Skip to contentScholarGate
LibraryBookshelfDeskReview StudioAssistant
Sign in
On this page
IntuitionHow it worksWhen to use itStrengths & limitationsCommon pitfallsApplicationsFrequently asked🔒 Read the full methodSourcesRelated methods
Cite this pageSpotted an issue on this page? Report or suggest a fix →
Home›Research Design›Participatory Exploratory Sequential Mixed Methods
Process / pipelineMixed methods design

Participatory Exploratory Sequential Mixed Methods

Participatory Exploratory Sequential Mixed Methods Design · Also known as: participatory QUAN→QUAL design, community-based exploratory sequential design, participatory two-phase mixed methods, QUAL→QUAN participatory design

Participatory exploratory sequential mixed methods is a two-phase design in which an initial qualitative phase — conducted with and by community members — generates findings that are used to build or refine a quantitative instrument or intervention, which is then tested in a second phase. The participatory lens ensures that affected communities co-own the research agenda, the data, and the interpretation throughout both phases.

ScholarGate
  1. Process / pipeline
  2. v1
  3. 2 Sources
  4. PUBLISHED
Cite this page →
Tools & resources
Download slides
Learn & explore

Read the full method

Members only

Sign in with a free account to read this section.

Sign in

Method map

The neighbourhood of related methods — select a node to explore.

Participatory Exploratory Sequential Mixed Methods
Concurrent Triangulation…Exploratory Sequential M…Multilevel Mixed Methods…Participatory Action Res…Transformative Mixed Met…Participatory Concurrent…Participatory Concurrent…

When to use it

Use this design when you need to develop or validate a quantitative measure or test an intervention in a population whose lived experience and cultural context are not adequately captured by existing instruments — and when community ownership of the research process is ethically or practically essential. It is well-suited to health disparities research, Indigenous and minority community studies, international development evaluation, and social program assessment. Do NOT use it when community engagement is only a token gesture (true participatory work requires sustained time and trust), when a validated instrument already exists and community adaptation is minor, or when timelines or budgets cannot accommodate the relationship-building and co-design phases that the participatory approach demands.

Strengths & limitations

Strengths
  • Produces quantitative instruments grounded in community-held concepts, improving construct validity and cultural relevance.
  • Community co-ownership increases trust, participation rates, and the likelihood that findings will be used by the community.
  • The sequential structure provides a logical, defensible rationale for each methodological decision.
  • Integrates exploratory depth with statistical breadth, yielding findings credible to both qualitative and quantitative audiences.
  • Aligns with Indigenous research methodologies and social justice frameworks, making it appropriate for equity-focused research.
Limitations
  • Substantially more time-intensive than non-participatory designs; community engagement, co-design, and relationship-building add months to the timeline.
  • Power dynamics within research partnerships must be actively managed — tokenistic participation undermines the approach's core logic.
  • Instrument development quality depends on the richness and transferability of Phase 1 findings; thin qualitative data produce poor instruments.
  • Findings from Phase 2 may have limited generalizability beyond the specific community if the sample is small or purposive.
  • Requires researchers skilled in both qualitative fieldwork and quantitative instrument development, as well as in community engagement practice.

Frequently asked

How does this differ from a standard exploratory sequential design?

In a standard exploratory sequential design, the researcher controls the qualitative phase and uses its outputs to build the quantitative instrument. In the participatory variant, community members co-design the research questions, co-collect and co-analyze qualitative data, and co-develop the instrument. The sequential structure is the same, but the locus of control and the ethical commitments are fundamentally different.

What counts as genuine participation?

Genuine participation means community members have meaningful decision-making power — over research questions, data interpretation, and how findings are used — not just access to interviews. Practical markers include community members serving as co-investigators or advisory board members with real authority, community review of instruments and findings before finalization, and dissemination plans that prioritize community benefit.

How large should each phase sample be?

Phase 1 qualitative samples follow the same guidance as standalone qualitative studies — typically 10–30 participants for interviews or focus groups, aiming for thematic saturation. Phase 2 quantitative sample size depends on the statistical goal: if the purpose is instrument validation (e.g., confirmatory factor analysis), 200–500 responses are often recommended; if descriptive or testing a specific hypothesis, a power analysis should determine the target.

Can I use this design with online or remote communities?

Yes, digital participatory methods (online focus groups, virtual photovoice, co-design workshops via video conferencing) have been applied successfully. The challenges are relationship-building and trust formation without in-person contact, and ensuring digital equity — community members must have reliable access to the technology used. Remote application requires more deliberate investment in building rapport and verifying that participation is genuinely voluntary and informed.

What paradigm underpins this design?

The participatory exploratory sequential design typically operates under the transformative or advocacy paradigm described by Mertens, which holds that research must serve the interests of marginalized or underrepresented groups. Some practitioners also situate it within pragmatism. The key distinguishing feature is the explicit commitment to social justice and community benefit as primary research values, not merely methodological preferences.

Sources

  1. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications. ISBN: 978-1483344379
  2. Mertens, D. M. (2009). Transformative Research and Evaluation. Guilford Press. ISBN: 978-1593856205

How to cite this page

ScholarGate. (2026, June 3). Participatory Exploratory Sequential Mixed Methods Design. ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/research-design/participatory-exploratory-sequential-mixed-methods

Related methods

Concurrent Triangulation Mixed Methods DesignExploratory Sequential Mixed Methods DesignMultilevel Mixed Methods DesignParticipatory Action ResearchTransformative Mixed Methods Design

Which method?

Set this method beside its closest kin and read them side by side — the library lays the books on the table; the choice is yours.

  • Concurrent Triangulation Mixed Methods DesignResearch Design↔ compare
  • Exploratory Sequential Mixed Methods DesignResearch Design↔ compare
  • Multilevel Mixed Methods DesignResearch Design↔ compare
  • Participatory Action ResearchQualitative↔ compare
  • Transformative Mixed Methods DesignResearch Design↔ compare
Compare side by side →

Referenced by

Participatory Concurrent Embedded Mixed MethodsParticipatory Concurrent Triangulation Mixed Methods

Similar methods

Participatory Explanatory Sequential Mixed MethodsExploratory Sequential Mixed Methods DesignParticipatory Qualitative-Priority Mixed DesignEvaluation-focused exploratory sequential mixed methodsSequential Exploratory Mixed Methods DesignParticipatory Concurrent Embedded Mixed MethodsParticipatory Multiphase Mixed MethodsQualitative-dominant exploratory sequential mixed methods

Related reference concepts

Mixed-Methods Research in HealthcareCommunity Engagement and Participatory MethodsQualitative Research MethodsParticipatory and Co-DesignCommunity Health Program ModelsInterviews and Surveys

Spotted an issue on this page? Report or suggest a fix →

ScholarGate — Participatory Exploratory Sequential Mixed Methods (Participatory Exploratory Sequential Mixed Methods Design). Retrieved 2026-07-21 from https://scholargate.app/en/research-design/participatory-exploratory-sequential-mixed-methods · Dataset: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20539026
Quick facts
Originator
John W. Creswell & Vicki L. Plano Clark (exploratory sequential base); Donna M. Mertens (participatory/transformative lens)
Year
2007–2011 (participatory variant codified in Creswell & Plano Clark's typology expansions)
Type
Mixed methods research design
DataType
Qualitative data (Phase 1: interviews, focus groups, observation); quantitative data (Phase 2: surveys, instruments built from Phase 1)
Subfamily
Mixed methods design
Related methods
Concurrent Triangulation Mixed Methods DesignExploratory Sequential Mixed Methods DesignMultilevel Mixed Methods DesignParticipatory Action ResearchTransformative Mixed Methods Design
ScholarGate

A content-first reference library for research methods — what each one is, how it works, and where it comes from.

Open data (CC-BY)

Explore

  • Library
  • Search the library…
  • Browse by field
  • Fields
  • Journey
  • Compare
  • Which method?

Reference

  • Subjects
  • Atlas
  • Glossary
  • Methodology
  • Philosophy

Your tools

  • Bookshelf
  • Desk
  • Chat

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Contact
  • Suggest a method

Entries are compiled from published sources for reference. Verifying the accuracy and suitability of any information for your own use remains your responsibility.

© 2026 ScholarGate · A research-method reference library
  • Privacy
  • Cookies
  • Terms
  • Delete account