Dedoose Publications

PUBLICATIONS

Dedoose has been field-tested and journal-proven by leading academic institutions and market researchers worldwide. Thousands of prominent researchers across the US and abroad have benefited from early versions of Dedoose in their qualitative and mixed methods work and have laid an outstanding publication and report trail along the way.

Education Based Publications

Mapping the Field of Mixed Methods Research

Creswell, John W. (2009)

Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 3(2), 95-108

Terrific survey of what’s happening in the mixed methods literature and mixed methods field. Discusses a range of topics raised at the 2008 Mixed Methods Conference and provides a “Map” of these topics broken out across 5 domains: philosophical/theoretical, techniques, nature of mixed methods, the adoption and use of mixed methods, and the politicization of mixed methods. Concludes with a discussion of incorporating mixed methods into other designs, paradigms, general design issues, and advocacy through extramural funding.
Education Based Publications

Introduction to Mixed Method and Mixed Model Studies in the Social and Behavioral Sciences: Paradigm Wars and Mixed Methodologies.

Tashakkori, Abbas & Teddlie, Charles (1998)

A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie, Mixed Methodology: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, pp. 20-39.

Encourages a focus on the research question as a guide to deciding on methods to apply in a particular study and comfort in cross the boundaries between pure interpretations of particular paradigmatic characteristics. Describes the nature and limitation of various mono-methods. Suggests that incorporating a pragmatic approach with a variety of appropriate methods helps gain a broader and more comprehensive perspective on the research question.
Policy Based Publications

Making it Work: Low-Wage Employment, Family Life, and Child Development

Yoshikawa, Hiro, Weisner, Thomas S., & Lowe, Edward (2006)

New York: Russell Sage Foundation

Low-skilled women in the 1990s took widely different paths in trying to support their children. Some held good jobs with growth potential, some cycled in and out of low-paying jobs, some worked part time, and others stayed out of the labor force entirely. Scholars have closely analyzed the economic consequences of these varied trajectories, but little qualitative or mixed method research has focused on the consequences of a mother’s career path on her children’s development. Making It Work, edited by Hirokazu Yoshikawa, Thomas Weisner, and Edward Lowe, looks past the economic statistics to illustrate how different employment trajectories affect the social and emotional lives of poor women and their children. Making It Work examines Milwaukee’s New Hope program, an experiment testing the effectiveness of an anti-poverty initiative that provided health and child care subsidies, wage supplements, and other services to full-time low-wage workers. Employing parent surveys, teacher reports, child assessment measures, ethnographic studies, and state administrative records, Making It Work provides a detailed picture of how a mother’s work trajectory affects her, her family, and her children’s school performance, social behavior, and expectations for the future. Rashmita Mistry and Edward D. Lowe find that increases in a mother’s income were linked to higher school performance in her children. Without large financial worries, mothers gained extra confidence in their ability to parent, which translated into better test scores and higher teacher appraisals for their children. JoAnn Hsueh finds that the children of women with erratic work schedules and non-standard hours—conditions endemic to the low-skilled labor market—exhibited higher levels of anxiety and depression. Conversely, Noemi Enchautegui-de-Jesus, Hirokazu Yoshikawa, and Vonnie McLoyd discover that better job quality predicted lower levels of acting-out and withdrawal among children. Perhaps most surprisingly, Anna Gassman-Pines, Hirokazu Yoshikawa, and Sandra Nay note that as wages for these workers rose, so did their marriage rates, suggesting that those worried about family values should also be concerned with alleviating poverty in America. It is too simplistic to say that parental work is either “good” or “bad” for children. Making It Work gives a nuanced view of how job quality, flexibility, and wages are of the utmost importance for the well-being of low-income parents and children.Looks past the economic statistics to illustrate how different employment trajectories affect the social and emotional lives of poor women and their children.
Education Based Publications

Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Research: How is it Done?

Bryman, Alan (2006)

Qualitative Research, 6(1), 97-113

This article seeks to move beyond typologies of the ways in which quantitative and qualitative research are integrated to an examination of the ways that they are combined in practice. Draws on a content analysis of methods and design from 232 articles using combined methods. Examine and discusses the rationales provide for employing mixed-methods and whether they correspond to actual practice.
Education Based Publications

Research Design Issues for Mixed Method and Mixed Model Studies

Tashakkori, Abbas & Teddlie, Charles (1998)

A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie, Mixed Methodology: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, pp. 40-58. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications

Discusses the concept of triangulation from various perspectives and the variety of approaches to implementing mixed methods research. Builds on Patton’s (1990) discussion of ‘mixed form’ design to a broader model in order to develop a taxonomy for distinguishing various mixed method designs and approaches.
Education Based Publications

Advances in mixed methods research

Bergman, M. M (2008)

London: Sage

Advances in Mixed Methods Research provides an essential introduction to the fast-growing field of mixed methods research. Bergman's book examines the current state of mixed-methods research, exploring exciting new ways of conceptualizing and conducting empirical research in the social and health sciences. Illuminating new ways of conceptualizing and conducting empirical research in the social sciences and humanities, this book contains contributions from some of the world's leading experts on qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. The contributions cover all of the main practical and methodological issues and represent a number of different visions of what mixed methods research is and where it is going. Contributions from the world's leading experts in qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches are brought together, clearing the way for a more constructive approach to social research. These contributions cover the main practical and methodological issues and include a number of different visions of what mixed methods research is. The discussion also covers the use of mixed methods in a diverse range of fields, including sociology, education, politics, psychology, computational science and methodology. This book represents an important contribution to the ongoing debate surrounding the use of mixed methods in the social sciences and health research, and presents a convincing argument that the conventional, paradigmatic view of qualitative and quantitative research is outdated and in need of replacement. It will be essential reading for anyone actively engaged in qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods research and for students of social research methods. Manfred Max Bergman is Chair of Methodology and Political Sociology at the University of Basel. Very good text wherein the mixed methods approach is coherently developed and its current (and potential) applications are described in clear, useful and interesting ways. I particularly liked the depth of understanding with Bergman demonstrating subtle implications of the advances. For the undergraduate level, I felt this was perhaps too advanced but well worth a read if the mixed methods approach is adopted. Mr Paul Buckley Nursing , Bradford University
Education Based Publications

Toward a Definition of Mixed Methods Research

Johnson, R. Burke, Onwuegbuzie, Anthony J., & Turner, Lisa A. (2007)

Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 112-133

Examines the definition of the emerging mixed methods research field. Surveyed major authors in the mixed method literature with regard to definition for the field and key issues that need to be addressed as the field advances. Results show a consensus of mixed methods as an emerging ‘research paradigm’ and a breadth of opinion around definition for the field.
Education Based Publications

Focus Groups

Morgan, David L. (2004)

S. N. Hesse-Biber and P. Leavy (Eds.), Approaches to Qualitative Research: A Reader on Theory and Practice, pp. 263-285. New York, NY: Oxford University Press

Written by a long-time authority on focus group, presents a brief history of focus group application up to, and including, information on the variety of current uses across many disciplines. Great section on the uses of focus groups in combination with other methods with a full compare/contrast discussion. Finally, goes into the specifics on ‘how to’ plan and conduct effective group data collection. My own preference (Morgan, 1996) is for a more inclusive approach that broadly defines focus groups as a research technique that collects data through group interaction on a topic determined by the researcher. In essence, it is the researcher's interest that provides the focus, whereas the data themselves come from the group interaction. One reason for favoring an inclusive approach is that the exclusive approaches do not really exclude very much. Other than focus groups, the primary categories of group interviews in the existing typologies are things that are manifestly different from focus groups. On the one hand, there are nominal groups and Delphi groups (Stewart & Shamdasani, 1990), which do not involve actual group interaction. On the other hand, there is the observation of naturally occurring groups, which typically do not involve the researcher in determining the topic of discussion. Thus, little is gained by excluding these categories of data collection because they already fall outside the broad definition of focus groups offered here. Among the more specific criteria that could be used to distinguish focus groups from other types of group interviews, both Frey and Fontana (1989) and Khan and Manderson (1992) assert that focus groups are more formal. In particular, they argue that focus groups are likely to involve inviting participants to the discussion and they also stress the distinctive role of the moderator. Although there is no doubt that group interviews vary along a continuum from more formally structured interaction to more informal gatherings, I do not believe it is possible to draw a line between formal and informal group interviews in a way that defines some as focus groups and others as something else. Instead, I find it more useful to think that the degree of formal structure in a focus group is a decision that the research makes according to the specific purposes of the research project. In par-ticular, the use of either a more formal or a less formal approach will depend on the researcher's goals, the nature of the research setting, and the likely reaction of the participants to the research topic. Among the other criteria that have been offered as distinguishing features of focus groups are their size and the use of specialized facilities for the interview (McQuarrie, 1996). Again, however, these supposedly exclu¬sive criteria are mostly a matter of degree. Who is to say when a group is too large or too small to be called a focus group or when a setting is too casual to qualify? Rather than generate pointless debates about what is or is not a focus group, I prefer to treat focus groups as a "broad umbrella" or "big tent" that can include many different variations. Of course, this approach requires researchers to make choices about doing focus groups one way rather than another. Fortunately, this need to make explicit decisions about data collection strategies is a familiar concern to social scientists, and it comes under the heading of "research design." As social scientists have gained increasing experience with focus groups, we also have produced insights into the situations in which different research designs are either more or less likely to be effective (e.g., Krueger, 1993; Morgan, 1992.a, 1995).
Education Based Publications

A Typology of Mixed Methods Sampling Designs in Social Science Research

Onwuegbuzie, Anthony J. & Collins, K. M. T. (2007)

The Qualitative Report, 12(2), 281-316

Introduces a framework for developing sampling designs in mixed methods research. Discusses sample frames, recommended sample sizes, a typology for classification of strategies, guidance for sampling decisions, and issues related to how sampling decisions impact generalization.
Education Based Publications

Research Design Issues for Mixed Method and Mixed Model Studies

Tashakkori, Abbas & Teddlie, Charles (1998)

A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie, Mixed Methodology: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, pp. 40-58

Discusses the concept of triangulation from various perspectives and the variety of approaches to implementing mixed methods research. Builds on Patton’s (1990) discussion of ‘mixed form’ design to a broader model in order to develop a taxonomy for distinguishing various mixed method designs and approaches.
11-20 of 37