Mixed methods, mixed feelings: a review of hurdles faced and vaulting poles to apply when wanting to do and publish mixed methods research.

IF 3.1 1区 社会学 Q1 DEMOGRAPHY
Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies Pub Date : 2025-05-17 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1080/1369183X.2025.2487748
Niels Spierings, Nella Geurts
{"title":"Mixed methods, mixed feelings: a review of hurdles faced and vaulting poles to apply when wanting to do and publish mixed methods research.","authors":"Niels Spierings, Nella Geurts","doi":"10.1080/1369183X.2025.2487748","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Sometimes 'mixed methods designs' are considered a winner for obtaining research grants, but a close-to-certain reject when publishing. Evidently, reality is more complex. At the same time, these considerations are grounded in actual experiences, observations and the structure of our epistemic community. In this contribution, we will reflect on this structure, particularly in ethnic and migration studies, as such reflection is particularly interesting for a case that is strongly interdisciplinary, which might pave the way as well as lead to double jeopardy (running into reviewers disliking the method and the disciplinary perspective). First, we will sketch a (quantitative) background of the definition and prevalence of mixed methods research in ethnic and migration journals. Next, and based on migration scholars' experiences with mixed methods research and often heard ideas, we will chart and discuss the structural barriers that hamper mixed methods research (from journal word counts to unqualified reviewers). Third, based on these barriers or hurdles as we will label them, both structural and practical solutions are discussed, leading to a wish list for facilitating high-quality mixed methods research.</p>","PeriodicalId":48371,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies","volume":"51 12","pages":"3170-3191"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12312779/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2025.2487748","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Sometimes 'mixed methods designs' are considered a winner for obtaining research grants, but a close-to-certain reject when publishing. Evidently, reality is more complex. At the same time, these considerations are grounded in actual experiences, observations and the structure of our epistemic community. In this contribution, we will reflect on this structure, particularly in ethnic and migration studies, as such reflection is particularly interesting for a case that is strongly interdisciplinary, which might pave the way as well as lead to double jeopardy (running into reviewers disliking the method and the disciplinary perspective). First, we will sketch a (quantitative) background of the definition and prevalence of mixed methods research in ethnic and migration journals. Next, and based on migration scholars' experiences with mixed methods research and often heard ideas, we will chart and discuss the structural barriers that hamper mixed methods research (from journal word counts to unqualified reviewers). Third, based on these barriers or hurdles as we will label them, both structural and practical solutions are discussed, leading to a wish list for facilitating high-quality mixed methods research.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

混合的方法,复杂的感受:当想要做和发表混合方法研究时,面临的障碍和跳跃杆子的审查。
有时,“混合方法设计”被认为是获得研究资助的赢家,但在发表时几乎肯定会被拒绝。显然,现实要复杂得多。同时,这些考虑是基于实际经验、观察和我们的认知共同体的结构。在这篇文章中,我们将反思这种结构,特别是在种族和移民研究中,因为这种反思对于一个强烈跨学科的案例来说特别有趣,这可能为双重危险铺平道路,也可能导致双重危险(遇到不喜欢方法和学科视角的评论家)。首先,我们将概述种族和移民期刊中混合方法研究的定义和流行的(定量)背景。接下来,根据移民学者在混合方法研究方面的经验和经常听到的想法,我们将绘制并讨论阻碍混合方法研究的结构性障碍(从期刊字数统计到不合格的审稿人)。第三,基于这些障碍或障碍,讨论了结构性和实用的解决方案,从而形成了促进高质量混合方法研究的愿望清单。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
9.10%
发文量
157
期刊介绍: The Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies (JEMS) publishes the results of first-class research on all forms of migration and its consequences, together with articles on ethnic conflict, discrimination, racism, nationalism, citizenship and policies of integration. Contributions to the journal, which are all fully refereed, are especially welcome when they are the result of original empirical research that makes a clear contribution to the field of migration JEMS has a long-standing interest in informed policy debate and contributions are welcomed which seek to develop the implications of research for policy innovation, or which evaluate the results of previous initiatives. The journal is also interested in publishing the results of theoretical work.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信