reliability and validity in mixed methods research

Quantitative standards of validity and reliability are held as the ultimate tests for all research methods and are applied to both qualitative and quantitative studies ( de Garine, 2004).

It is these differences in the underlying goals of the methods that lead to problems in their evaluation and integration. The positivist stance that drives quantitative research is placed in opposition to the relativism of most qualitative methods. Essentially, qualitative approaches are interested in and often centered around context, whereas most quantitative methods are not ( Burke Johnson and Onwuegbuzie, 2004). The social sciences view behavior and belief as concepts that are in flux, and so they are naturally and necessarily subjective, whereas food and nutrition science is required to conceptualize the phenomena they study as having static and objective components because they are searching for measurable truths ( Creswell, 2008). The nature of the debate centers on the epistemological differences in the roles of objectivity and generalizability between qualitative and quantitative methods ( Burke Johnson and Onwuegbuzie, 2004 Johnson et al., 2007 Teddlie and Tashakkori, 2003). While proponents of mixed methods research support it as a third paradigm that draws on the best traits of qualitative and quantitative research, purists feel that the fundamentally different nature of the two types of data make them difficult to integrate ( Burke Johnson and Onwuegbuzie, 2004). Mixed methods research holds a contentious place in anthropological research methodology.

Holland, in Beyond the Bones, 2016 9.3 Using a Mixed Methods Approach

Reliability and validity in mixed methods research