A critical realist rationale for using a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods

Abstract

Although using a combination of quantitative and qualitative approaches is widely advocated, there is considerable scope for confusion due to the complex ontological and epistemological issues that need to be resolved. This paper examines some of the issues that may arise when the methods are combined. Three distinct standpoints with regard to using mixed method approaches are highlighted: a methodological purist position, a pragmatic standpoint and an anti-conflationist position. It is suggest that an anti-conflationist approach that is underpinned by the philosophy of critical realism is compatible with all three of the purposes of methodological triangulation identified by Risjord and his co-authors (Risjord et al., 2001, 2002) and that adopting a critical realist perspective may circumvent many of the problems that are associated with paradigm ‘switching’. The case for adopting a critical realist framework is illustrated by a case study, in which a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods was used to explore how and why gatekeeping decisions emerge at the interface between primary care and community mental health teams.