Shih F J
National Taiwan University, College of Medicine, School of Nursing, Taipei, Republic of China.
J Adv Nurs. 1998 Sep;28(3):631-41. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.1998.00716.x.
The controversy concerning the value of qualitative, quantitative and triangulation approaches to nursing research for understanding human behaviour and increasing nursing knowledge has been an increasing source of debate among nurse scholars. However, the differences and similarities of these three perspectives have not been fully compared as either philosophies or methodologies. The purposes of this paper are to provide an understanding of the origin and development of the triangulation research method, clarify major sources of confusion in the presentation of a triangulation study, and discuss the problems and possible solutions of a triangulation study. Finally, an example of multiple triangulation in a nursing research within a Taiwanese cultural context -- turning points of recovery from cardiac surgery during the intensive care unit transition -- is presented. In the course of the paper, suggestions are also given to help nurse researchers recognize when it is most appropriate to use a certain research method, whether that be qualitative, quantitative or triangulation.
关于定性、定量和三角互证法在护理研究中对于理解人类行为及增加护理知识的价值的争议，一直是护理学者们争论日益增多的根源。然而，这三种视角作为哲学或方法论，其差异与相似之处尚未得到充分比较。本文旨在让人们了解三角互证研究法的起源与发展，阐明在呈现三角互证研究时的主要混淆来源，并讨论三角互证研究的问题及可能的解决办法。最后，给出一个台湾文化背景下护理研究中的多重三角互证实例——重症监护病房过渡期间心脏手术康复的转折点。在本文论述过程中，还给出了一些建议，以帮助护理研究者认识到何时最适合使用某种研究方法，无论是定性、定量还是三角互证法。
