Beyond qualitative and quantitative data linking: An example from a mixed method study of family recreation

Therapeutic Recreation Journal, Second Quarter 2000 by Mactavish, Jennifer B, Schleien, Stuart J

On the issue of constraints, the questionnaire data suggested that a host of previously identified factors (e.g., work and family responsibilities, lack of time, money, common interests, skills) affected family recreation (Crawford, Jackson, & Godbey, 1991). The interviews confirmed the presence of these challenges and added clarity about the nature of some of these constraints. For example, in discussions about work/family responsibilities and a lack of time, it became apparent that parents considered these to be symptoms that masked a more salient challenge-coordinating family members' schedules so that family recreation was possible. Additionally, the interviews revealed that while a lack of common interest was frequently noted in the survey data as a constraint, the real concern revolved around finding family activities that could accommodate wide ranges in age and skill. Beyond enhancing clarity about the nature of some constraints, the interviews extended understanding about the influence of these factors. For many parents, it was extremely difficult, if not impossible, to isolate specific factors that constrained their family's recreation. Instead, constraints were described as an accumulation of complex family and individual issues that had to be "worked through or around" for family recreation to occur (quote from a parent).

The preceding summary highlights some of the key findings and more importantly, demonstrates how the questionnaire and interview data were used together in a study of family recreation. This summary also illustrates that the two approaches, in concert, produced richer insights about the participants' views on the patterns and benefits of, and constraints to family recreation than would have been possible using either method alone.

Conclusions

Mixed method research designs, although increasingly used, have not been fully embraced in the social sciences. This reluctance appears to be rooted in at least two criticisms-both of which relate to explanations of mixed method designs in the literature. The first criticism contends that descriptions of mixed method research lack clarity, depth, and coherence (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998); and the second criticism charges that insufficient attention has been paid to the underlying philosophical issues that these approaches engender (Datta, 1994; Samdahl, 1999). Responding to these criticisms, this research note described a dominant-less dominant mixed method research design and its application in a study of family recreation. The rationale for grounding this work in the naturalistic paradigm was discussed, as were the influences of this framework in the collection, analysis, and reporting of the data. A summary of the results was presented to show how the quantitative and qualitative data were used to complement and extend what was learned about family recreation.

The exemplar presented in this research note counters contentions that mixed method research is a "mixed-up" approach to inquiry that lacks paradigmatic and/or theoretical grounding (Datta, 1994). It also demonstrates the usefulness of a dominant-less dominant design when the aim is to generate knowledge that: (a) facilitates understanding of complex issues within naturally occurring contexts, (b) enhances confidence in the trustworthiness and credibility of research findings, and (c) provides a greater breadth and depth of information than otherwise would be possible with a single approach. These outcomes are not limited to the example used in this research note, but are general points that have been advanced in support of mixed method research (Bullock, 1993; Greene et al., 1989; Henderson, 1991; Howe, 1988; Patton, 1990; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998).