Pragmatism as a Supportive Paradigm for the Mixed Research Approach: Conceptualizing the Ontological, Epistemological, and Axiological Stances of Pragmatism
Open accessAbstract
The emergence of the mixed research approach has been accompanied by searching for a philosophy that legitimates mixing quantitative and qualitative methods in one research. Many researchers consider pragmatism as the most common philosophical justification for the mixed research approach; however, pragmatism is criticized as a philosophy in general and also as philosophical support for the mixed research approach especially for not addressing the differing assumptions of the quantitative and qualitative paradigms. Trying to overcome this criticism, the current research is mainly concerned with presenting pragmatism as a coherent, integrated paradigm by conceptualizing its ontological, epistemological and axiological stances. The researcher coins three new terminologies: the reality cycle, the double-faced knowledge, and the necessary bias principle. These philosophical stances combine both the quantitative and qualitative paradigms' points of view as two integrated, not conflicting philosophies.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The epistemological pillar and its related epistemological stances are developing into the cornerstone of all contemporary relational and systemic therapies.
“We would argue that the epistemological pillar and its related epistemological stances (e.g., pragmatism [Maarouf, 2019] and critical realism [Patomäki & Wight, 2000]) are in fact developing into the cornerstone of all contemporary relational and systemic therapies.”
From Researching what we practice—The paradigm of systemic family research: Part 2 (2023) · cites this paper as Maarouf, 2019
The epistemological pillar is similar to the epistemological stances underlying pragmatism and critical realism, which allow for the application of a range of methods to collect and analyze data.
“As such, the epistemological pillar is similar to the epistemological stance underlying the paradigms of pragmatism (Maarouf, 2019) and critical realism (Patomäki & Wight, 2000), as these allow for the application of a range of methods to collect and analyze data.”
From Researching what we practice—The paradigm of systemic family research: Part 2 (2023) · cites this paper as Maarouf, 2019
Cites
Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come
Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x033007014 · Cited by 11,170 · cited 7× · see citing works
“Besides, it is very time-consuming in data collection and analysis (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialYvonne Feilzer, M. (2010) · Journal of Mixed Methods Research · doi:10.1177/1558689809349691 · Cited by 1,258 · see citing works
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 11× · see citing works
“2 differing assumptions of the quantitative and qualitative paradigms (e.g., Hall, 2013; Biddle & Schafft, 2015; Sale et al., 2002).”
BackgroundMethodInfluential
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Howard, A. H., Roberts, M., Mitchell, T., & Wilke, N. G. (2023) · Adversity and Resilience Science · doi:10.1007/s42844-023-00088-y · Cited by 50 · see citing works
Researching what we practice—The paradigm of systemic family research: Part 2
Whittaker, K., Stokkebekk, J., Lorås, L., & Tilden, T. (2023) · Family Process · doi:10.1111/famp.12921 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
- Authors
- Maarouf, H.
- Affiliations
- Cairo University (EG)
- Corresponding author
- Maarouf, Heba
- ORCID
- Maarouf, Heba
- Venue
- International Business Research
- Published
- 2019-08-26
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1
- ISSN
- 1913-9004 (ISSN-L)
- 1913-9012
- OpenAlex
- W2971276831
- Cited by
- 114
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 15 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4
- FWCI
- 4.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Locations
- International Business Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Business Strategies and Management Research
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Research and Methods
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Pragmatism in Philosophy and Education
- Keywords
- pragmatism, mixed methods, research paradigms, epistemological positions, research philosophy
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
