Understanding the philosophical positions of classical and neopragmatists for mixed methods research

• Published in: Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie 2017-10, Vol.69 (Suppl 2), p.63-86
• Main Authors: Johnson, R. Burke, de Waal, Cornelis, Stefurak, Tres, Hildebrand, David L.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Abhandlungen; Methodology of the Social Sciences; Mixed methods research; Personality and Social Psychology; Philosophy of science; Philosophy of the Social Sciences; Pragmatism; Quantitative analysis; Research methodology; Social Sciences; Sociology
• ISSN: 0023-2653; 1861-891X
• DOI: 10.1007/s11577-017-0452-3

Pragmatism is the most popular philosophy/paradigm in the international field of mixed methods research (MMR). This article therefore introduces, describes, and contrasts the philosophies of the most well known pragmatists, including the three most important classical pragmatists (Charles Sanders Peirce, William James and John Dewey) and two neopragmatists (Richard Rorty and Susan Haack). It is shown that Rorty and James fit well with qualitatively driven MMR (i. e., MMR where the qualitative component of the study is primary); Peirce fits well with quantitatively driven MMR (i. e., MMR where the quantitative component is primary); and Dewey fits well with MMR that attempts to treat qualitative and quantitative research/philosophy equally (i. e., equal-status mixed methods research). Importantly, it is shown here that pragmatism offers a way out of many philosophy of science quagmires facing social researchers and it offers a promising philosophy for mixed methods research practice.