ABSTRACT
The use of different methods in combination is likely to become increasingly common. In this volume, we have looked at different theoretical and practical issues around the use of mixed methods in psychology. At a pragmatic level, we argued in the introduction that it makes sense for psychologists to continue to use the most appropriate methods for the research question, and that the combination of methods could provide many advantages at different levels, from the design of individual studies to the shape of the discipline as a whole. Nerlich (this volume) has shown that psychology has traditionally used a range of methods and that the debate about methods in psychology has a long history. Based on a consideration of both the modernist and postmodernist traditions in psychology, Henwood has argued for a re-think of issues around validity, and against the traditional dualism of qualitative versus quantitative. Several chapters (Harré & Crystal; Clarke; Stenner & Stainton-Rogers, this volume) have argued in different ways for the blending of methods to create a “hybrid psychology” or “qualiquantology”. Harré and Crystal considered the kinds of explanation that psychology should seek, whilst Clarke proposed ways in which “natural psychology” can find a place within the discipline. Stenner and Stainton-Rogers provided an example of the use of Q-methodology. Other chapters have looked at specific issues to do with the design of mixed method studies. Pidgeon et al. (this volume) considered the importance of interviews within a quantitative study, and Todd and Lobeck (this volume) considered issues around triangulation of focus group and questionnaire studies. Nicolson (this volume) argued for the important contribution of qualitative feminist psychology to an understanding of post-natal depression, whilst Vann and Cole (this volume) considered the importance of quantitative methods within the toolkit of cultural psychology. Finally, the benefits of both qualitative and quantitative studies in the development of theories of difficult behaviour in schools, and in developing relationships between researchers and practitioners, was described by Miller (this volume).
