Vol. 1 No. 5 (2025): Desember
Articles

INTEGRATING QUALITATIVE INQUIRY AND SURVEY RESEARCH IN SOCIAL SCIENCES: A DESCRIPTIVE AND ANALYTICAL LITERATURE REVIEW

PDF
  • Rahmat Abd Fatah
Rahmat Abd Fatah
Universitas Muhammadiyah Maluku Utara

Published 2025-12-30

Keywords

  • mixed methods research; qualitative inquiry; survey research; methodological integration; social science research

Abstract

Recent developments in contemporary social sciences indicate a growing need for methodological approaches capable of explaining the complexity of social reality in a manner that is both in-depth and representative. The longstanding tension between the depth of meaning offered by qualitative research and the breadth of generalization associated with survey research has driven the advancement of mixed methods as an integrative research strategy. This article aims to map and analyze global trends in the integration of qualitative and survey methods in social science research through a descriptive and analytical literature review approach. The literature search was conducted using reputable international databases, namely Scopus and Web of Science, supplemented by Google Scholar, covering publications from 2000 to 2024. The selected articles consist of peer-reviewed publications that explicitly discuss or apply the integration of qualitative and survey approaches. The analysis employs thematic and conceptual synthesis to identify epistemological rationales, dominant methodological design patterns, the strategic role of surveys, and levels of methodological integration in social research practice. The findings indicate that pragmatism constitutes the dominant epistemological foundation, accompanied by hybrid practices that combine interpretivist and post-positivist logics. Sequential designs, particularly the sequential exploratory design, emerge as the most globally prevalent pattern, while surveys play a strategic role not only as instruments of quantification but also as mechanisms for generalizing qualitative findings, validating constructs, and constructing social typologies. The findings further reveal that methodological integration most frequently occurs at the design and interpretation stages, whereas integration at the analytical stage remains limited. This article contributes to methodological reflection by emphasizing the importance of coherence in integration logic as a fundamental prerequisite for meaningful and scientifically accountable mixed methods practice in social science research.

 

PDF

References

  1. Amadi, A. (2023). Integration in a mixed-method case study of construction phenomena: From data to theory. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 30(1), 210–237.
  2. Azabar, S., & Thijssen, P. (2025). Behind the scenes: a (self) critical reflection on doing mixed methods. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 1–19.
  3. Biddle, C., & Schafft, K. A. (2015). Axiology and anomaly in the practice of mixed methods work: Pragmatism, valuation, and the transformative paradigm. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 9(4), 320–334.
  4. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.
  5. Creswell, J. W., & Inoue, M. (2025). A process for conducting mixed methods data analysis. Journal of General and Family Medicine, 26(1), 4–11. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.1002/jgf2.736
  6. Curry, L. A., Nembhard, I. M., & Bradley, E. H. (2009). Qualitative and mixed methods provide unique contributions to outcomes research. Circulation, 119(10), 1442–1452.
  7. Fatah, R. A. (2024). Penerapan Metode Penelitian Fenomenologi Pada Hermeneutika Hans George Gadamer. Jurnal Kolaboratif Sains, 7(1), 515–524. https://doi.org/10.56338/jks.v7i1.4901
  8. Fetters, M. D., Curry, L. A., & Creswell, J. W. (2013). Achieving integration in mixed methods designs—principles and practices. Health Services Research, 48(6pt2), 2134–2156. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12117
  9. Fetters, M. D., & Molina-Azorin, J. F. (2017). The journal of mixed methods research starts a new decade: The mixed methods research integration trilogy and its dimensions. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol. 11, pp. 291–307. Sage Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689817714066
  10. Huang, L., Zan, J., Lv, K., & Zhao, X. (2025). A systematic review of mixed methods research in tourism and hospitality. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 63, 163–176. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2025.03.005
  11. Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 112–133. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689806298224
  12. Jones, K. (2017). Using a theory of practice to clarify epistemological challenges in mixed methods research: An example of theorizing, modeling, and mapping changing West African seed systems. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 11(3), 355–373.
  13. Kittel, B. (2006). A crazy methodology? On the limits of macro-quantitative social science research. International Sociology, 21(5), 647–677.
  14. Migiro, S. O., & Magangi, B. A. (2011). Mixed methods: A review of literature and the future of the new research paradigm. African Journal of Business Management, 5(10), 3757–3764.
  15. Morgan, D. L. (2007). Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: Methodological implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 48–76.
  16. Morgan, D. L. (2014). Pragmatism as a paradigm for social research. Qualitative Inquiry, 20(8), 1045–1053.
  17. Plano Clark, V. L. (2017). Mixed methods research. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 12(3), 305–306.
  18. Riazi, A. M. (2016). Innovative mixed-methods research: Moving beyond design technicalities to epistemological and methodological realizations. Applied Linguistics, 37(1), 33–49.
  19. Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
  20. Sommer Harrits, G. (2011). More than method?: A discussion of paradigm differences within mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 5(2), 150–166.
  21. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2010a). Putting the human back in ‘“human research methodology”’: The researcher in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol. 4, pp. 271–277. Sage Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA.
  22. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2010b). Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. sage.
  23. Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2008). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. Sage publications.
  24. Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2011). Mixed methods research. The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, 4(1), 285–300.
  25. Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2012). Common “core” characteristics of mixed methods research: A review of critical issues and call for greater convergence. American Behavioral Scientist, 56(6), 774–788.
  26. Turner, S. F., Cardinal, L. B., & Burton, R. M. (2017). Research design for mixed methods: A triangulation-based framework and roadmap. Organizational Research Methods, 20(2), 243–267.
  27. Yvonne Feilzer, M. (2010). Doing mixed methods research pragmatically: Implications for the rediscovery of pragmatism as a research paradigm. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(1), 6–16.