Vertaile menetelmiä
Tarkastele valitsemiasi menetelmiä rinnakkain; eroavat rivit korostetaan.
| Laadullisesti painottunut sekamenetelmämatriisi× | Laatuun painottuva monimenetelmällinen suunnittelu× | |
|---|---|---|
| Tieteenala | Tutkimusasetelma | Tutkimusasetelma |
| Menetelmäperhe | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Syntyvuosi≠ | 2003–2009 | 1991–2003 (formalized in mixed methods typologies) |
| Kehittäjä≠ | 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 |
| Tyyppi≠ | Mixed methods research design variant | Mixed methods research design |
| Alkuperäislähde≠ | 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 |
| Rinnakkaisnimet | 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 |
| Liittyvät≠ | 5 | 6 |
| Tiivistelmä≠ | 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. |
| ScholarGateAineisto ↗ |
|
|