Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 770

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 100 of the 100 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Research Methods in Engineering Education

Borrego, Maura, Douglas, Elliot P., Amelink, Catherine T.·2009·Journal of Engineering Education
DOI 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2009.tb01005.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The purpose of this research review is to open dialog about quantitative, qualitative, and mixed research methods in engineering education research. Our position is that no particular method is privileged over any other. Rather, the choice must be driven by the research questions. For each approach we offer a definition, aims, appropriate research questions, evaluation criteria, and examples from the Journal of Engineering Education. Then, we present empirical results from a prestigious international conference on engineering education research. Participants expressed disappointment in the low representation of qualitative studies; nonetheless, there appeared to be a strong preference for quantitative methods, particularly classroom‐based experiments. Given the wide variety of issues still to be explored within engineering education, we expect that quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches will be essential in the future. We encourage readers to further investigate alternate research methods by accessing some of our sources and collaborating across education/social science and engineering disciplinary boundaries.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2009.tb01005.x

Cites

100 of 100 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 100 references

Research works printed but not linked: 37

  1. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00822.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00822.x
  2. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00964.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00964.x
  3. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00847.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00847.x
  4. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.1995.tb00174.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.1995.tb00174.x
  5. Creswell J.W., 2003, Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research, 209
  6. Crotty M., 2003, The foundations of social research
  7. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.1993.tb01076.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.1993.tb01076.x
  8. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2001.tb00577.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2001.tb00577.x
  9. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.1993.tb00063.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.1993.tb00063.x
  10. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.1994.tb01106.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.1994.tb01106.x
  11. Gentile J.R., 1994, Inaction research: A superior and cheaper alternative for educational researchers, Educational Researcher, 23, 30
  12. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.1998.tb00326.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.1998.tb00326.x
  13. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.1994.tb00132.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.1994.tb00132.x
  14. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.1995.tb00143.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.1995.tb00143.x
  15. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.1996.tb00202.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.1996.tb00202.x
  16. 10.1002/0471744697 · doi:10.1002/0471744697
  17. Hoaglin D.C., 1982, Data for decisions: Information strategies for policymakers
  18. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.1997.tb00305.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.1997.tb00305.x
  19. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00851.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00851.x
  20. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2002.tb00724.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2002.tb00724.x
  21. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2003.tb00736.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2003.tb00736.x
  22. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.1997.tb00293.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.1997.tb00293.x
  23. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2001.tb00634.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2001.tb00634.x
  24. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2001.tb00614.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2001.tb00614.x
  25. Morse J.M., 2003, Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research, 189
  26. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00811.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00811.x
  27. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.1996.tb00247.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.1996.tb00247.x
  28. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.1999.tb00479.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.1999.tb00479.x
  29. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.1993.tb00080.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.1993.tb00080.x
  30. Sandelowski M., 2003, Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research, 321
  31. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00863.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00863.x
  32. 10.3102/0013189X031008025 · doi:10.3102/0013189x031008025
  33. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2003.tb00743.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2003.tb00743.x
  34. Teddlie C., 2003, Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research, 3
  35. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.1995.tb00163.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.1995.tb00163.x
  36. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.1994.tb00131.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.1994.tb00131.x
  37. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.1998.tb00382.x · doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.1998.tb00382.x

Cited by

See all 770

Metadata

Authors
Borrego, M., Douglas, E. P., & Amelink, C. T.
Venue
Journal of Engineering Education
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-01
Volume
98
Issue
1
Pages
53-66
ISSN
  • 1069-4730 (ISSN-L)
  • 2168-9830
DOI
10.1002/j.2168-9830.2009.tb01005.x
OpenAlex
W1987639441
Cited by
770
References
100
FWCI
88.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 1462 d)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Research Methods in Engineering Education. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2009.tb01005.x
The paper
Borrego, M., Douglas, E. P., & Amelink, C. T. (2009). Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Research Methods in Engineering Education. Journal of Engineering Education. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2009.tb01005.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.