Сравнение на методи

	Матрица на смесени методи с доминиране на качествения подход	Дизайн със смесени методи с приоритет на качествените изследвания
Област	Дизайн на изследването	Дизайн на изследването
Семейство	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Година на възникване	2003–2009	1991–2003 (formalized in mixed methods typologies)
Създател	Charles Teddlie & Abbas Tashakkori (matrix framework); qualitative-dominant weighting drawn from Jennifer Greene and David Morgan	Janice Morse; John W. Creswell & Vicki L. Plano Clark
Тип	Mixed methods research design variant	Mixed methods research design
Основополагащ източник	Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of Mixed Methods Research: Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Sage. ISBN: 978-0761930129	Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (3rd ed.). Sage. ISBN: 978-1483344379
Други названия	QUAL-dominant MMM, qualitative-priority mixed methods matrix, QUAL-weighted matrix design, qual-dominant typology matrix	QUAL-dominant mixed methods, qualitative-dominant mixed design, qual-priority MMR, qualitative-weighted mixed methods
Свързани	5	6
Резюме	The qualitative-dominant mixed methods matrix is a design variant in which the researcher selects and positions a specific mixed methods design within a typological matrix — organized by timing (sequential vs. concurrent) and paradigm weighting — while assigning greater priority to the qualitative strand. Quantitative data play a supporting, supplementary role, and the final inferences are grounded primarily in qualitative findings.	Qualitative-priority mixed methods design is a mixed methods approach in which qualitative inquiry carries the greater weight — in terms of volume, analytical depth, and interpretive authority — while a supplementary quantitative strand provides supporting evidence. The design acknowledges that the phenomenon under study is best understood through meaning-making, lived experience, or social processes, with numbers used to corroborate or contextualize, not to dominate, the research story.