December 8, 2024

Introduction

Mixed methods analysis combines a range of qualitative and quantitative methodologies to produce results that facilitate interpretation (Johnson et al., 2007). It is becoming increasingly well-known for its ability to tackle research inquiries that remain challenging to understand. According to John Creswell, the researcher first draws “inferences from qualitative and quantitative data and then advances meta-inferences by integrating the two databases in a mixed methods study” (Creswell, 2022, p. 87). However, incorporating those studies can create ethical issues to address from the viewpoints of participants, researchers, and institutional review boards (IRBs). This proposal outlines these ethical concerns while highlighting the importance of the participant’s safety, the researcher’s neutrality, and regulatory compliance in practice. 

Additionally, the researcher will address any potential bias that may arise during the study and outline strategies to mitigate it. “All investigators involved in the conduct of research involving human subjects need to have an adequate understanding of the ethical principles of research and compliance requirements” (Fetters, 2020, p. 159). Aside from that, the proposal shows the processes for gaining site authorization, maintaining confidentiality, and creating data triangulation. Lastly, the researcher will include a diagram of the mixed-methods data collection and analysis process, as well as a discussion of the approach’s advantages and limitations. 

Participant Perspective Ethics

One must think about the participant’s point of view from different angles without bias. Those perspectives are characterized by a keen eye for protection, respect, and transparency; ethical considerations are the number one priority to consider. Making participants understand the study’s purpose, methods, and their rights to withdraw at any time is a need. Consent forms must clearly state potential risks and benefits in language that is accessible. Protecting participants’ personal information through anonymization, secure data storage, and limited access, ensuring confidentiality, is necessary. For qualitative strands, pseudonyms and general descriptions are used to identify participant perspectives without hindering the aspect of anonymity. Voluntary participation is necessary to avoid coercion or pressure in historically underrepresented communities. It is salient to think about those who are disabled or with limited resources or assistance availability as well.

Moreover, cultural sensitivity is needed to adapt to research methods that align with participants’ cultural norms. In retrospect, cultural sensitivity is invaluable, especially when working with historically excluded groups, such as Hispanic/Latinx community college students (Doran, 2023; Tagami & Reagan, 2022). Next to consider is the researcher’s perspective and the ethics that must be followed when conducting a scientific study.

Researcher Perspective Ethics

Researchers must balance methodological inclemency with moral answerability. Although the researcher hails from a marginalized community in the study, they did not attend a two-year institution. It is possible to eliminate bias from the survey by upholding journalistic integrity. Specific concerns include researchers’ previous roles or relationships with participants, as these can introduce or perpetuate bias. Reflexivity, or self-awareness of these catalysts, is requisite to maintain objectivity. Researchers must ensure neutrality in data interpretation. For example, triangulation—collecting data from multiple sources—minimizes the influence of personal biases. Participant engagement is essential. Creating a trusting researcher-participant relationship requires transparency and cultural acceptance, particularly in qualitative studies where further interaction occurs. It is significant to mitigate emotional or psychological distress, particularly during interviews on sensitive topics. To help participants navigate any anticipated discomfort, it is essential to provide resources or a wave of support in the form of assistance.

Institutional Review Board (IRB) Perspective

The IRB is necessary to maintain ethical research practices by reviewing study protocols. Ethical concerns from the IRB’s point of view encompass ensuring that the potential benefits of the research outweigh any risks to those participating. Adhering to federal guidelines, such as the Common Rule, and maintaining detailed documentation of all procedures is essential. Monitoring involves establishing mechanisms for ongoing oversight to address any problems that may arise during the study. Once the researcher establishes monitoring, it is possible to confirm that permissions are obtainable from the organizations or institutions where the research is to take place.

Qualitative Strand Procedures

Qualitative strand procedures start with access and authorization. Site access is available through formal agreements with institutional administrators that detail study objectives and participant requirements. The researcher-participant relationship must prioritize participant protection; otherwise, it will fail to function correctly. Key measures to remember include obtaining informed consent, implementing privacy safeguards, and adhering to secure data handling protocols. Trust-building strategies encompass active listening and cultural awareness across the board for researchers. Methods such as pre-interviews or informal conversations facilitate the building of a relationship between the researcher and the participant. Integrating data from interviews, focus groups, and observational notes strengthens validity.

Role of the Researcher

Researchers act as facilitators of information exchange. However, their past or present roles, such as being a faculty member or colleague, must be disclosed to participants. Awareness of how these relationships might influence data collection is crucial. Transparent communication helps mitigate potential conflicts of interest.

Mixed Methods Design: Procedures and Diagram

In this ongoing study, the researcher will conduct qualitative interviews before collecting quantitative data to identify patterns. The study follows an explanatory sequential design. The diagram below outlines the process.

Advantages and Limitations of Mixed Methods

One of the most significant advantages of a mixed-methods study is that it analyzes numerical data in conjunction with an explanatory context; the context provides an in-depth and comprehensive overview. Then, the researcher will use triangulation to strengthen validity by confirming the findings, which will naturally be extensive due to the multiple methods used in the study. Another advantage of using mixed methods for this study is the flexibility. One can adapt to research questions that might be challenging or thought-provoking, creating space for an in-depth conversation. Some limitations to consider include potential project obstacles, the time and effort required for the study, and the possibility of misinterpreted data. Because it requires careful planning, time, and resources to integrate diverse data types effectively, contradictory findings between strands can further complicate interpretation.

Conclusion

Ethical considerations are rudimentary in planning and conducting mixed-methods research. By addressing these issues from the perspectives of the participant, researcher, and IRB, researchers can ensure their study conduct is accountable and inherently effective. Combining each process part to create a catalyst of intricate procedures for the protection of the participant, site authorization, and triangulation further bolsters the research’s credibility (Fetters, 2020, p. 100; Creswell, 2014). Mixed-methods research showcases distinctive advantages despite its complexities, making it an ideal tool for addressing multifaceted research questions.

References

Creswell, J. W. (2022). A concise introduction to mixed methods research (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Doran, E. (2023). Applying the Servingness Framework to Hispanic-Serving Community Colleges: An Environmental Scan. Journal of Applied Research in the Community College, 30(2), 85–100.

Fetters, M. D. (2020). The mixed methods research workbook: Activities for designing, implementing, and publishing projects. SAGE Publications.

Johnson, R. Burke, Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie, & Lisa A. Turner. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research 1:112–133.Tagami, M., & Reagan, M. (2022, November 17). Are California’s Hispanic serving institutions living up to their name? CalMatters. https://calmatters.org/education/higher-education/college-beat/2022/11/hispanic-serving-institutions-california/