Commentary—After Triangulation, What Next?

59Citations
Citations of this article
204Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

This commentary agrees with the editors’ recent decision to do away with triangulation as a term in mixed methods research, but before doing so, it argues for a review of its original popularity, and a careful consideration of what should replace it. Triangulation depends on the comparison of results from qualitative and quantitative studies that attempt to answer the same research question(s), so there are three possible outcomes: convergence, complementarity, and divergence. After reviewing each of these alternatives, I present an approach that cross-tabulates tests of hypotheses as quantitative results and themes as qualitative results, based on the extent to which those results are convergent, complementary, or divergent.

References Powered by Scopus

Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix

11350Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Triangulation Revisited: Strategy of Validation or Alternative?

397Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The Journal of Mixed Methods Research Starts a New Decade: The Mixed Methods Research Integration Trilogy and Its Dimensions

180Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Teacher wellbeing in England: teacher responses to school-level initiatives

65Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Contested Spaces: Intimate Segregation and Environmental Gentrification on Chicago's 606 Trail

52Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Understanding Farmers' Behavior and Their Decision-Making Process in the Context of Cattle Diseases: A Review of Theories and Approaches

35Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Morgan, D. L. (2019, January 1). Commentary—After Triangulation, What Next? Journal of Mixed Methods Research. SAGE Publications Inc. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689818780596

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 81

62%

Lecturer / Post doc 19

15%

Researcher 19

15%

Professor / Associate Prof. 12

9%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Social Sciences 43

50%

Business, Management and Accounting 25

29%

Arts and Humanities 9

10%

Psychology 9

10%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free