Enfoques de métodos mixtos en la investigación en ciencia de familia

Enfoques de métodos mixtos en la investigación en ciencia de familia

Resumen: Los complejos fenómenos de interés para los científicos de familia requieren el uso de enfoques cuantitativos y cualitativos. Los investigadores de las ciencias sociales se están cambiando a los diseños de métodos mixtos que combinan estos dos enfoques. La mezcla de métodos de investigación es muy prometedora para abordar los temas de la ciencia de familia, pero sólo si los investigadores entienden las opciones de diseño y los procedimientos que acompañan a esta opción metodológica. Las discusiones sobre los métodos mixtos en la literatura de la ciencia de familia son difíciles de localizar, y poco se ha escrito acerca de cómo los científicos de familia aplican este enfoque en la práctica. Este artículo presenta una visión general... Ver más

Guardado en:

Latinoamericana de Estudios de Familia

2145-6445

2215-8758

Parra Carvajal, Francisco Javier

López Montaño, Luz María

O’neil Green, Denise

Garrett, Amanda L.

Churchill, Susan L.

Huddleston Casas, Catherine A

Plano Clark, Vicki L.

UNIVERSIDAD DE CALDAS

4

2011-01-01

243

267

Colombia

métodos de investigación

investigación cualitativa

investigación cuantitativa

investigación de familia

métodos mixtos de investigación

http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2

info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess

id 98521158f5554738a65fda3b179f337b
record_format ojs
spelling Enfoques de métodos mixtos en la investigación en ciencia de familia
McGraw, L. A., A. M. Zvonkovic y A. J. Walker. 2000. Studying postmodern families: A feminist analysis of ethical tensions in work and family research. Journal of Marriage and Family 62, No. 1: 68-77.
Perlesz, A. L. y J. Lindsay. 2003. Methodological triangulation in researching families: Making sense of dissonant data. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 6, No. 1: 25-40.
O’Cathain, A., E. Murphy y J. Nicholl. 2007. Integration and publications as indicators of “yield” from mixed methods studies. Journal of Mixed Methods Research 1, No. 2: 147-163.
O’Brien, M. 2005. Studying individual and family development: Linking theory and research. Journalof Marriage and Family 67, No. 4: 880-890.
National Council on Family Relations Annual Conference. 2006. 2006 NSFR call for papers. Retrieved January 15, 2006, from http://www.ncfr.org/pdf/Call_for_Proposals.pdf 1566 Plano Clark et al. in Journal of Family Issues 29 (2008).
Morse, J. M. 1991. Approaches to qualitative-quantitative methodological triangulation. Nursing Research 40: 120-123.
Morgan, D. L. 1998. Practical strategies for combining qualitative and quantitative methods:Applications to health research. Qualitative Health Research 8, No. 3: 362-376.
Miles, M. B. y A. M. Huberman. 1994. Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. 2nd ed.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
________. 2005b. Open adoption as a family form. Journal of Family Issues 26, No. 3: 380-410.
Miall, C. E. y K. March. 2005a. Community attitudes toward birth fathers’ motives for adoption placement and single parenting. Family Relations 54, No. 4: 535-546.
Mertens, D. M. 2003. Mixed methods and the politics of human research: The transformative– emancipatory perspective. En Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research, eds. A. Tashakkori y C. Teddlie, 135-164. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mason, M. A., S. Harrison-Jay, G. M. Svare y N. H. Wolfinger. 2002. Stepparents: De facto parents or legal strangers? Journal of Family Issues 23, No. 4: 507-522.
Punch, K. F. 1998. Introduction to social research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches. London: Sage.
Marshall, T. y P. Solomon. 2004. Provider contact with families of adults with severemental illness: Taking a closer look. Family Process 43, No. 2: 209-216.
Mangen, D. J. 1995. Methods and analysis of family data. En Handbook of aging and the family, eds. R. Blieszner y V. Hilkevitch Bedfor, 148-177. Westport, CT: Greenwood.
Lavee, Y., A. Ben-David y F. Azaiza. 1997. Israeli and Palestinian families in the peace process: Sources of stress and response patterns. Family Process 36, No. 3: 247-263.
Knodel, J. y C. Saengtienchai. 2005. Older-aged parents: The final safety net for adult sons and daughters with AIDS in Thailand. Journal of Family Issues 26, No. 5: 665-698.
Katz, R. y A. Lowenstein. 1999. Adjustment of older Soviet immigrant parents and theiradult children residing in shared households: An intergenerational comparison. Family Relations 48, No. 1: 43-50.
Jick, T. D. 1979. Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. Administrative Science Quarterly 24: 602-611.
Javo, C., J. A. Ronning y S. Heyerdahl. 2004. Child-rearing in an indigenous Sami population in Norway: A cross-cultural comparison of parental attitudes and expectations. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 45, No. 1: 67-78.
Javo, C., R. Alapack, S. Heyerdahl y J. A. Ronning. 2003. Parental values and ethnic identity in indigenous Sami families: A qualitative study. Family Process 42, No. 1: 151-164.
Hendrickson Christensen, D. y C. M. Dahl. 1997. Rethinking research dichotomies. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal 25, No. 3: 269-285.
Hanson, W. E., J. W. Creswell, V. L. Plano Clark, K. P. Petska y J. D. Creswell. 2005. Mixed methods research designs in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology 52, No. 2: 224-235.
Handel, G. 1996. Family worlds and qualitative family research: Emergence and prospects of wholefamily methodology. En The methods and methodologies of qualitative family research, eds. M. B. Sussman y J. F. Gilgun, 335-348. Binghamton, NY: Haworth.
Plano Clark, V. L. 2005. Cross-disciplinary analysis of the use of mixed methods in physics education research, counseling psychology, and primary care. Doctoral dissertation, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, 2005. Dissertation Abstracts International, 66, 02A.
Rank, M. R. 1988, November. The blending of quantitative and qualitative data in family research.
Greene, J. C., V. J. Caracelli y W. F. Graham. 1989. Toward a conceptual framework for mixed- method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 11, No. 3: 255-274.
Walker, A. J. ed. 2005. Theoretical and methodological issues in studying families [Special issue]. Journal of Marriage and Family 67, No. 4.
Text
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
Yin, R. K. 2003. Case study research: Design and methods. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Weine, S., K. Knafl, S. Feetham, Y. Kulauzovic, A. Klebic, S. Sclove et al. 2005. A mixed methods study of refugee families engaging in multiple-family groups. Family Relations 54, No. 4: 558-568.
Weigel-Garrey, C. J., C. C. Cook y M. J. Brotherson. 1998. Children and privacy: Choice, control, and access in home environments. Journal of Family Issues 19, No. 1: 43-64.
________. eds. 2003. Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
Paper presented at the National Council of Family Relations Pre-Conference Workshop on Theory Construction and Research Methodology, Philadelphia, PA.
Tashakkori, A. y C. Teddlie. 1998. Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Struthers, C. B. y J. L. Bokemeier. 2000. Myths and realities of raising children and creating family life in a rural county. Journal of Family Issues 21, No. 1: 17-46.
Strazdins, L. y D. H. Broom. 2004. Acts of love (and work): Gender imbalance in emotional work and women’s psychological distress. Journal of Family Issues 25, No. 3: 356-378.
Smith, J. K. y L. Heshusius. 1986. Closing down the conversation: The end of the quantitative-qualitative debate among educational inquirers. Educational Researcher 15, No. 1: 4-12.
Shulha, L. M. y R. J. Wilson. 2003. Collaborative mixed methods research. En Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research, eds. A. Tashakkori y C. Teddlie, 639-669. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
________. 2003. Tables or tableaux? The challenges of writing and reading mixed methods studies. En Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research, eds. A. Tashakkori y C. Teddlie, 321-350.
Sandelowski, M. 1996. Using qualitative methods in intervention studies. Research in Nursing and Health 19, No. 4: 359-364.
Sale, J. E., L. H. Lohfeld y K. Brazil. 2002. Revisiting the quantitative-qualitative debate: Implications for mixed-methods research. Quality and Quantity 36: 43-53.
Richter, K. 1997. Child care choice in urban Thailand: Qualitative and quantitative evidence of the decision-making process. Journal of Family Issues 18, No. 2: 174-204.
________. 1996. The blending of qualitative and quantitative methods in understanding childbearing among welfare recipients. En Qualitative methods in family research, eds. J. F. Gilgun, K. J. Daly y G.Handel, 281-300. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Greenstein, T. N. 2006. Methods of family research. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Greene, J. C. y V. J. Caracelli. eds. 1997. Advances in mixed-method evaluation: The challenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms. En New directions for evaluation. Vol. 74. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Mixed Methods App roaches in Family Science Research 1565.
Greene, J. C. 2005. Synthesis: A reprise on mixing methods. En Discovering successful pathways in children’s development: Mixed methods in the study of childhood and family life, ed. T. S. Weisner, 405-419. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
métodos de investigación
Universidad de Caldas
application/pdf
Artículo de revista
, Año 2012 : Enero - Diciembre
4
investigación cualitativa
investigación cuantitativa
investigación de familia
métodos mixtos de investigación
https://revistasojs.ucaldas.edu.co/index.php/revlatinofamilia/article/view/4657
Parra Carvajal, Francisco Javier
López Montaño, Luz María
O’neil Green, Denise
Garrett, Amanda L.
Churchill, Susan L.
Huddleston Casas, Catherine A
Plano Clark, Vicki L.
Resumen: Los complejos fenómenos de interés para los científicos de familia requieren el uso de enfoques cuantitativos y cualitativos. Los investigadores de las ciencias sociales se están cambiando a los diseños de métodos mixtos que combinan estos dos enfoques. La mezcla de métodos de investigación es muy prometedora para abordar los temas de la ciencia de familia, pero sólo si los investigadores entienden las opciones de diseño y los procedimientos que acompañan a esta opción metodológica. Las discusiones sobre los métodos mixtos en la literatura de la ciencia de familia son difíciles de localizar, y poco se ha escrito acerca de cómo los científicos de familia aplican este enfoque en la práctica. Este artículo presenta una visión general de los métodos de investigación mixtos, incluyendo su definición, la terminología y los tipos de diseño, y examina cómo se está utilizando con éxito, y se publica en revistas de investigación de familia. Las autoras revisaron la aplicación de diseños de métodos mixtos en 19 estudios, analizan las características de diseño y los problemas que surgieron durante la ejecución. Ellas concluyen con recomendaciones para los científicos de familia considerando el uso de este enfoque. (1543)
Latinoamericana de Estudios de Familia
Publication
Creswell, J. W., L. F. Goodchild y P. P. Turner. 1996. Integrated qualitative and quantitative research:Epistemology, history, and designs. En Higher education: Handbook of theory and research, Vol. 11, ed. J. C. Smart, 90-136. New York: Agathon.
Brewer, J. y J. Hunter. 1989. Multimetod research: A synthesis of styles. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Burgess, E. W. (1927). Statistics and case studies as methods of sociological research. Sociology and Social Research 12: 103-120.
Creswell, J. W., M. D. Fetters, V. L. Plano Clark y A. Morales. In press. Nesting qualitative data in health sciences intervention trials: A mixed methods application. En Mixed methods research for nursing and the health sciences, eds. S. Andrew y L. Halcomb. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Creswell, J. W., M. D. Fetters y N. V. Ivankova. 2004. Designing a mixed methods study in primary care. Annals of Family Medicine 2, No. 1: 7-12.
________. 2005. Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Creswell, J. W. 1999. Mixed-method research: Introduction and application. En Handbook of educational policy, ed. G. J. Cizek, 455-472. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Coleman, M. ed. Journal of Marriage and the Family 57, No. 4, 1995.
Carr, D.2005.The psychological consequences of midlife men’s social comparisons with their young adult sons. Journal of Marriage and Family 67. No.1:240-250.
Creswell, J. W. V. L. Plano Clark, M. L. Gutmann y W. E. Hanson. 2003. Advanced mixed methods research designs. En Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research, eds. A. Tashakkori y C. Teddlie, 209-240. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Creswell, J. W. y V. L. Plano Clark. 2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Campbell, C. L. y A. S. Demi. 2000. Adult children of fathers missing in action (MIA): Anexamination of emotional distress, grief, and family hardiness. Family Relations 49. No. 3: 267-276.
Dalla, R. L. y W. C. Gamble. 1997. Exploring factors related to parenting competence among Navajo teenage mothers: Dual techniques of inquiry. Family Relations 46, No. 2: 113-121.
Creswell, J. W., A. Tashakkori, K. D. Jensen y K. L. Shapley. 2003. Teaching mixed methods research: Practices, dilemmas, and challenges. En Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research, eds. A. Tashakkori y C. Teddlie, 619-637. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Gibson-Davis, C. M., K. Edin y S. McLanahan. 2005. High hopes but even higher expectations: The retreat from marriage among low-income couples. Journal of Marriage and Family 67, No. 5: 1301-1312.
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
Español
Gomel, J. N., B. J. Tinsley, R. D. Parke y K. M. Clark. 1998. The effects of economic hardship on family relationships among African American, Latino, and Euro-American families. Journal of Family Issues 19, No. 4: 436-467.
Journal article
qualitative research
quantitative research
family research
research methods
Mixed methods approaches in family science research
No Resumen en ingles
mixed methods research)
https://revistasojs.ucaldas.edu.co/index.php/revlatinofamilia/article/view/4657
https://revistasojs.ucaldas.edu.co/index.php/revlatinofamilia/article/download/4657/4256
2215-8758
267
2012-01-01T00:00:00Z
2012-01-01T00:00:00Z
243
2145-6445
2011-01-01
institution UNIVERSIDAD DE CALDAS
thumbnail https://nuevo.metarevistas.org/UNIVERSIDADDECALDAS/logo.png
country_str Colombia
collection Latinoamericana de Estudios de Familia
title Enfoques de métodos mixtos en la investigación en ciencia de familia
spellingShingle Enfoques de métodos mixtos en la investigación en ciencia de familia
Parra Carvajal, Francisco Javier
López Montaño, Luz María
O’neil Green, Denise
Garrett, Amanda L.
Churchill, Susan L.
Huddleston Casas, Catherine A
Plano Clark, Vicki L.
métodos de investigación
investigación cualitativa
investigación cuantitativa
investigación de familia
métodos mixtos de investigación
qualitative research
quantitative research
family research
research methods
mixed methods research)
title_short Enfoques de métodos mixtos en la investigación en ciencia de familia
title_full Enfoques de métodos mixtos en la investigación en ciencia de familia
title_fullStr Enfoques de métodos mixtos en la investigación en ciencia de familia
title_full_unstemmed Enfoques de métodos mixtos en la investigación en ciencia de familia
title_sort enfoques de métodos mixtos en la investigación en ciencia de familia
title_eng Mixed methods approaches in family science research
description Resumen: Los complejos fenómenos de interés para los científicos de familia requieren el uso de enfoques cuantitativos y cualitativos. Los investigadores de las ciencias sociales se están cambiando a los diseños de métodos mixtos que combinan estos dos enfoques. La mezcla de métodos de investigación es muy prometedora para abordar los temas de la ciencia de familia, pero sólo si los investigadores entienden las opciones de diseño y los procedimientos que acompañan a esta opción metodológica. Las discusiones sobre los métodos mixtos en la literatura de la ciencia de familia son difíciles de localizar, y poco se ha escrito acerca de cómo los científicos de familia aplican este enfoque en la práctica. Este artículo presenta una visión general de los métodos de investigación mixtos, incluyendo su definición, la terminología y los tipos de diseño, y examina cómo se está utilizando con éxito, y se publica en revistas de investigación de familia. Las autoras revisaron la aplicación de diseños de métodos mixtos en 19 estudios, analizan las características de diseño y los problemas que surgieron durante la ejecución. Ellas concluyen con recomendaciones para los científicos de familia considerando el uso de este enfoque. (1543)
description_eng No Resumen en ingles
author Parra Carvajal, Francisco Javier
López Montaño, Luz María
O’neil Green, Denise
Garrett, Amanda L.
Churchill, Susan L.
Huddleston Casas, Catherine A
Plano Clark, Vicki L.
author_facet Parra Carvajal, Francisco Javier
López Montaño, Luz María
O’neil Green, Denise
Garrett, Amanda L.
Churchill, Susan L.
Huddleston Casas, Catherine A
Plano Clark, Vicki L.
topicspa_str_mv métodos de investigación
investigación cualitativa
investigación cuantitativa
investigación de familia
métodos mixtos de investigación
topic métodos de investigación
investigación cualitativa
investigación cuantitativa
investigación de familia
métodos mixtos de investigación
qualitative research
quantitative research
family research
research methods
mixed methods research)
topic_facet métodos de investigación
investigación cualitativa
investigación cuantitativa
investigación de familia
métodos mixtos de investigación
qualitative research
quantitative research
family research
research methods
mixed methods research)
citationvolume 4
citationedition , Año 2012 : Enero - Diciembre
publisher Universidad de Caldas
ispartofjournal Latinoamericana de Estudios de Familia
source https://revistasojs.ucaldas.edu.co/index.php/revlatinofamilia/article/view/4657
language Español
format Article
rights http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
references McGraw, L. A., A. M. Zvonkovic y A. J. Walker. 2000. Studying postmodern families: A feminist analysis of ethical tensions in work and family research. Journal of Marriage and Family 62, No. 1: 68-77.
Perlesz, A. L. y J. Lindsay. 2003. Methodological triangulation in researching families: Making sense of dissonant data. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 6, No. 1: 25-40.
O’Cathain, A., E. Murphy y J. Nicholl. 2007. Integration and publications as indicators of “yield” from mixed methods studies. Journal of Mixed Methods Research 1, No. 2: 147-163.
O’Brien, M. 2005. Studying individual and family development: Linking theory and research. Journalof Marriage and Family 67, No. 4: 880-890.
National Council on Family Relations Annual Conference. 2006. 2006 NSFR call for papers. Retrieved January 15, 2006, from http://www.ncfr.org/pdf/Call_for_Proposals.pdf 1566 Plano Clark et al. in Journal of Family Issues 29 (2008).
Morse, J. M. 1991. Approaches to qualitative-quantitative methodological triangulation. Nursing Research 40: 120-123.
Morgan, D. L. 1998. Practical strategies for combining qualitative and quantitative methods:Applications to health research. Qualitative Health Research 8, No. 3: 362-376.
Miles, M. B. y A. M. Huberman. 1994. Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. 2nd ed.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
________. 2005b. Open adoption as a family form. Journal of Family Issues 26, No. 3: 380-410.
Miall, C. E. y K. March. 2005a. Community attitudes toward birth fathers’ motives for adoption placement and single parenting. Family Relations 54, No. 4: 535-546.
Mertens, D. M. 2003. Mixed methods and the politics of human research: The transformative– emancipatory perspective. En Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research, eds. A. Tashakkori y C. Teddlie, 135-164. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mason, M. A., S. Harrison-Jay, G. M. Svare y N. H. Wolfinger. 2002. Stepparents: De facto parents or legal strangers? Journal of Family Issues 23, No. 4: 507-522.
Punch, K. F. 1998. Introduction to social research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches. London: Sage.
Marshall, T. y P. Solomon. 2004. Provider contact with families of adults with severemental illness: Taking a closer look. Family Process 43, No. 2: 209-216.
Mangen, D. J. 1995. Methods and analysis of family data. En Handbook of aging and the family, eds. R. Blieszner y V. Hilkevitch Bedfor, 148-177. Westport, CT: Greenwood.
Lavee, Y., A. Ben-David y F. Azaiza. 1997. Israeli and Palestinian families in the peace process: Sources of stress and response patterns. Family Process 36, No. 3: 247-263.
Knodel, J. y C. Saengtienchai. 2005. Older-aged parents: The final safety net for adult sons and daughters with AIDS in Thailand. Journal of Family Issues 26, No. 5: 665-698.
Katz, R. y A. Lowenstein. 1999. Adjustment of older Soviet immigrant parents and theiradult children residing in shared households: An intergenerational comparison. Family Relations 48, No. 1: 43-50.
Jick, T. D. 1979. Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. Administrative Science Quarterly 24: 602-611.
Javo, C., J. A. Ronning y S. Heyerdahl. 2004. Child-rearing in an indigenous Sami population in Norway: A cross-cultural comparison of parental attitudes and expectations. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 45, No. 1: 67-78.
Javo, C., R. Alapack, S. Heyerdahl y J. A. Ronning. 2003. Parental values and ethnic identity in indigenous Sami families: A qualitative study. Family Process 42, No. 1: 151-164.
Hendrickson Christensen, D. y C. M. Dahl. 1997. Rethinking research dichotomies. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal 25, No. 3: 269-285.
Hanson, W. E., J. W. Creswell, V. L. Plano Clark, K. P. Petska y J. D. Creswell. 2005. Mixed methods research designs in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology 52, No. 2: 224-235.
Handel, G. 1996. Family worlds and qualitative family research: Emergence and prospects of wholefamily methodology. En The methods and methodologies of qualitative family research, eds. M. B. Sussman y J. F. Gilgun, 335-348. Binghamton, NY: Haworth.
Plano Clark, V. L. 2005. Cross-disciplinary analysis of the use of mixed methods in physics education research, counseling psychology, and primary care. Doctoral dissertation, University of Nebraska–Lincoln, 2005. Dissertation Abstracts International, 66, 02A.
Rank, M. R. 1988, November. The blending of quantitative and qualitative data in family research.
Greene, J. C., V. J. Caracelli y W. F. Graham. 1989. Toward a conceptual framework for mixed- method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 11, No. 3: 255-274.
Walker, A. J. ed. 2005. Theoretical and methodological issues in studying families [Special issue]. Journal of Marriage and Family 67, No. 4.
Yin, R. K. 2003. Case study research: Design and methods. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Weine, S., K. Knafl, S. Feetham, Y. Kulauzovic, A. Klebic, S. Sclove et al. 2005. A mixed methods study of refugee families engaging in multiple-family groups. Family Relations 54, No. 4: 558-568.
Weigel-Garrey, C. J., C. C. Cook y M. J. Brotherson. 1998. Children and privacy: Choice, control, and access in home environments. Journal of Family Issues 19, No. 1: 43-64.
________. eds. 2003. Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
Paper presented at the National Council of Family Relations Pre-Conference Workshop on Theory Construction and Research Methodology, Philadelphia, PA.
Tashakkori, A. y C. Teddlie. 1998. Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Struthers, C. B. y J. L. Bokemeier. 2000. Myths and realities of raising children and creating family life in a rural county. Journal of Family Issues 21, No. 1: 17-46.
Strazdins, L. y D. H. Broom. 2004. Acts of love (and work): Gender imbalance in emotional work and women’s psychological distress. Journal of Family Issues 25, No. 3: 356-378.
Smith, J. K. y L. Heshusius. 1986. Closing down the conversation: The end of the quantitative-qualitative debate among educational inquirers. Educational Researcher 15, No. 1: 4-12.
Shulha, L. M. y R. J. Wilson. 2003. Collaborative mixed methods research. En Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research, eds. A. Tashakkori y C. Teddlie, 639-669. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
________. 2003. Tables or tableaux? The challenges of writing and reading mixed methods studies. En Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research, eds. A. Tashakkori y C. Teddlie, 321-350.
Sandelowski, M. 1996. Using qualitative methods in intervention studies. Research in Nursing and Health 19, No. 4: 359-364.
Sale, J. E., L. H. Lohfeld y K. Brazil. 2002. Revisiting the quantitative-qualitative debate: Implications for mixed-methods research. Quality and Quantity 36: 43-53.
Richter, K. 1997. Child care choice in urban Thailand: Qualitative and quantitative evidence of the decision-making process. Journal of Family Issues 18, No. 2: 174-204.
________. 1996. The blending of qualitative and quantitative methods in understanding childbearing among welfare recipients. En Qualitative methods in family research, eds. J. F. Gilgun, K. J. Daly y G.Handel, 281-300. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Greenstein, T. N. 2006. Methods of family research. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Greene, J. C. y V. J. Caracelli. eds. 1997. Advances in mixed-method evaluation: The challenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms. En New directions for evaluation. Vol. 74. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Mixed Methods App roaches in Family Science Research 1565.
Greene, J. C. 2005. Synthesis: A reprise on mixing methods. En Discovering successful pathways in children’s development: Mixed methods in the study of childhood and family life, ed. T. S. Weisner, 405-419. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Creswell, J. W., L. F. Goodchild y P. P. Turner. 1996. Integrated qualitative and quantitative research:Epistemology, history, and designs. En Higher education: Handbook of theory and research, Vol. 11, ed. J. C. Smart, 90-136. New York: Agathon.
Brewer, J. y J. Hunter. 1989. Multimetod research: A synthesis of styles. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Burgess, E. W. (1927). Statistics and case studies as methods of sociological research. Sociology and Social Research 12: 103-120.
Creswell, J. W., M. D. Fetters, V. L. Plano Clark y A. Morales. In press. Nesting qualitative data in health sciences intervention trials: A mixed methods application. En Mixed methods research for nursing and the health sciences, eds. S. Andrew y L. Halcomb. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Creswell, J. W., M. D. Fetters y N. V. Ivankova. 2004. Designing a mixed methods study in primary care. Annals of Family Medicine 2, No. 1: 7-12.
________. 2005. Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Creswell, J. W. 1999. Mixed-method research: Introduction and application. En Handbook of educational policy, ed. G. J. Cizek, 455-472. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Coleman, M. ed. Journal of Marriage and the Family 57, No. 4, 1995.
Carr, D.2005.The psychological consequences of midlife men’s social comparisons with their young adult sons. Journal of Marriage and Family 67. No.1:240-250.
Creswell, J. W. V. L. Plano Clark, M. L. Gutmann y W. E. Hanson. 2003. Advanced mixed methods research designs. En Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research, eds. A. Tashakkori y C. Teddlie, 209-240. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Creswell, J. W. y V. L. Plano Clark. 2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Campbell, C. L. y A. S. Demi. 2000. Adult children of fathers missing in action (MIA): Anexamination of emotional distress, grief, and family hardiness. Family Relations 49. No. 3: 267-276.
Dalla, R. L. y W. C. Gamble. 1997. Exploring factors related to parenting competence among Navajo teenage mothers: Dual techniques of inquiry. Family Relations 46, No. 2: 113-121.
Creswell, J. W., A. Tashakkori, K. D. Jensen y K. L. Shapley. 2003. Teaching mixed methods research: Practices, dilemmas, and challenges. En Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research, eds. A. Tashakkori y C. Teddlie, 619-637. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Gibson-Davis, C. M., K. Edin y S. McLanahan. 2005. High hopes but even higher expectations: The retreat from marriage among low-income couples. Journal of Marriage and Family 67, No. 5: 1301-1312.
Gomel, J. N., B. J. Tinsley, R. D. Parke y K. M. Clark. 1998. The effects of economic hardship on family relationships among African American, Latino, and Euro-American families. Journal of Family Issues 19, No. 4: 436-467.
type_driver info:eu-repo/semantics/article
type_coar http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
type_version info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
type_coarversion http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85
type_content Text
publishDate 2011-01-01
date_accessioned 2012-01-01T00:00:00Z
date_available 2012-01-01T00:00:00Z
url https://revistasojs.ucaldas.edu.co/index.php/revlatinofamilia/article/view/4657
url_doi https://revistasojs.ucaldas.edu.co/index.php/revlatinofamilia/article/view/4657
issn 2145-6445
eissn 2215-8758
citationstartpage 243
citationendpage 267
url2_str_mv https://revistasojs.ucaldas.edu.co/index.php/revlatinofamilia/article/download/4657/4256
_version_ 1797158020734517248

Código QR

Estadísticas y Métricas Alternativas

Títulos similares