative disciplines such as economics . Across disciplines, however, triangulation is more of a desideratum in textbooks than a research program widespread in practice, although, for example, in a 2004 survey of British educational researchers, 71% of all respondents stated that they would use triangulation. In contrast, however, there is an empirical finding that triangulation in the field of business administration declined in the 1990s compared to the 1980s. With regard to the research fields, triangulation is particularly common in nursing , health , tourism and educational research.

methodology

Triangulation is today, in addition to sequencing, in which qualitative and quantitative research strategies are applied one after the other, and hybridization, in which the mixing of methods can hardly be determined analytically, a core area of ​​the method combination in the social sciences. It should be noted, however, that due to the popularity of the term triangulation is by no means a clearly delimited research program.

Legitimation

In general, triangulation should give research results a higher level of plausibility and credibility . The basic idea is that a series of different measurements or analyzes with errors and problems in the aggregation would result in a more valid analysis, in that the weaknesses of one approach would be balanced out by the strengths of the other, because this would reveal errors, problems or measurement inaccuracies . However, matching triangulation results do not necessarily go hand in hand with high (external) validity; instead, triangulation consensus is necessary, but not sufficient for high validity. Recently, a number of researchers have moved away from traditional concepts of validity and now only suspect that triangulation would not necessarily produce more valid, but richer results. A frequently mentioned special form of this justification is the reference to the problem of connecting micro and macro levels theoretically and empirically, which in the eyes of some authors can only be done through the application of different methods and theories. Although the latter researchers more in the tradition of relativism and former rather a critical realism represented, both traditions found in the frequently cited in the Triangulationsliteratur aphorism by Richard Levins again:

"[O] ur truth is the intersection of independent lies."

- Richard Levins

These epistemological legitimizations of triangulation are contrasted with more pragmatic justifications in which researchers resort to new methods because the prediction results obtained with the methods previously used have turned out to be too poor.

Typology

In 1970, Norman K. Denzin developed what is still the most widespread legitimation and typology of triangulation. He differentiates between four forms of triangulation: data triangulation, researcher triangulation, theory triangulation and method triangulation.

Data triangulation

In data triangulation, data from different sources or different types of data from the same source are used in order to compensate for the different biases of different data material. In particular, the collection of data from people in different social positions is considered. In a study on language courses, for example, students, teachers and administrative staff can be interviewed, as each of these sources presumably has a different approach and point of view to the language courses. Alternatively or in connection with this procedure, for example experimental data, survey data or from a participant observation could be collected about the different groups of people. The various data, in turn, can be present and evaluated in various forms, for example interview data as a transcript (in various transcription forms) or as video or audio files.

Special forms of this type of triangulation are time and place triangulation, in which data is collected at different times or in different places in order to eliminate idiosyncrasies of the historical context.

Researcher triangulation

Another possibility is for different researchers to analyze the data. The participation of more than one researcher can defuse the (cognitive) conflict of interest that exists when the same researcher formulates research results theoretically and empirically substantiates them. Furthermore, it is assumed that different people pursue different (often implicit) theoretical approaches and thus a theory triangulation is carried out at the same time. Sometimes this even goes so far that researchers are deliberately recruited whose social background, for example their gender or social class, varies because that is considered to be important for their access to data. Finally, in qualitative social research, it is hoped that the researcher triangulation will also bring different researchers to the table with different skills in data analysis. Researcher triangulation is particularly often used in qualitative social research with participatory methods such as participant observation, but traditional quantitative methods such as content analysis also use this strategy and validate code books with the help of intercoder reliability .

Denzin recommends not letting students or doctoral candidates do the coding work as usual, but rather using experienced qualitative researchers.

Method triangulation

The triangulation of methods is, although the use of different methods, of course, often implies the most widely used method of triangulation and the use of different data and thus data triangulation. At the end of the 1950s and at the beginning of the 1960s, when triangulation was still more a domain of quantitative-postpositivist research, especially in psychology , this type of triangulation was limited to the use of different measurement models or operationalizations , whereby initially only the reliability of various operationalizations was checked and should be improved and later also more valid measurements were aimed for. Today the field of method triangulation is much broader, whereby not only different measurement methods but also different empirical research methods are used.

In method triangulation with Norman Denzin, a distinction is often made between triangulation within a method and between methods . When triangulating within a method , the same method is used in different ways. In the case of quantitative surveys, this can be done, for example, by using different indicators to measure the same construct; In qualitative research, this can be done, for example, in ethnographic studies by referring to several different study groups.

When combining different methods, there are two basic options: On the one hand, data from different sources, on the other hand, the same data can be evaluated in a combination of methods using different methods. Alternatively, the same data can be converted by converting mostly qualitative data into quantitative data by coding.

If you choose a combination of methods, you can combine both within and between methods in Denzin's typology . The combination within methods means that the same method is used in different ways, as is done, for example, with multidimensional scaling . Today, however, mostly between combined methods, and in this case this is usually the combination of one or more quantitative methods with one or more qualitative methods, in fact, this variant is the triangulation of methods now so dominant that some authors define it as only form of triangulation. Qualitative and quantitative methods can be combined in both directions. If you start with a quantitative survey, you can use statistical techniques to identify special cases, so-called outliers , for closer investigation with the help of qualitative methods, or you can avoid the typical "elite bias" showing through when selecting cases for qualitative investigations. In the opposite direction, one can test theories developed with the help of qualitative methods by developing and applying suitable quantitative measuring instruments in larger populations . A particularly common example of the latter version is the use of quantitative surveys following qualitative interviews .

However, such combinations of methods can - regardless of the respective ontological and epistemological assessment of the triangulation itself - result in problems if the methods used imply mutually contradicting ontologies . As a result, the combination of different methods always presupposes a decision in favor of a certain epistemological research paradigm.

Finally, when choosing a method, it must always be ensured that the chosen methods are congruent with the theories used; Mixing methods should not become an end in itself.

The orientation triangulation

In theory triangulation , different theoretical perspectives are applied to the same phenomenon or the same data. Denzin enumerates interactionism , Marxism , phenomenology , feminism , semiotics and cultural studies as possible theoretical perspectives.

This form of triangulation is probably the most difficult to achieve; some authors even think that the orientation triangulation is probably unattainable.

In the 1990s, Valerie Janesick proposed a fifth type of triangulation, interdisciplinary triangulation . Similar to theoretical triangulation, approaches from various disciplines are used here to develop the explanation of a phenomenon.

Type combinations

The different types of triangulation can of course also be combined with one another. A particularly well-known example of this kind within ethnomethodology is Cicourel's unlimited triangulation , in which both researchers and research subjects as well as research assistants participate in the generation and evaluation of various types of data. Different types of data are created from conversations between researchers and those being researched, for example by using different types of transcription to generate data for an analysis of the same conversations.

The role of computer programs

Screenshot of a CAQDAS package ( MAXQDA )

In the opinion of many authors, programs for computer-aided qualitative data analysis ( CAQDAS programs ) are helpful in data triangulation because they can organize a number of different types of data; Sometimes it is even hoped that the development of such software will provide an impetus for the wider spread of triangulation. With regard to data and method triangulation, these programs enable the qualitatively working researcher to transfer the data coded by him to statistical programs without loss. The investigation would gain in transparency and systematics. In addition, various collaboration functions of CAQDAS allow the systematic comparison of the analyzes of the same data material by different researchers.

In general, an increase in analytical rigor (“ rigor ”) and reliability is expected from the use of software in method triangulation ; Studies should become “deeper” through the use of software and show more details. A minority of authors, on the other hand, see the use of CAQDAS as a tendency towards rigidity in qualitative social research, which may lead to a deterioration in the research potential of these methods.

An application example for the use of CAQDAS in method triangulation is the extraction of transcription sections that have been quantitatively coded in the same way.

rating

Although triangulation seems intuitively tempting at first, on closer inspection it is not entirely unproblematic. In addition to the choice of metaphor, pragmatic research and epistemological problems in particular are raised.

Choice of metaphor

A recurring point of criticism is the choice of metaphor (the term triangulation comes from geodesy), the two-dimensionality of which would represent an outdated epistemological worldview.

Problems with conflicting results

On the purely pragmatic level, the question arises of how one should deal with triangulation results that neither reinforce nor enrich one another, but contradict one another. In practice, researchers tend to trust results obtained through qualitative methods, which is more likely to be owed to the emotional involvement of the researchers with qualitative data than to a formal-logical justification for legitimation. However, there is still no well-founded solution to this problem. Alan Bryman then succinctly recommends using inconsistencies as the starting point for new ideas to improve theory.

Ontological and Epistemological Questions

By far the harshest criticisms of triangulation stem from epistemological and ontological considerations. The accusation of realism deserves special mention.

Realism reproach

Like all methods of empirical social research, triangulation also has epistemological premises. In this case it is a ( naive ) realism that the proponents of triangulation are accused of, especially from the constructivist side, because triangulation necessarily presupposes the existence of an objective reality. Some authors, including Norman WH Blaikie and Yvonna S. Lincoln , even believe that triangulation in practice only takes place within ( post- ) positivist approaches. Other authors, including Clive Seale , deny this accusation that triangulation, despite its affinity for realism, can also be used in other epistemological paradigms. In particular, a pragmatism of Dewey's style is also well suited as an “epistemological partner”.

Alternative to or confirmation of the idea of ​​validity?

On the other hand, representatives of postmodernism warn that triangulation fails to recognize that every method throws a different view of a phenomenon; Therefore, instead of triangulation, they propose crystallization in the combination of methods, in which precisely non-equivalent results are to be achieved.

status

Regardless of all the advantages and disadvantages of triangulation, however, it can be stated that, despite numerous supporters, it is mostly not seriously considered by the majority of social science researchers who tend towards postmodernism.

literature

  • Uwe Flick : Triangulation: An Introduction . 2nd Edition. VS Verlag, Wiesbaden 2008, ISBN 978-3-531-15666-8 .
  • Kelle, U. (2014). Mixed methods. In manual methods of empirical social research (pp. 153-166). Springer VS, Wiesbaden.
  • Kuckartz, U. (2014). Mixed Methods: methodology, research designs and analytical methods. Springer publishing house.
  • Flick, U. (2011). Method triangulation in qualitative research. In triangulation (pp. 27-50). VS publishing house for social sciences.

Individual evidence

  1. ^ A b Norman WH Blaikie: A Critique of the Use of Triangulation in Social Research . In: Quality & Quantity . tape 25 , no. 2 , May 1991, pp. 115-136, p. 115 , doi : 10.1007 / BF00145701 .
  2. ↑ Nigel Fielding, Jane L. Fielding: Linking data: The Articulation of Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Social Research . Sage, London & Beverly Hills, CA 1986, ISBN 0-8039-2518-2 , pp. 33 .
  3. ↑ a b Wendy K. Olson: Triangulation in social research: Qualitative and quantitative methods can really be mixed . In: Developments in Sociology . tape 20 , 2004, pp. 103-121, p. 103 .
  4. ↑ Uwe Flick: Triangulation: An Introduction . 2nd Edition. VS Verlag, Wiesbaden 2008, ISBN 978-3-531-15666-8 , pp. 7 .
  5. ^ Norman WH Blaikie: A critique of the use of triangulation in social research . In: Quality & Quantity . tape 25 , no. 2 , 1991, p. 115-136, p. 117 , doi : 10.1007 / BF00145701 .
  6. ↑ Uwe Flick: Triangulation: An Introduction . 2nd Edition. VS Verlag, Wiesbaden 2008, ISBN 978-3-531-15666-8 , pp. 8 .
  7. ^ Howard S. Becker: Problems of Inference and Proof in Participant Observation . In: American Sociological Review . tape 23 , no. 6 , 1958, pp. 652-660, p. 657 , JSTOR : 2089053 .
  8. ↑ a b Uwe Flick: Triangulation: An Introduction . 2nd Edition. VS Verlag, Wiesbaden 2008, ISBN 978-3-531-15666-8 , pp. 9 .
  9. ↑ Todd D. Jick: Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Triangulation in Action . In: Administrative Science Quarterly . tape 24 , no. 4 , 1979, p. 602-611, p. 602 , JSTOR : 2392366 .
  10. ^ R. Burke Johnson: Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come . In: Educational Researcher . tape 33 , no. 7 , 2004, p. 14-26, p. 14 f . ( sagepub.com ).
  11. ^ Nigel Fielding, Margit Schreier: On the Compatibility between Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methods . In: FQS - Forum Qualitative Social Research . tape 2 , no. 1 , February 2001, chap. 4 , p. 13 ( qualitative-research.net [accessed October 22, 2008]).
  12. ^ Paul Downward, Andrew Mearman: Retroduction as mixed-methods triangulation in economic research: Reorienting economics into social science . In: Cambridge Journal of Economics . tape 31 , no. 1 , 2007, p. 77-99, p. 80 ( oxfordjournals.org ).
  13. ^ Nigel Fielding, Margit Schreier: On the Compatibility between Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methods . In: FQS - Forum Qualitative Social Research . tape 2 , no. 1 , February 2001, chap. 4 , p. 3 ( qualitative-research.net [accessed October 22, 2008]).
  14. ↑ Stephen Gorard, Katie Rushforth, Chris Taylor: Is There a Shortage of Quantitative Work in Education Research? In: Oxford Review of Education . tape 30 , no. 3 , 2004, p. 371-395, p. 385 , JSTOR : 4127142 .
  15. ↑ Terri A. Scandura, Ethlyn A. Williams: Research Methodology in Management: Current Practices, Trends, and Implications for Future Research . In: The Academy of Management Journal . tape 43 , no. 6 , December 2000, pp. 1248-1264, p. 1256 , JSTOR : 1556348 .
  16. ^ A b Paul Downward, Andrew Mearman: Retroduction as mixed-methods triangulation in economic research: Reorienting economics into social science . In: Cambridge Journal of Economics . tape 31 , no. 1 , 2007, p. 77-99, p. 82 ( oxfordjournals.org ).
  17. ^ Nigel Fielding, Margit Schreier: On the Compatibility between Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methods . In: FQS - Forum Qualitative Social Research . tape 2 , no. 1 , February 2001, chap. 4 , p. 11 ( qualitative-research.net [accessed October 22, 2008]).
  18. ^ Nigel Fielding, Margit Schreier: On the Compatibility between Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methods . In: FQS - Forum Qualitative Social Research . tape 2 , no. 1 , February 2001, chap. 4 , p. 12 ( qualitative-research.net [accessed October 22, 2008]).
  19. ↑ John W. Creswell, Dana L. Miller: Determining Validity in Qualitative Inquiry . In: Theory into Practice . tape 39 , no. 3 , 2000, pp. 124-130, p. 124 , JSTOR : 1477543 . Dietmar Janetzko: Nonreactive Data Collection on the Internet . In: Nigel G. Fielding, Raymond M. Lee, Grant Blank (Eds.): The SAGE Handbook of Online Research Methods . Sage, Los Angeles 2008, ISBN 1-4129-2293-3 , pp.
     161-173, p. 162 .
  20. ^ Eugene J. Webb, Donald T. Campbell, Richard D. Schwartz, Lee Sechrest: Unobtrusive Measures: Non-reactive Research in the Social Sciences . Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, London & New Delhi 2000, ISBN 978-0-7619-2012-0 , pp. 3 f . (First edition: 1966).
  21. ↑ Kenneth A. Bollen, Pamela Paxton: Detection and Determinants of Bias in Subjective Measures . In: American Sociological Review . tape 63 , no. 3 , 1998, p. 465-478, p. 476 , JSTOR : 2657559 .
  22. ^ Fu-Jin Shih: Triangulation in nursing research: Issues of conceptual clarity and purpose . In: Journal of Advanced Nursing . tape 28 , no. 3 , 1998, p. 631-641, p. 633 . Jo Moran-Ellis, Victoria D. Alexander, Ann Cronin, Mary Dickinson, Jane Fielding, Judith Sleney, Hilary Thomas: Triangulation and integration: processes, claims and implications . In: Qualitative Research . tape
     6 , no. 1 , 2006, p. 45-59, p. 55 ( sagepub.com ).
  23. ↑ a b Julia Brannen: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches: An Overview . In: Julia Brannen (Ed.): Mixing Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Research . Ashgate, Aldershot, England 1992, ISBN 1-85628-184-1 , pp. 3-38, p. 11 f .
  24. ↑ z. B., Johnathan A. Smith: Evolving Issues in Qualitative Psychology . In: James TE Richardson (Ed.): The Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods for Psychology and the Social Sciences . 2nd Edition. BPS Blackwell, Leicester 2002, ISBN 978-1-85433-204-2 , pp. 189-202, p. 193 . Nigel Fielding, Jane L. Fielding: Linking data: The Articulation of Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Social Research . Sage, London & Beverly Hills, CA 1986, ISBN 0-8039-2518-2 , pp.
     23 .
  25. ↑ " Our truth lies at the crossroads of independent lies " (translation: user: Fossa ).
  26. ^ Richard Levins: The Strategy of Model Building in Population Biology . In: American Scientist . tape 54 , 1966, pp. 421-431, p. 423 .
  27. ^ Norman K. Denzin: The Research Act in Sociology: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods . 1970, p. 300 ff .
  28. ^ A b James Dean Brown: Using Surveys in Language Programs . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2001, ISBN 0-521-79216-9 , pp. 228 .
  29. ↑ Hammersley, Martyn, Paul Atkinson: Ethnography: Principles in Practice . Tavistock, London, England 1983, p. 198 .
  30. ↑ James Dean Brown: Using Surveys in Language Programs . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2001, ISBN 0-521-79216-9 , pp. 229 .
  31. ^ A b c Norman K. Denzin: The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods . 3. Edition. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 1989, ISBN 0-13-774381-5 , pp. 239 (first edition: 1970).
  32. ^ Matthew B. Miles, A. Michael Huberman: Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New Methods . Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA 1984, ISBN 0-8039-2274-4 , pp. 234 .
  33. ↑ Julia Brannen: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches: An Overview . In: Julia Brannen (Ed.): Mixing Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Research . Ashgate, Aldershot, England 1992, ISBN 1-85628-184-1 , pp. 3-38, p. 12 .
  34. ↑ MA Koelen, L Vaandrager, C Colomer: Health promotion research: dilemmas and challenges . In: Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health . tape 55 , no. 4 , 2001, p. 257-262, p. 260 ( bmj.com ).
  35. ↑ Uwe Flick: Triangulation: An Introduction . 2nd Edition. VS Verlag, Wiesbaden 2008, ISBN 978-3-531-15666-8 , pp. 10 . Nigel Fielding, Margit Schreier: On the Compatibility between Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methods . In: FQS - Forum Qualitative Social Research . tape
     2 , no. 1 , February 2001, chap. 4 , p. 12 ( qualitative-research.net [accessed October 22, 2008]).
  36. ^ Alan Bryman: Quantity and Quality in Social Research . Unwin Hyman, London, England 1988, ISBN 0-04-312039-3 , pp. 131 .
  37. ↑ Donald T. Campbell, Donald W. Fiske: Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix . In: Psychological Bulletin . tape 56 , no. 2 , March 1959, p. 81-105 .
  38. ^ Eugene J. Webb, Donald T. Campbell, Richard D. Schwartz, Lee Sechrest: Unobtrusive Measures: Non-reactive Research in the Social Sciences . Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, London & New Delhi 2000, ISBN 978-0-7619-2012-0 , pp. 176 (first edition: 1966).
  39. ^ Norman K. Denzin: The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods . Aldine, Chicago, IL 1970, ISBN 0-408-70124-2 , pp. 307 f .
  40. ↑ Todd D. Jick: Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Triangulation in Action . In: Administrative Science Quarterly . tape 24 , no. 4 , December 1979, pp. 602-611, p. 603 , JSTOR : 2392366 .
  41. ^ Barney G. Glaser, Anselm L. Strauss: Discovery of Substantive Theory: A Basic Strategy underlying Qualitative Research . In: American Behavioral Scientist . tape 8 , 1965, p. 5-12, p. 7 ( sagepub.com ).
  42. ↑ a b Pat Bazeley: The Contribution of Computer Software to Integrating Qualitative and Quantitative Data and Analyzes . In: Research in the Schools . tape 13 , no. 1 , 2006, p. 64-74 .
  43. ^ Martyn Hammersley: The Relationship between Qualitative and Quantitative Research: Paradigm Loyalty versus Methodological Eclecticism . In: John T. Richardson (Ed.): Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods for Psychology and the Social Sciences . 2nd Edition. BPS Blackwell, Leicester 2002, ISBN 978-1-85433-204-2 , pp. 159-174, p. 167 .
  44. ↑ a b Berth Danermark, Mats Ekström, Liselotte Jakobsen, Jan Ch Karlsson. Explaining Society: An Introduction to Critical Realism in the Social Sciences . Routeledge, London 2002, ISBN 0-415-22183-8 , pp. 153 ff .
  45. ↑ Sam D. Sieber: The Integration of Fieldwork and Survey Methods . In: American Journal of Sociology . tape 78 , no. 3 , May 1973, pp. 1335-1359, p. 1352 , JSTOR : 2776390 .
  46. ↑ Uwe Flick: Designing Qualitative Research . Sage Publications, London, England & Thousand Oaks, CA 2007, ISBN 978-0-7619-4976-3 , pp. 81 .
  47. ^ Norman WH Blaikie: A critique of the use of triangulation in social research . In: Quality & Quantity . tape 25 , no. 2 , 1991, p. 115-136, p. 122 f ., doi : 10.1007 / BF00145701 .
  48. ↑ Jennifer Greene, Charles McClintock: Triangulation in Evaluation . In: Evaluation Review . tape 9 , no. 5 , 1985, pp. 523-545, p. 541 , doi : 10.1007 / BF00145701 .
  49. ↑ Wilfreda E Thurston, Leslie Cove, Lynn M Meadows: Methodological Congruence in Complex and Collaborative Mixed Method Projects . In: International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches . tape 2 , no. 1 , 2008, p. 2–14, p. 4 ( e-contentmanagement.com ).
  50. ^ Norman K. Denzin: The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods . 3. Edition. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 1989, ISBN 0-13-774381-5 , pp. 240 f . (First edition: 1970).
  51. ^ Norman K. Denzin: The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods . 3. Edition. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 1989, ISBN 0-13-774381-5 , pp. 241 (first edition: 1970).
  52. ^ Sandra Mathison: Why triangulate? In: Educational Researcher . tape 17 , no. 2 , 1988, p. 13-17, p. 14 ( sagepub.com ).
  53. ↑ Valerie J. Janesick: The Dance of Qualitative Research Design: Metaphor, Methodolatry, and Meaning . In: Norman K. Denzin, Yvonna S. Lincoln (Eds.): Handbook of Qualitative Research . Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA 1994, pp. 209-218, p. 214 f .
  54. ^ Aaron V. Cicourel: Cognitive Sociology: Language and Meaning in Social Interaction . The Free Press, New York, NY 1973, pp. 124 .
  55. ^ Nancy L. Leech, Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie: An Array of Qualitative Data Analysis Tools: A Call for Data Analysis Triangulation . In: School Psychology Quarterly . tape 22 , no. 4 , 2007, p. 557-584, p. 577 ff .
  56. ↑ Terri A. Scandura, Ethlyn A. Williams: Research Methodology in Management: Current Practices, Trends, and Implications for Future Research . In: The Academy of Management Journal . tape 43 , no. 6 , December 2000, pp. 1248-1264, p. 1262 , JSTOR : 1556348 .
  57. ↑ a b Phillip Mayring: Combination and integration of qualitative and quantitative analysis . In: FQS - Forum Qualitative Social Research . tape 2 , no. 1 , February 2001, chap. 6 , p. 5 ( qualitative-research.net [accessed October 22, 2008]). Patricia Bazeley: Epilogue: Software tools and the development of multiple and mixed methods research . tape
     2 , no. 1 , p. 127-132, p. 128 f .
  58. ^ Eugenio de Gregorio, Francesco Arcidiacono: Computer-assisted Analysis in Social Sciences: A unique strategy to carry on mixed and blended research? In: International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches . tape 2 , no. 1 , 2008, p. 31-35, p. 31 ( e-contentmanagement.com ).
  59. ↑ Patricia Bazeley: Epilogue: Software tools and the development of multiple and mixed methods research . tape 2 , no. 1 , p. 127-132, p. 128 f .
  60. ↑ Sharon Andrew, Yenna Salamonson, Elizabeth J Halcomb 3: Integrating mixed methods data analysis using NVivo: An example examining attrition and persistence of nursing students . In: International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches . tape 2 , no. 1 , 2008, p. 36-43, p. 37 .
  61. ^ Katie Macmillan, Thomas Koenig: The Wow Factor: Preconceptions and Expectations for Data Analysis Software in Qualitative Research . In: Social Science Computer Review . tape 22 , no. 2 , 2004, p. 179-186 ( sagepub.com ).
  62. ↑ Maxine Pfannkuch , Chris J. Wild: Statistical Thinking and Statistical Practice: Themes Gleaned from Professional Statisticians . In: Statistical Science . tape 15 , no. 2 , 2000, pp. 132-152, p. 151 , JSTOR : 2676728 .
  63. ^ Alan Bryman: Quantitative and Qualitative Research: Further Reflection on their Integration . In: Julia Brannen (Ed.): Mixing Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Research . Ashgate, Aldershot, England 1992, ISBN 1-85628-184-1 , pp. 57-78, p. 63 .
  64. ^ A b Alan Bryman: Quantitative and Qualitative Research: Further Reflection on their Integration . In: Julia Brannen (Ed.): Mixing Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Research . Ashgate, Aldershot, England 1992, ISBN 1-85628-184-1 , pp. 57-78, p. 64 .
  65. ^ Alan Bryman: Quantity and Quality in Social Research . Unwin Hyman, London, England 1988, ISBN 0-04-312039-3 , pp. 133 .
  66. ↑ Norman K. Denzin, Yvonna S. Lincoln: The Art and Practices of Interpretation, Evaluation, and Presentation . In: Norman K. Denzin, Yvonna S. Lincoln (Eds.): The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research . Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA 2005, ISBN 978-0-7619-2757-0 , pp. 909-914, p. 912 . Egon G. Guba, Yvonna S. Lincoln: Fourth Generation Evaluation . Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA 1989, ISBN 0-8039-3235-9 , pp.
     240 f .
  67. ^ Norman WH Blaikie: A Critique of the Use of Triangulation in Social Research . In: Quality & Quantity . tape 25 , no. 2 , May 1991, pp. 115-136, p. 125 , doi : 10.1007 / BF00145701 . Egon G. Guba, Yvonna S. Lincoln: Fourth Generation Evaluation . Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA 1989, ISBN 0-8039-3235-9 , pp.
     162 .
  68. ^ Clive Seale: The Quality of Qualitative Research . Sage Publications, London, England 1999, ISBN 0-7619-5597-6 , pp. 53 ff .
  69. ^ R. Burke Johnson: Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come . In: Educational Researcher . tape 33 , no. 7 , 2004, p. 14-26, p. 16 f . ( sagepub.com ).
  70. ↑ Valerie J. Janesick: The Choreography of Qualitative Research Design: Minuets, improvisation, and Crystallization . In: Norman K. Denzin, Yvonna S. Lincoln (Eds.): Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry . 2nd Edition. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA 2003, ISBN 0-7619-2691-7 , pp. 46-79, p. 67 . Laurel Richardson: Writing: A Method of Inquiry . In: Norman K. Denzin, Yvonna S. Lincoln (Eds.): Handbook of Qualitative Research . Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA 1994, pp.
     516-529, p. 517 .
  71. ^ Bernice A. Pescosolido, Beth A. Rubin: The Web of Group Affiliations Revisited: Social Life, Postmodernism, and Sociology . In: American Sociological Review . tape 65 , no. 1 , 2000, pp. 52-76, pp. 62, 71 , JSTOR : 2657289 .
This article was added to the list of articles worth reading on November 28, 2008 in this version .