Embedding the dialogic in mixed method approaches to theory development

References

• Bryman, A. 2006. “Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Research: How is it Done?” Qualitative Research 6 (1): 97–113. doi: 10.1177/1468794106058877
   Google Scholar
• *Burnham, M., Z. Ma, and B. Zhang. 2016. “Making Sense of Climate Change: Hybrid Epistemologies, Social-Natural Assemblages, and Smallholder Knowledge.” Area 48 (1): 18–26. doi: 10.1111/area.12150
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bustamante, C. 2017. “TPACK and Teachers of Spanish: Development of a Theory-Based Joint Display in a Mixed Methods Research Case Study.” Journal of Mixed Methods Research. doi:10.1177/1558689817712119.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Catallo, C., S. M. Jack, D. Ciliska, and H. L. MacMillan. 2012. “Identifying the Turning Point: Using the Transtheoretical Model of Change to Map Intimate Partner Violence Disclosure in Emergency Department Settings.” International Scholarly Research Network. doi:10.5402/2012/239468. Article ID 239468.
   Google Scholar
• *Catallo, C., S. M. Jack, D. Ciliska, and H. L. MacMillan. 2013. “Mixing a Grounded Theory Approach with a Randomized Controlled Trial Related to Intimate Partner Violence: What Challenges Arise for Mixed Methods Research?” Nursing Research and Practice, 2013: 1–12. doi: 10.1155/2013/798213
   Google Scholar
• Creamer, E. G. 2004. “Collaborators’ Attitudes about Differences of Opinion.” The Journal of Higher Education 75 (5): 556–571. doi: 10.1353/jhe.2004.0028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creamer, E. G. 2011. “Experimenting with Voice and Reflexivity to Produce Multi-Voiced Texts.” In The SAGE Handbook for Research in Education, 2nd ed., edited by C. Conrad, and R. C. Serlin, 367–380. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Creamer, E. G., and Associates. 2011. Working Equal: Collaboration among Academic Couples. New York, NY: Routledge Falmer Press.
   Google Scholar
• Creamer, E. G. 2018a. An Introduction to Fully Integrated Mixed Methods Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Creamer, E. G. 2018b. “Enlarging the Conceptualization of Mixed Method Approaches to Grounded Theory with Intervention Research.” In Methodological Innovation in Mixed Method Research. American Behavioral Scientist, edited by E. G. Creamer, and J. L. Schoonenboom. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0002764218772642
   Google Scholar
• Creamer, E. G. 2018c. “Paradigms in Play: Using Case Studies to Explore the Value-Added of Divergent Findings in Mixed Methods Research.” International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches 10 (1): 30–40. doi: 10.29034/ijmra.v10n1a2
   Google Scholar
• *Davis, P., and B. Baulch. 2011. “Parallel Realities: Exploring Poverty Dynamics using Mixed Methods in Rural Bangladesh.” Journal of Development Studies 47 (1): 118–142. doi: 10.1080/00220388.2010.492860
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dickinson, W. B. 2010. “Visual Displays for Mixed Methods Findings.” In SAGE Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research. 2nd ed., edited by A. Tashakkori and C. Teddlie, 469–504. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, C. D. 2017. "Examining acculturation strategies in immigrant and refugee youth: A mixed methods approach to arts informed research" Doctoral diss., Virginia Tech, Virginia, VA.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, C. D., and E. G. Creamer. 2018. “Cultural Transitions, Individuality, and the Arts: Examining Individuality in Acculturation Through a Mixed Methods Approach to Arts-Informed Research.” International Journal of Education and Social Science Research 1 (1): 30–40.
   Google Scholar
• Fortin, J. 2018. “Lasers Reveal a Maya Civilization so Dense it Blew Experts Minds.” New York Times, February 3.
   Google Scholar
• Freshwater, D. 2007. “Reading Mixed Methods Research: Contexts for Criticism.” Journal of Mixed Methods Research 1 (2): 134–146. doi: 10.1177/1558689806298578
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Gasson, S., and J. Waters. 2013. “Using a Grounded Theory Approach to Study Online Collaborative Behaviors.” European Journal of Information Systems 22: 95–118. doi: 10.1057/ejis.2011.24
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gorard, S. 2004. “Skeptical or Clerical? Theory as a Barrier to the Combination of Research Methods.” Journal of Educational Enquiry 5 (1): 1–21.
   Google Scholar
• Greene, J. C. 2007. Mixed Methods in Social Inquiry. San Francisco, CA: Wiley Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Greene, J. C., V. J. Caracelli, and W. F. Graham. 1989. “Toward a Conceptual Framework for Mixed-Method Evaluation Designs.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 11 (3): 255–274. doi: 10.3102/01623737011003255
   Google Scholar
• Guetterman, T., J. W. Creswell, and U. Kuckartz. 2015. “Using Joint Displays and MAXQDA Software to Represent the Results of Mixed Methods Research.” In Use of Visual Displays in Research and Testing: Coding, Interpreting, and Reporting Data, edited by M. T. McCrudden, G. Schraw, and C. W. Buckendahl, 145–175. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• *Indicates articles used as case exemplars. Number exceeds sample numbers in tables because there are several publications available for some of the exemplars.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, Y. J., and J. Greene. 2007. “The Predictive Validity of an ESL Placement Test: A Mixed Methods Approach.” Journal of Mixed Methods Research 1 (4): 366–389. doi: 10.1177/1558689807306148
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Lee, W. Y., S. Nakamura, M. J. Chung, Y. J. Chun, M. Fu, S. C. Lian, and C. L. Liu. 2013. “Asian Couples in Negotiation: A Mixed Method Observational Study of Cultural Variations Across Five Asian Regions.” Family Process 25 (3): 499–518. doi: 10.1111/famp.12040
   Google Scholar
• Maxwell, J. A. 2015. “Expanding the History and Range of Mixed Methods Research.” Journal of Mixed Methods Research 10 (1): 12–27. doi: 10.1177/1558689815571132
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maxwell, J., M. Chmiel, and S. E. Rogers. 2015. “Designing Integration in Multimethod and Mixed Methods Research.” In The Oxford Handbook of Multimethod and Mixed Methods Research Inquiry, edited by S. Hesse-Biber, and R. B. Johnson, 223–239. Oxford, UK: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Perlesz, A. 1999. “Complex Responses to Trauma: Challenges in Bearing Witness.” Family Therapy 20 (1): 11–19.
   Google Scholar
• Perlesz, A., and J. Lindsay. 2003. “Methodological Triangulation in Researching Families: Making Sense of Dissonant Data.” International Journal of Social Research Methodology 6 (1): 25–40. doi: 10.1080/13645570305056
   Google Scholar
• Pluye, P., R. M. Grad, A. Levine, and B. Nicolau. 2009. “Understanding Divergence of Quantitative and Qualitative Data (or Results) in Mixed Methods Studies.” International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches 3: 58–72. doi: 10.5172/mra.455.3.1.58
   Google Scholar
• Trend, M. G. 1978. “On the Reconciliation of Qualitative and Quantitative Analyses: A Case Study.” Human Organization 37 (4): 345–354. doi: 10.17730/humo.37.4.181457u6563w1187
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walsh, I. 2014. “A Strategic Path to Study IT use through Users’ IT Culture and IT Needs: A Mixed-Method Grounded Theory.” The Journal of Strategic Information Systems 23: 146–173. doi: 10.1016/j.jsis.2013.06.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walsh, I. 2015. “Using Quantitative Data in Mixed-Design Grounded Theory Studies: An Enhanced Path Formal Grounded Theory in Information Systems.” European Journal of Information Systems 24: 531–557. doi: 10.1057/ejis.2014.23
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Weiss, H. B., H. Kreider, E. Mayer, R. Hencke, and M. A. Vaughn. 2005. “Working it out: The Chronicle of a Mixed-Method Analysis.” In Discovering Successful Pathways in Children’s Development: Mixed Methods and the Study of Childhood and Family Life, edited by T. S. Weisner, 47–64. John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Mental Health and Development. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• *Weiss, H. B., E. Mayer, and H. Kreider. 2003. “Making it Work: Low-Income Working Mothers’ Involvement in their Children’s Education.” American Educational Research Journal 40 (4): 879–901. doi: 10.3102/00028312040004879
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar