Porównaj metody

	Jakościowo-dominujący wielopoziomowy projekt mieszany	Jakościowo-priorytetowy mieszany projekt badawczy
Dziedzina	Projektowanie badań	Projektowanie badań
Rodzina	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Rok powstania	2000s–2010s	1991–2003 (formalized in mixed methods typologies)
Twórca	Tashakkori & Teddlie; Leech & Onwuegbuzie	Janice Morse; John W. Creswell & Vicki L. Plano Clark
Typ	Mixed methods research design	Mixed methods research design
Źródło pierwotne	Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (Eds.). (2010). SAGE Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research (2nd ed.). Sage Publications. ISBN: 978-1412972666	Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (3rd ed.). Sage. ISBN: 978-1483344379
Inne nazwy	QUAL-dominant multilevel MMR, qualitative-priority multilevel mixed methods, qual-dominant nested multilevel design, QUAL+quan multilevel design	QUAL-dominant mixed methods, qualitative-dominant mixed design, qual-priority MMR, qualitative-weighted mixed methods
Pokrewne	4	6
Podsumowanie	Qualitative-dominant multilevel mixed methods design addresses research questions nested across two or more social levels — such as individuals within classrooms within schools — while assigning primary inferential weight to the qualitative strand. Quantitative data collected at one or more levels serve a supporting role: they contextualize, corroborate, or sharpen qualitative findings rather than generate the principal conclusions. The design is especially productive when understanding processes and meanings at multiple organizational layers is more important than population-level statistical estimates.	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.