Journal of the Korean Home Economics Association (대한가정학회지)

The Korean Home Economics Association (대한가정학회)
권호 표지

An Inquiry about Mixed Methodology for Family Studies

가족연구를 위한 혼합방법론에 대한 고찰

  • Yang, Sung-Eun (Division of Public Administration and Social Welfare, Chosun University)
  • 양성은 (조선대학교 행정.복지학부)
  • Published : 2006.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purposes of the present article are to suggest pragmatism as offering a philosophical paradigm for mixed methods research, to explain the fundamental principles of mixed methodology, and to present examples of research for understanding how to apply it to family studies. Mixed methods research is the class of research where the researcher mixes or combines quantitative and qualitative techniques, methods, approaches, concepts or language into a single study. Mixed methodology has its roots in pragmatism, which is a new philosophical paradigm to criticize the traditional dualism and to endorse eclecticism and pluralism. The present article argues that mixed methods research has the potential to answer a broader and more complete range of research questions, and to provide strong evidence for a conclusion through convergence and corroboration of the qualitative and the quantitative methods.

Keywords

References

  1. 강유진, 한경혜(2002). 한국여성노인의 생애사분석을 통한 노년기 삶의 이해: 인생전환점, 삶의 맥락, 적응전략을 중심으로. 한국가족관계학회지, 7(3), 99-126
  2. 권성복, 이미라(1987). 중환자 가족의 요인분석 요구. 간호학회지, 17(2), 122-136
  3. 김동배, 이희연(2003). 사회복지실천의 생태체계 패러다임과 연구방법론에 대한 고찰(I). 연세사회복지연구, 9, 27-58
  4. 김태현, 노치영(2003). 북한이탈여성들의 삶이야기: 해석학적 현상학을 통한 중국생활체험분석. 대한가정학회지, 41(8), 1-17
  5. 노영주(2001). 이혼 여성의 모성경험에 관한 질적연구. 한국가족관계학회지, 6(2), 43-64
  6. 문성호(1997). 사회사업실천의 연구방법에 관한 논쟁: 통합적 접근의 모색. 한국사회복지학, 33, 144-161
  7. 양성은(2005). 고3수험생 어머니의 입시준비 경험에 대한 현상학적 연구. 한국가정관리학회지, 23(2), 49-61
  8. 유계숙, 최연실, 성미애(편역)(1993). 가족학이론. 서울: 문음사
  9. 이강이, 최혜영(2004). 신문기사를 통해 본 이혼 양상에 대한 내용분석. 대한가정학회지, 42(11), 47-60
  10. 천혜정(2004). 가족학 분야에서의 질적 연구 경향 및 방법론적 문제점. 한국가정관리학회지, 22(5), 161-173
  11. Allen-Meares, P. (1995). Applications of qualitative research: Let the work begin. Social Work Research, 19, 5-8
  12. Brewer, J., & Hunter, A. (1989). Multimethod research: A synthesis of styles. Newbury park, Ca: Sage
  13. Bryman, A. (1998). Quantity and quality in social research. London: Allen and Unwin Inc
  14. Campbel, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin
  15. Carroll, R. M. (1997). Families functioning during and after palliative care of a child. Paper presented at the 5th International Conference on Grief and Bereavement in Contemporary Society, Wasington, DC
  16. Casebeer, A. L., & Verhoef, M. J. (1997). Combining qualitative and quantitative research methods: Considering the possibilities for enhancing the study of chronic diseases. Chronic Diseases in Canada, 18, 130-135
  17. Clarke, P. N., & Yaros, P. S. (1988). Research blenders: Commentary and response. Nursing Science Quarterly, 1, 147-149 https://doi.org/10.1177/089431848800100406
  18. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design(2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
  19. Creswell, J. W. (2005). International Qualitative Research Workshop, 2005. 2. 17-2. 19. Edmonton, Canada
  20. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2000). Handbook of qualitative research(2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
  21. Firestone, W. A. (1990). Accommodation: Toward a paradigm-praxis dialectic. In E. G. Guba(Ed..), The paradigm dialog (pp. 105-124). Newbury Park, CA: Sage
  22. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine
  23. Green, J. C. (1994). Qualitative paradigm evaluation. In N. K. Denzin. & Y. S. Lincoln(Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 530-544). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
  24. Green, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed method evaluations. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11, 255-274 https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737011003255
  25. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park CA: Sage Publications
  26. Hassard, J. (1993). Sociology and organization theory: Positivism, paradigms and postmodernity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
  27. Hasse, J. E., & Myers, S. T. (1988). Reconciling paradigm assumptions of qualitative and quantitative research. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 10, 128-137 https://doi.org/10.1177/019394598801000202
  28. James, W. (1962). What pragmatism means. In W. Barrett, & H. Aikin(Eds..). Philosophy in the twentieth century. New York: Random House
  29. Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26
  30. Johnston, P. L. (2004). Mixed methods, mixed methodology health service research in practice. Qualitative Health Research, 14(2), 259-271 https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732303260610
  31. Miles, M. & Huberman, A. (1984). Drawing valid meaning from qualitative data: Toward a shared craft. Educational Researcher, 13, 20-30
  32. Morse, J. M. (1991). Qualitative nursing research. Newbury Park: Sage
  33. Morse, J. M. (2005). 한국질적연구센터 워크샵 'Ethnography and issues in mixed qualitative research method design.' 2005.9.2.-9.4
  34. Patton, M. Q. (1988). Paradigm and pragmatism. In D. M. Fetterman(Ed.), Qualitative approaches to evaluation in education: The silent scientific revolution (pp. 116-137). New York: Praeger
  35. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods(3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
  36. Shepard, M. P. (1992). Identification of the family system responses to the perceived impact of chronic illness which promote adaptation in a child with a chronic illness. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania
  37. Shepard, M. P., Orsi, A. J., Mahon, M. M., & Carroll, R. M. (2002). Mixed-methods research with vulnerable families. Journal of Family Nursing, 8(4), 334-352 https://doi.org/10.1177/107484002237511
  38. Stern, S. B. (1994). Commentary: Wanted Social work practice evaluation and research-all methods considered. In E. Sherman & W. J. Reid(Eds.), Qualitative research in social work (pp. 485-492). New York: Columbia University Press
  39. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage