DEFINING AND ASSESSING THE VALUE OF CANONICAL MIXED METHODS RESEARCH DESIGNS IN PUBLIC POLICY AND PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

Chelsea Richwine, Qian Eric Luo, Zoë Thorkildsen, Nicholas J. Chong, Rebecca Morris, Burt S. Barnow and Sanjay K. Pandey

Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 2022, vol. 41, issue 3, 891-920

Abstract: Mixed methods research (MMR) designs are well suited for answering policy‐relevant questions, yet they remain underutilized in public policy and public administration scholarship. To provide a deeper understanding of the effective use of such designs, this article examines the prevalence of MMR in public policy and public administration journals, drawing a key distinction between “canonical” and “non‐canonical” MMR. Canonical mixed methods studies are characterized by (1) an explicit rationale for using mixed methods (i.e., a clear connection between methodological decisions and research questions), (2) effective integration of qualitative and quantitative strands, and (3) design transparency. We demonstrate the value of a canonical approach in public policy and public administration research by highlighting differences in quality between canonical and non‐canonical mixed methods studies. Our findings indicate that a canonical approach to mixed methods research makes positive contributions to methodological quality and knowledge development.

Date: 2022
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.22392

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wly:jpamgt:v:41:y:2022:i:3:p:891-920

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Policy Analysis and Management from John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().