A Mixed Methods Investigation of Mixed Methods Sampling Designs in Social and Health Science Research

Abstract

A sequential design utilizing identical samples was used to classify mixed methods studies via a two-dimensional model, wherein sampling designs were grouped according to the time orientation of each study's components and the relationship of the qualitative and quantitative samples. A quantitative analysis of 121 studies representing nine fields in the social or health sciences revealed that more studies utilized a sampling design that was concurrent (66.1%) than sequential (33.9%). Also, identical sampling designs were the most prevalent, followed by nested sampling, multilevel sampling, and parallel sampling, respectively. Qualitative analysis suggested that across a number of studies the researchers made statistical generalizations that were not sufficiently warranted—culminating in interpretive inconsistency and contributing to crises of representation, legitimation, integration, and politics.