Abowitz, D A and Toole, T M (2010) Mixed method research: Fundamental issues of design, validity, and reliability in construction research. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(1), pp. 108-116. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The fact that people play key roles in nearly all aspects of construction suggests that effective construction research requires proper application of social science research methods. This is particularly true for researchers studying topics that involve human actions or behavior in construction processes, such as leadership, innovation, and planning. In social science research, no single method of data collection (survey, experiment, participant observation, or unobtrusive research) is ideal. Each method has inherent strengths and weaknesses. Careful attention to the methodological ABCs of the design process, as discussed here, can enhance the validity and reliability of a given study. Combining quantitative and qualitative approaches in research design and data collection, however, should be considered whenever possible. Such mixed-methods research is more expensive than a single method approach, in terms of time, money, and energy, but improves the validity and reliability of the resulting data and strengthens causal inferences by providing the opportunity to observe data convergence or divergence in hypothesis testing.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | concept measurement; data analysis; mixed methods; research methods; social science |
| Index terms: | testing, social science, research design, qualitative approach, mixed method research, validity, mixed method, construction process, survey, experiment, observation, data analysis, design process |
| Subjects: | design methods, evaluation and assessment methods, data collection methods, research design and methodology, data analysis and analytics, professional practice, theoretical framing, research methods, building construction |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Design Practice, Site Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here