The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Editorial: Differing Perspectives on Mixed Methods Research
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
SAGE Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2010) · doi:10.4135/9781506335193 · Cited by 6,215
Self-citationToward a Conceptual Framework for Mixed-Method Evaluation Designs
Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989) · Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis · doi:10.3102/01623737011003255 · Cited by 5,687
Transformative Paradigm: Mixed Methods and Social Justice
Mertens, D. M. (2007) · Journal of Mixed Methods Research · doi:10.1177/1558689807302811 · Cited by 1,115
Revisiting the Quantitative-Qualitative Debate: Implications for Mixed-Methods Research
Sale, J. E. M., Lohfeld, L. H., & Brazil, K. (2002) · Quality and Quantity · doi:10.1023/a:1014301607592 · Cited by 1,082
Cited by
Frantzen, K. K., & Fetters, M. D. (2016) · Quality & Quantity · doi:10.1007/s11135-015-0261-6 · Cited by 91
Thaheem, S. K., Zainol Abidin, M. J., Mirza, Q., & Pathan, H. U. (2022) · Asian Education and Development Studies · doi:10.1108/aeds-08-2020-0189 · Cited by 53
Metadata
- Authors
- Creswell, J. W., & Tashakkori, A.
- Venue
- Journal of Mixed Methods Research
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2007-10
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 303-308
- ISSN
- 1558-6898 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-6901
- OpenAlex
- W2021414982
- Cited by
- 331
- References
- 4
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Editorial: Differing Perspectives on Mixed Methods Research. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1558689807306132
- The paper
- Creswell, J. W., & Tashakkori, A. (2007). Editorial: Differing Perspectives on Mixed Methods Research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689807306132
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.
