Mixed Methods Design

·         Response Guidelines

Reply to the posts of two peers in this discussion by asking a probing question or sharing material to expand the discussion. There needs to be separate responses for each peer supported with at least two references for each peer’s response.

1st peer posting

The research question under consideration for the pre-proposal assignment is to determine if the use of somatic experiencing (SE) therapy (by Peter Levine) is effective in reducing PTSD symptoms in clients diagnosed with PTSD.  A mixed method approach could be deployed for this study. The researcher could utilize an explanatory design in which she collects quantitative data on the outcomes of clients who are randomly assigned to either CBT or SE therapy to treat clients diagnosed with PTSD.  Based on the results, the researcher could then conduct a qualitative study that involves 6 clients and interview them to learn more about their experience and outcome. For example, if the quantitative study showed mixed results in the effectiveness of SE therapy; the counselor could interview a select group of clients to attempt to understand what might have contributed to the different outcomes. Did the different outcomes correlate with different age groups, genders, types of trauma, etc.

Utilizing a mixed method approach allows the researcher to further investigate and understand a phenomena by utilizing different types of data (Sheperis, 2010). A mixed method design can help researchers dig deep into their subject by collecting both quantitative and qualitative data. One disadvantage to utilizing a mixed method approach is the additional time required to conduct both types of research (Sheperis, 2010). It also requires expertise on behalf of the researcher to be able to competently conduct both types of research.

References

Sheperis, C. J., Young, J. S., & Daniels, M. H. (2010). Counseling research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc. ISBN: 9780131757288.

2nd peer posting

Mixed methods designs capitalize on the strengths of qualitative and quantitative designs. Mixed methods designs help clarify and assist in answering difficult questions and allow researchers to use two types of data to verify findings (Sheperis, Young, & Daniels, 2010, p. 188).  There are many different, about 40, types of mixed methods designs.  Some common ones include triangulation design, embedded design, explanatory design, and exploratory design.  Triangulation design is the most common design and is intended to collect both quantitative and qualitative data, merge the data, and view the results (Sheperis et al., 2010). This design takes the limitation of quantitative design of large numbers of participants and complements them with the strengths of qualitative research of smaller number of participants (Sheperis et al., 2010).  Embedded design is used when researchers need to answer questions from a different perspective.  Explanatory design is a two-phase design in which qualitative data helps explain initial quantitative results (Sheperis et al., 2010).  Lastly, exploratory design is another two-phase design where qualitative results are obtained first, followed by quantitative data and is used when there are no measurements available (Sheperis et al., 2010).  Overall, the ideal sampling size depends on the method of data collection in use.

Mixed methods designs can address the research question of suicide among military personnel.  Specifically, the explanatory design would be most beneficial in addressing the research question.  Qualitative data would first be gathered, addressing the how or what specifics of suicide and military personnel.  Quantitative data is useful for answering the questions of who, where, how many, how much, and what is the relationship between specific variables (Frels & Onwuegbuzi, 2012).  Mixed methods designs can address both sets of these questions within a single research study (Frels & Onwuegbuzi, 2012).  Additionally, this data will help explain quantitative results of specific data comparing each branch of the military on both suicide ideation and attempt while analyzing potential factors.  Quantitative data provides the initial picture of the research problem and the qualitative analysis explains the larger picture of the research problem (Sheperis et al., 2010).  Limitations of this design include it being labor intensive, difficult to conduct qualitative follow up, and difficulty obtaining approval (Sheperies et al., 2010).  Strengths of the design include being easy to understand, the methods are conducted separately, and two types of data is not needed to be integrated (Sheperis et al., 2010).

References:

Frels, R. K., & Onwuegbuzi, A. J. (2012). Administering quantitative instruments with qualitative interviews: A mixed research approach. Journal of Counseling and Development, 91(2), 184-194.

Sheperis, C. J., Young, J. S., & Daniels, M. H. (2010). Counseling research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc. ISBN: 9780131757288.