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 Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
1558689808330621v1
3/2/109    most recent
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 Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Slonim-Nevo, V.
Right arrow Articles by Nevo, I.
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?

Conflicting Findings in Mixed Methods Research

An Illustration From an Israeli Study on Immigration

Vered Slonim-Nevo

Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel, slonim{at}bgu.ac.il

Isaac Nevo

Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel

Combining diverse methods in a single study raises a problem: What should be done when the findings of one method of investigation conflict with those of another? The authors illustrate this problem using an example in which three study phases—quantitative, qualitative, and intervention—are applied. The findings from the quantitative phase did not fit those from the qualitative phase; there were discrepancies within the qualitative phase itself, and the findings from the single-case evaluations of the intervention using standardized scales did not fit the findings derived from self-made scales. The authors explain these inconsistencies by way of the complementary approach: Conflicting findings should be integrated, and consistency is restored by admitting complexity in the phenomenon under investigation.

Key Words: inconsistent findings • mixed methods research • quantitative • qualitative • and intervention studies • single-case designs • immigrant adolescents

This version was published on April 1, 2009

Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol. 3, No. 2, 109-128 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/1558689808330621
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?