Mixed-Methods Designs in Comparative Public Policy Research: The Dismantling of Pension Policies

Abstract

Mixed-methods designs have received burgeoning attention in the academic community during the last decade not only in the social sciences but also in public health research and psychological science (Giddings, 2006; Doyle et al., 2009). Multimethod approaches and techniques of triangulation have a long tradition in these literatures (Campbell and Fiske, 1959; Jick, 1979; Brewer and Hunter, 1989). They have however only recently been translated into a ‘unique research approach that has philosophical foundations, its own terminology, systematic research designs, and specific procedures for designing, implementing and reporting research using this approach’ (Piano Clark et al., 2008: p. 354; see Greene, 2008). Apart from the feature to combine qualitative and quantitative approaches, mixed-methods research differs from multimethod designs by the interwovenness of the underlying research questions that can only be answered through different analyses (Johnson et al., 2007; Morse, 2010).