The Death of Mixed Methods: Research Labels and their Casualties

Labels can be helpful in structuring our understanding of phenomena. But they are also restrictive when enforcing categorical differences. The classification of all numerical research as quantitative and all other research techniques as qualitative has necessitated the construction of a third category – that of ‘mixed methods’, to describe studies which use both types of techniques. This paper reviews the historical development of mixed methods then analyses its construct and content validity, and propensity for bias. Underlying problems with the concept’s descriptive accuracy and exhaustiveness are revealed. The findings suggest that, as a label grown out of two stereotypes, mixed methods is in danger of acting against its own aims by inhibiting new growth in research and by enforcing separation amongst methodologies and their practitioners. A case is, therefore, made for removing paradigms altogether and for a rebirth of research from the ashes of mixed methods