Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Mixed Methods Research
This Article
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vitale, D. C.
Right arrow Articles by Feild, H. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Integrating Qualitative and Quantitative Methods for Organizational Diagnosis

Possible Priming Effects?

Dean C. Vitale

Auburn University, Alabama

Achilles A. Armenakis

Auburn University, Alabama

Hubert S. Feild

Auburn University, Alabama

This study reviews considerations for integrating closed-ended items and open-ended questions in a single survey instrument, focusing on contextual effects as a potential pitfall in organizational diagnosis. A randomized posttest-only control group experiment was conducted in a field setting with a small (92 employees) for-profit firm wherein the experimental group received a mixed questionnaire (closed-ended, followed by open-ended, questions) and the control group received only open-ended questions. Individuals receiving the mixed survey responded with a lower response rate and fewer comments than those receiving only the open-ended questions. A thematic content analysis of responses revealed a practically significant difference between groups in respondents' perceptions of the organization's strengths. However, the reported weaknesses of the organization did not differ between groups.

Key Words: mixed methods • priming • survey instrument

Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol. 2, No. 1, 87-105 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/1558689807309968
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Journal of Mixed Methods ResearchHome page
V. Slonim-Nevo and I. Nevo
Conflicting Findings in Mixed Methods Research: An Illustration From an Israeli Study on Immigration
Journal of Mixed Methods Research, April 1, 2009; 3(2): 109 - 128.
[Abstract] [PDF]