"RESEARCHDESIGNQualitative,Quantitative.and Mixed MethodsApproachesSECOND EDITIONJohn W. CreswellUniversity of Nebraska, LincolnSAGE PublicationsInternational Educational and Professional PublisherThousand Oaks London New Delhi ~6763Copyright O2003 by Sage Publications, Inc.-3All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in anyform or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, record-ing, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission inwriting from the publisher.Cover image copyright O Sheldan CollinsICorbis; used by permission.For information:Sage Publications, Inc.2455 Teller RoadThousand Oaks, California 91320E-mail: [email protected] Publications Ltd.6 Bonhill StreetLondon EC2A 4PUUnited KingdomSage Publications India Pvt. Ltd.M-32 MarketGreater Kailash INew Delhi 110 048 IndiaPrinted in the United States of AmericaLibrary of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication DataCreswell, John W.Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methodapproaches I by John W. Creswel1.- 2nd ed.p. cmIncludes bibliographical references and indexes.ISBN 0-7619-2441-8 (c) -ISBN 0-7619-2442-6 (pbk.)1. Social sciences-Research-Methodology.2. Social sciences-Statistical methods. I. Title.H62 .C6963 200230W.7'2-dc21Acquiring Editor: C. Deborah LaughtonEditorial Assistant: Veronica NovakProduction Editor: Diana E. AxelsenCopy Editor: A. J. SobczakTypesetter:C&M Digitals (P) Ltd., Chennai, IndiaCover Designer: Michelle Lee CHAPTER ONEA Frameworkfor Designn the past two decades, research approaches have multiplied toa point at which investigatorsor inquirers have many choices. ForIthose designing a proposal or plan, I recommend that a generalframework be adopted to provide guidance about all facets of thestudy, from assessing the general philosophical ideas behind theinquiry to the detailed data collection and analysis procedures.Usingan extant framework also allows researchers to lodge their plans inideas well grounded in the literatureand recognized by audiences(e.g., faculty committees) that read and support proposals forresearch.What frameworks exist for designing a proposal? Although differ-ent types and terms abound In the literature, I will focus on three:quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods approaches.'The firsthas been available to the social and human scientist for years, thesecond has emerged primarily during the last three or four decades,and the last is new and still developing in form and substance.This chapter introduces the reader to the three approaches toresearch. I suggest that to understandthem, the proposal developerneeds to consider three framework elements: philosophical assump-tions about what constltutes knowledge claims; general proceduresof research called strategies of inquhy and detailed procedures ofdata collection, analysis, and writing. called methods. Qualitative.quantitative, and mixed methods approaches frame each of theseelements differently, and these diefences are identified and dis-cussed in this chapter. 'Then typical scenarios that combine the threeelements are advanced, followed by the reasons why one wouldchoose one approach over another in designing a study.'This discus-sion will not be a philosophical treatiseon the nature of knowledge,but it will provide a practical grounding in some of the philosophicalideas behind research. 4 Research DesignTHREE ELEMENTS OF INQUIRYIn the first edition of this book, I used two approaches-qualitative andquantitative. I described each in terms of different philosophicalassumptions about the nature of reality, epistemology, values, therhetoric of research, and methodology (Creswell, 1994).Several devel-opments in the last decade have caused a reexamination of this stance.Mixed methods research has come of age. To include only quantita-tive and qualitative methods falls short of the major approachesbeing used today in the social and human sciences.Other philosophical assumptions beyond those advanced in 1994have been widely discussed in the literature. Most notably, criticalperspectives, advocacy/participatory perspectives, and pragmaticideas (e.g., see Lincoln & Guba, 2000; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998)are being extensively discussed. Although philosophical ideasremain largely "hidden" in research (Slife & Williams, 199S), theystill influence the practice of research and need to be identified.The situation today is less quantitative versus qualitative and morehow research practices lie somewhere on a continuum between thetwo (e.g., Newrnan & Benz, 1998).The best that can be said is thatstudies tend to be more quantitative or qualitative in nature. Thus,later in the chapter I introduce typical scenarios of quantitative,qualitative, and mixed methods research.Finally, the practice of research (such as writing a proposal) involvesmuch more than philosophical assumptions. Philosophical ideasmust be combined with broad approaches to research (strategies)and implemented with specific procedures (methods). Thus, aframework is needed that combines the elements of philosophicalideas, strategies, and methods into the three approaches to research.Crotty's (1998) ideas established the groundwork for this framework.He suggested that in designing a research proposal, we consider fourquestions:1. What epistemology-theory of knowledge embedded in thetheoretical perspective--informs the research (e.g., objectivism,subjectivism, etc.)?2. What theoretical perspective-philosophical stance-liesbehind the methodology in questions (e.g., positivism andpostpositivm, interpretivism, critical theory, etc.)? A Framework for Design 5Elements of InquiryAlternative Knowledge ClaimsApproaches to ResearchDesign ProcessesQualitative of ResearchStrategiesof Inquiry -QuantitativeMixed Methods -Questions~~~l~tedTheoretical lens/btopractice Data collectionConceptualized Data analysisby the researcher Write-upMethods ValidationFigure 1.1 Knowledge Claims. Strategies of Inquiry, and MethodsLeading to Approaches and the Design Process3. What methodology-strategy or plan of action that linksmethods to outcomes-governs our choice and use of methods(e.g., experimental research, survey research, ethnography, etc.)?4. What methods-techniques and procedures40 we propose touse (e.g., questionnaire, interview. focus group, etc.)?These four questions show the interrelated levels of decisions that gointo the process of designing research. Moreover, these are aspects thatinform a choice of approach, ranging hmthe broad assumptions thatare brought to a project to the more practical decisions made about howto collect and analyze data.With these ideas in mind, I conceptualized Crotty's model to addressthree questions central to the design of research:1. What knowledge claims are being made by the researcher(including a theoretical perspective)?2. What strategiesof inquiry will inform the procedures?3. What methods of data collection and analysis will be used?Next, I drew a picture, as shown in Figure 1.1.This displays how threeelements of inquiry (i.e., knowledge claims, strategies, and methods)combine to form different approaches to research. These approaches, inturn, are translated into processes in the design of research. Preliminarysteps in designing a research proposal, then, are to assess the knowledgeclaims brought to the study, to consider the strategyof inquiry that willbe used, and to identify specific methods. Using these three elements, a Research Designble 1.1 Alternative Knowledge Claim PositionsPostposmvlsm ConstructivismDetermination UnderstandingReductlonism Multiple participant meaningsEmpirical observation Social and historical constructionand measurement Theory generatlonTheory verificationAdvocacy/Participatory PragmatismPoliticalConsequences of actionsEmpowerment issue-oriented Problem-centeredCollaborative PluralisticChange-oriented Real-world practice orientedresearcher can then identify either the quantitative, qualitative, or mixedmethods approach to inquiry.Alternative Knowledge ClaimsStating a knowledge claim means that researchers start a project withcertain assumptions about how they will learn and what they willlearn during their inquiry. These claims might be called paradigms(Lincoln & Guba, 2000; Mertens, 1998); philosophical assumptions,epistemologies, and ontologies (Crotty, 199 8); or broadly conceivedresearch methodologies (Neuman, 2000). Philosophically, researchersmake claims about what is knowledge (ontology), how we know it(epistemology),what values go into it (axiology), how we write about it(rhetoric), and the processes for studying it (methodology) (Creswell,1994). Four schools of thought about knowledge claims will bediscussed: postpositivism, constructivism, advocacy/participatory, andpragmatism. The major elements of each position are presented inTable 1.1.In discussions to follow, I will attempt to translate the broadphilosophical ideas of these positions into practice.Postpositive Knowledge ClaimsTraditionally, the postpositivist assumptions have governed claimsabout what warrants knowledge. This position is sometimes calledthe "scientific method" or doing "science" research. It is also calledquantitative research, positivist/postpositivist research, empirical science, A Framework for Design 7and postpostivism. The last term, "postpositivism," refers to the thinkingafter positivism, challenging the traditional notion of the absolute truthof knowledge (Phillips & Burbules, 2000) and recognizing that wecannot be "positive" about our claims of knowledge when studying thebehavior and actions of humans. The postpositivist tradition comesfrom 19th-century writers such as Comte, Mill, Durkheim, Newton, andLocke (Smith, 1983), and it has been most recently articulated bywriters such as Phillips and Burbules (2000).Postpositivism reflects a deterministic philosophy in which causesprobably determine effects or outcomes. Thus, the problems studied bypostpositivists reflect a need to examine causes that influence outcomes,such as issues examined in experiments. It is also reductionistic in thatthe intent is to reduce the ideas into a small, discrete set of ideas to test,such as the variables that constitute hypotheses and research questions.The knowledge that develops through a postpositivist lens is based oncareful observation and measurement of the objective reality that exists"out there" in the world. Thus, developing numeric measures of obser-vations and studying the behavior of individuals become paramount fora postpositivist. Finally, there are laws or theories that govern the world,and these need to be tested or verified and refined so that we can under-stand the world. Thus, in the scientific method-the accepted approachto research by postpostivists-an individual begins with a theory, col-lects data that either supports or refutes the theory, and then makesnecessary revisions before additional tests are conducted.In reading Phillips and Burbules (2000).one can gain a sense of thekey assumptionsof this position, such as the following:1. That knowledge is conjectural (and anti-foundationa1)-absolute truth can never be found. Thus, evidence establishedin research is always imperfect and fallible. It is for this reasonthat researchers do not prove hypotheses and instead indicate afailure to reject.2. Research is the process of making claims and then refining orabandoning some of them for other claims more strongly war-ranted. Most quantitative research. for example, starts with thetest of a theory.3. Data, evidence, and rational considerations shape knowledge.In practice, the researcher collects information on instrumentsbased on measures completed by the participants or byobservations recorded by the researcher. 8 Research Design4. Research seeks to develop relevant true statements, ones thatcan serve to explain the situation that is of concern or thatdescribes the causal relationships of interest. In quantitativestudies, researchers advance the relationship among variablesand pose this in terms of questions or hypotheses.5. Being objective is an essential aspect of competent inquiry, andfor this reason researchers must examine methods and conclu-sions for bias. For example, standards of validity and reliabilityare important in quantitative research.Socially Constructed Knowledge ClaimsOthers claim knowledge through an alternative process and setof assumptions. Social constructivism (often combined with inter-pretivism; see Mertens, 1998)is such a perspective. The ideas came fromMannheim and from works such as Berger and Luckmann's The SocialConstruction of Reality (19 6 7) and Lincoln and Guba's NaturalisticInquiry (1985). More recent writers who have summarized this positionare Lincoln and Guba (2000), Schwandt (2000), Neuman (2000), andCrotty (1998), among others. Assumptions identified in these works holdthat individuals seek understanding of the world in which they live andwork. They develop subjective meaningsof their experiences-meaningsdirected toward certain objects or things. These meanings are varied andmultiple, leading the researcher to look for the complexity of views ratherthan narrowing meanings into a few categories or ideas. The goal ofresearch, then, is to rely as much as possible on the participants' views ofthe situation being studied. The questions become broad and general sothat the participants can construct the meaning of a situation, a mean-ing typically forged in discussions or interactions with other persons. Themore open-ended the questioning, the better, as the researcher listenscarefully to what people say or do in their life setting. Often these subject-ive meanings are negotiated socially and historically. In other words, theyare not simply imprinted on individuals but are formed through interact-ion with others (hence social constructivism) andthrough historical andcultural norms that operate in individuals' k.Thus, constructivistresearchers often address the "processes"of interaction among individu-als. They also focus on the specific contexts in which people live and workin order to understand the historical andcultural settingsof the partici-pants. Researchers recognize that their own background shapes theirinterpretation, and they "position themselves" in the research toacknowledge how their interpretation flows from their own personal, A Framework for Design 9cultural, and historical experiences. The researcher's intent, then, is tomake sense of (or interpret) the meanings others have about the world.Rather than starting with a theory (as in postpostivism), inquirersgenerate or inductively develop a theory or pattern of meaning.For example, in discussing constructivism, Crotty (19 9 8) identifiedseveral assumptions:1. Meanings are constructed by human beings as they engagewith the world they are interpreting. Qualitative researcherstend to use open-ended questions so that participants canexpress their views.Humans engage with their world and make sense of it based ontheir historical and social perspectivewe are all born into aworld of meaning bestowed upon us by our culture. Thus, qual-itative researchers seek to understand the context or setting ofthe participants through visiting this context and gatheringinformation personally. They also make an interpretation ofwhat they find, an interpretation shaped by the researchers'own experiences and backgrounds.3. The basic generationof meaning is always social, arising in andout of interaction with a human community. The process ofqualitative research is largely inductive, with the inquirer gen-erating meaning from the data collected in the field.Advocacy/Participatow Knowledge ClaimsAnother group of researchers claims knowledge through an advo-cacylparticipatory approach. This position arose during the 1980s and1990s from individuals who felt that the postpostivist assumptionsimposed structural laws and theories that did not fit marginalized indi-viduals or groups or did not adequately address issues of social justice.Historically, some of the advocacy/participatory (or emancipatory)writers have drawn on the works of Marx, Adorno, Marcuse, Habermas,and Freire (Neuman, 2000). More recently, works by Fay (1987),Heronand Reason (199 7), and Kemmis and WWson (1998) can be read forthis perspective. In the main, these inquirers felt that the constructiviststance did not go far enough in advocating for an action agenda to helpmarginalized peoples. These researchers believe that inquiry needs to beintertwined with politics and a political agenda. Thus, the researchshould contain an action agenda for reform that may change the lives of 10 Research Designthe participants, the institutions in which individuals work or live, andthe researcher's life. Moreover, specific issues needed to be addressedthat speak to important social issuesof the day, issues such as empower-ment, inequality, oppression, domination, suppression, and alienation.The advocacy researcher often begins with one of these issues as thefocal point of research. This research also assumes that the inquirer willproceed collaboratively so as to not further marginalize the participantsas a result of the inquiry. In this sense, the participants may help designquestions, collect data, analyze information, or receive rewards for par-ticipating in the research. The "voice" for the participants becomes aunited voice for reform and change. This advocacy may mean providinga voice for these participants, raising their consciousness, or advancingan agenda for change to improve the lives of the participants.Within these knowledge claims are stances for groups and individu-als in society that may be marginalized or disenfranchised. Therefore,theoretical perspectives may be integrated with the philosophicalassumptions that construct a picture of the issues being examined, thepeople to be studied, and the changes that are needed. Some of thesetheoretical perspectives are listed below.Feminist perspectives center and make problematic women's diversesituations and the institutions that bethose situations. Researchtopics may include policy issues related to realizing social justice forwomen in specific contexts or knowledge about oppressive situa-tions for women (Olesen, 2000).Racialized discourses raise important questions about the control andproduction of knowledge, particularly knowledge about people andcommunities of color (Ladson-Billings, 2000).Critical theory perspectives are concerned with empowering humanbeings to transcend the constraints placed on them by race, class,and gender (Fay, 198 7).Queer theory focuses on individuals calling themselves lesbians, gay,bisexuals, or transgendered people. The research can be less objecti-fying, can be more concerned with cultural and political means, andcan convey the voices and experiences of individuals who have beensuppressed (Gamson, 2000).Disability inquiry addresses the meaning of inclusion in schoolsand encompasses administrators, teachers. and parents who havechildren with disabilities (Mertens, 1998). "