"Mixed methods in my bones" : transcending the qualitative-quantitative divide

Jennifer Mason (2006, p. 19) calls for thinking that transcends or even subverts the qualitative-quantitative divide, suggesting it is more helpful to think in terms of multidimensional research strategies. Max Bergman describes the terms qualitative and quantitative as the straw men of research. This article challenges the (largely U.S.-based) notion that mixing methods necessarily means combining a quantitative and a qualitative method or approach to research, and argues that thinking in this way serves as a distraction from the purpose of research and, therefore, is counterproductive to good research. It does so on the basis that such thinking artificially divides the natural order of things; that it is actually not possible to clearly delineate differences between qualitative and quantitative approaches; that the meaning of everything, including numbers, is theory based and all research is interpretive; that it is better to focus on what methods will best answer the research questions than on attempting to show that the research design cleverly combines qualitative and quantitative approaches; and that, ultimately, whatever methods are used will become “inextricably intertwined” as a study proceeds (Miles & Huberman, 1994, p. 41).