Lipscomb Martin
University of the West of England, Faculty of Health and Social Care, Gloucester Centre, Gloucester, UK.
Nurs Philos. 2008 Jan;9(1):32-45. doi: 10.1111/j.1466-769X.2007.00325.x.
Mixed method study designs are becoming increasingly popular among nurse researchers. Mixed studies can have advantages over single method or methodological investigative designs. However, these advantages may be squandered where researchers fail to think through and justify their theoretic decisions. This paper argues that nurse researchers do not always pay sufficient heed to the philosophic and theoretic elements of research design and, in consequence, some mixed study reports lack argumentative coherence and validity. It is here suggested that Hempel's concept of equivalence can be stretched to usefully illustrate one of the main threats to argumentative coherence in mixed study design. The critical realist theory of Roy Bhaskar is then introduced and this, it is proposed, offers one means by which Hempel's equivalence dilemma can be overcome. Critical realists recognize the existence of logical connections between the ontological, epistemological, and methodological premises that underpin their work. They are therefore more likely to produce coherent studies than uncritical pragmatists who ignore such linkages and, paradoxically, critical realists can be epistemological pluralists because, in re-conceptualizing the ontological basis of inquiry, problems associated with the mixing of alternative metaphysics are circumvented.
混合方法研究设计在护理研究人员中越来越受欢迎。混合研究相对于单一方法或方法学调查设计可能具有优势。然而,如果研究人员没有充分思考并论证其理论决策,这些优势可能会被浪费。本文认为,护理研究人员并不总是充分关注研究设计的哲学和理论要素,因此,一些混合研究报告缺乏论证的连贯性和有效性。本文认为,亨佩尔的等效性概念可以加以拓展,以有效地说明混合研究设计中论证连贯性的一个主要威胁。接着引入了罗伊·巴斯卡尔的批判实在论理论,本文认为,这提供了一种克服亨佩尔等效性困境的方法。批判实在论者认识到支撑其工作的本体论、认识论和方法论前提之间存在逻辑联系。因此,与忽视这种联系的非批判性实用主义者相比,他们更有可能进行连贯的研究,而且矛盾的是,批判实在论者可以成为认识论多元论者,因为在重新概念化探究的本体论基础时,与混合替代形而上学相关的问题得以避免。