Axiology and Anomaly in the Practice of Mixed Methods Work: Pragmatism, Valuation, and the Transformative Paradigm

Catharine Biddle, Kai A. Schafft

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This article uses a Kuhnian framework to explain the adoption of the transformative paradigm in pragmatically informed mixed methods research. We argue that pragmatism represents a model of “normal science” among many mixed methods researchers and that Kuhn’s concept of the scientific anomaly provides an instructive metaphor for understanding what we interpret to be a failure of pragmatic mixed methods researchers to adequately account for the axiological foundation for their work. The transformative paradigm thus can be read as providing pragmatic researchers with an axiological “fix” that sidesteps the larger question of how to establish a philosophically consistent means of specifying research value. We discuss this argument in light of pragmatist philosophy, the recent history of mixed methods research, and the future development of the field.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)320-334
Number of pages15
JournalJournal of Mixed Methods Research
Volume9
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 22 2015

Fingerprint

Mixed Methods
pragmatism
Valuation
Anomaly
Paradigm
paradigm
pragmatics
metaphor
Mixed methods
Pragmatism
history
science
Values
Mixed methods research
Model

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Education
  • Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
  • Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty

Cite this

@article{a59a9229ee024e21ad6409a255be8fbd,
title = "Axiology and Anomaly in the Practice of Mixed Methods Work: Pragmatism, Valuation, and the Transformative Paradigm",
abstract = "This article uses a Kuhnian framework to explain the adoption of the transformative paradigm in pragmatically informed mixed methods research. We argue that pragmatism represents a model of “normal science” among many mixed methods researchers and that Kuhn’s concept of the scientific anomaly provides an instructive metaphor for understanding what we interpret to be a failure of pragmatic mixed methods researchers to adequately account for the axiological foundation for their work. The transformative paradigm thus can be read as providing pragmatic researchers with an axiological “fix” that sidesteps the larger question of how to establish a philosophically consistent means of specifying research value. We discuss this argument in light of pragmatist philosophy, the recent history of mixed methods research, and the future development of the field.",
author = "Catharine Biddle and Schafft, {Kai A.}",
year = "2015",
month = "10",
day = "22",
doi = "10.1177/1558689814533157",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "9",
pages = "320--334",
journal = "Journal of Mixed Methods Research",
issn = "1558-6898",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "4",

}

Axiology and Anomaly in the Practice of Mixed Methods Work : Pragmatism, Valuation, and the Transformative Paradigm. / Biddle, Catharine; Schafft, Kai A.

In: Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol. 9, No. 4, 22.10.2015, p. 320-334.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Axiology and Anomaly in the Practice of Mixed Methods Work

T2 - Pragmatism, Valuation, and the Transformative Paradigm

AU - Biddle, Catharine

AU - Schafft, Kai A.

PY - 2015/10/22

Y1 - 2015/10/22

N2 - This article uses a Kuhnian framework to explain the adoption of the transformative paradigm in pragmatically informed mixed methods research. We argue that pragmatism represents a model of “normal science” among many mixed methods researchers and that Kuhn’s concept of the scientific anomaly provides an instructive metaphor for understanding what we interpret to be a failure of pragmatic mixed methods researchers to adequately account for the axiological foundation for their work. The transformative paradigm thus can be read as providing pragmatic researchers with an axiological “fix” that sidesteps the larger question of how to establish a philosophically consistent means of specifying research value. We discuss this argument in light of pragmatist philosophy, the recent history of mixed methods research, and the future development of the field.

AB - This article uses a Kuhnian framework to explain the adoption of the transformative paradigm in pragmatically informed mixed methods research. We argue that pragmatism represents a model of “normal science” among many mixed methods researchers and that Kuhn’s concept of the scientific anomaly provides an instructive metaphor for understanding what we interpret to be a failure of pragmatic mixed methods researchers to adequately account for the axiological foundation for their work. The transformative paradigm thus can be read as providing pragmatic researchers with an axiological “fix” that sidesteps the larger question of how to establish a philosophically consistent means of specifying research value. We discuss this argument in light of pragmatist philosophy, the recent history of mixed methods research, and the future development of the field.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84942119882&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84942119882&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1558689814533157

DO - 10.1177/1558689814533157

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84942119882

VL - 9

SP - 320

EP - 334

JO - Journal of Mixed Methods Research

JF - Journal of Mixed Methods Research

SN - 1558-6898

IS - 4

ER -