Fernando Almeida


Mixed methods research is an approach that combines both quantitative and qualitative methods into a single study in order to provide a broader and more complete vision of a problem. Mixed methodologies are employed when both comparative analysis and the development of aspects of the study need to be undertaken comprehensively and in depth. The use of mixed methods turns possible to overcome the limitations of quantitative and qualitative methodologies, allowing the researcher to get rich information that could not be obtained using each method alone. However, the number of published scientific studies addressing the use of mixed methods is limited, and most of them focus on describing a single implementation approach without giving a global and comparative overview of the various approaches. In this sense, this study tries to synthesize and describe each of the mixed methods approach, also providing indications about the advantages and limitations of each of these approaches. In total, ten mixed methods approaches are identified that can be grouped into four major groups: (i) sequential design; (ii) concurrent design; (iii) multiphase design; and (iv) multilevel design. It was also possible to conclude that although each mixed method design presents specific advantages and limitations, sequential approaches are easier to adopt since they facilitate the integration process of both studies but generally lead to higher implementation time. On the other hand, concurrent design typically leads to greater difficulties in the integration of both studies, but they speed up the development process, because quantitative and qualitative can be executed in parallel. Finally, multiphase and multilevel designs are emergent approaches that are used in more complex studies in which it becomes necessary to consider several dimensions of analysis.


Article visualizations:

Hit counter



research methods, mixed methods, research process, quantitative analysis, qualitative analysis

Full Text:



Almalki, S. (2016). Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Data in Mixed Methods Research – Challenges and Benefits. Journal of Education and Learning, 5(3), 288-296.

Bamberger, M. (2012). Introduction to Mixed Methods in Impact Evaluation. New York: The Rockefeller Foundation.

Baran, M., & Jones, J. (2016). Mixed Methods Research for Improved Scientific Study. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

Bazeley, P. (2015). Mixed Methods in Management Research: Implications for the Field. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 13(1), 27-35.

Bergman, M. (2008). Advances in mixed methods research: Theories and applications. SAGE: Thousand Oaks, CA.

Bryman, A. (2006). Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: How is it done? Qualitative Research, 6(1), 97-113.

Bryman, A. (2007). Barriers to Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1, 8-22.

Burt, J. (2015). Following the mixed methods trail: some travel advice. British Journal of General Practice, 65, 264-265.

Cavacini, A. (2015). What is the best database for computer science journal articles? Journal of Scientometrics, 102(3), 2059-2071.

Choudhary, N., & Jesiek, B. (2016). State of Mixed Methods research in Engineering Education: In-depth examination of JEE articles. In Proceedings of the IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), Erie, PA, USA, 1-9.

Creswell, J., Plano, C., Gutmann, M., & Hanson, W (2003). Advances in mixed methods research designs. In: Tashakkori A, Teddlie C (eds), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (209-240). SAGE; Thousand Oaks, CA.

Creswell, J., & Clark, V. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.

Cronholm, S., & Hjalmarsson, A. (2011). Experiences from Sequential Use of Mixed Methods. The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 9(2), 87-95.

Greene, J. C. (2006). Toward a methodology of mixed methods social inquiry. Research in the Schools, 13(1), 93-98.

Greene, J. (2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Guest, G. (2013). Describing mixed methods research: An alternative to typologies. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 7, 141-151.

Hughes, A. (2016). Mixed Methods Research. Retrieved from (accessed on 23th July 2018).

Johnson, R., Onwuegbuzie, A., & Turner, L. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of mixed methods research, 1(2), 112-133.

Koskey, K., & Stewart, V. (2013). A Concurrent Mixed Methods Approach to Examining the Quantitative and Qualitative Meaningfulness of Absolute Magnitude Estimation Scales in Survey Research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 8(2), 180-202.

Lisle, J. (2011). The benefits and challenges of mixing methods and methodologies: lessons learnt from implementing qualitatively led mixed methods research designs in Trinidad and Tobago. Caribbean Curriculum, 18, 87-120.

Malina, M., Norreklit, H., & Selto, F. (2011). Lessons learned advantages and disadvantages of mixed method research. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 8(1), 59-71.

McKim, C. (2017). The Value of Mixed Methods Research: A Mixed Methods Study. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 11(2), 202-222.

Miller, W., Crabtree, B., Harrison, M., & Fennell, M. (2013). Integrating Mixed Methods in Health Services and Delivery System Research. Health Services Research, 48(6), 2125-2133.

Molina-Azorin, J. (2016). Mixed methods research: An opportunity to improve our studies and our research skills. European Journal of Management and Business Economics, 25, 37-38.

Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Johnson, R. B. (2006). The validity issue in mixed research. Research in the Schools, 13(1), 48–63.

Onwuegbuzie, A. & Collins, K. (2007). A typology of Mixed methods Sampling designs in Social Science Research. The Qualitative Report, 12(2), 281-316.

Plastow, N. (2016). Mixing-up research methods: A recipe for success or disaster? South African Journal of Occupational Therapy, 46(1), 89-90.

Ponce, O., & Pagán-Maldonado, N. (2015). Mixed Methods Research in Education: Capturing the Complexity of the Profession. International Journal of Educational Excellence, 1(1), 111-135.

Ponterotto, J., Mathew, J., & Raughley, B. (2013). The value of mixed methods designs to social justice research in counseling and psychology. Journal for Social Action in Counseling and Psychology, 5(2), 42-68.

Queirós, A., Faria, D., & Almeida, F. (2017). Strengths and Limitations of Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methods. European Journal of Education Studies, 3(9), 369-387.

Schoonenboom, J., & Johnson, R. (2017). How to Construct a Mixed Methods Research Design. KZfSS Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 69(2), 107-131.

Silva, T. (2011). Mixed methods: a reflection of its adoption in environmental reporting. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 8(1), 91-104.

Tariq, S., & Woodman, J. (2013). Using mixed methods in health research. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine (JRSM), 4(6), 1-8.

Tobi, H., & Kampen, J. (2018). Research design: the methodology for interdisciplinary research framework. Quality & Quantity, 52(3), 1209-1225.

Toomela, A. (2008). Variables in psychology: A critique of quantitative psychology. Integrative Psychological & Behavioral Science, 42, 245-265.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2018 Fernando Almeida

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright © 2015-2018. European Journal of Education Studies (ISSN 2501 - 1111) is a registered trademark of Open Access Publishing Group. All rights reserved.

This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library (Biblioteca Nationala a Romaniei). All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms. All authors who send their manuscripts to this journal and whose articles are published on this journal retain full copyright of their articles. All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).