See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/243463725

Mixed methods designs in marketing research

Article  in  Qualitative Market Research · January 2011

DOI: 10.1108/13522751111099300

CITATIONS READS

73 3,730

2 authors:

Robert L. Harrison Tim Reilly

Western Michigan University University of Minnesota Duluth
16 PUBLICATIONS   193 CITATIONS    6 PUBLICATIONS   105 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Robert L. Harrison on 02 February 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal
Mixed methods designs in marketing research
Robert L. Harrison Timothy M. Reilly
Article information:
To cite this document:
Robert L. Harrison Timothy M. Reilly, (2011),"Mixed methods designs in marketing research", Qualitative
Market Research: An International Journal, Vol. 14 Iss 1 pp. 7 - 26
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13522751111099300
Downloaded by Western Michigan University At 17:12 01 February 2015 (PT)

Downloaded on: 01 February 2015, At: 17:12 (PT)

References: this document contains references to 67 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 17296 times since 2011*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Dallas Hanson, Martin Grimmer, (2007),"The mix of qualitative and quantitative research in major
marketing journals, 1993-2002", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 41 Iss 1/2 pp. 58-70 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/03090560710718111
Dilanthi Amaratunga, David Baldry, Marjan Sarshar, Rita Newton, (2002),"Quantitative and qualitative
research in the built environment: application of “mixed” research approach", Work Study, Vol. 51 Iss 1 pp.
17-31 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00438020210415488
Rana Sobh, Chad Perry, (2006),"Research design and data analysis in realism research", European
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 40 Iss 11/12 pp. 1194-1209 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03090560610702777

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 235366 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1352-2752.htm

Mixed methods
Mixed methods designs designs
in marketing research
Robert L. Harrison
Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA, and 7
Timothy M. Reilly
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, Nebraska, USA

Abstract
Downloaded by Western Michigan University At 17:12 01 February 2015 (PT)

Purpose – The purpose of this article is to determine the uses of mixed method research designs
published in major marketing journals.
Design/methodology/approach – This study involved a content analysis of 2,166 articles published
between 2003 and 2009 in nine prominent marketing journals.
Findings – A total of 34 mixed method studies implemented data-collection procedures sequentially
(79 percent), eight implemented them concurrently (19 percent) and one combined both sequential and
concurrent procedures (2 percent). On the whole, priority was skewed more toward quantitative strands,
with 27 articles prioritizing quantitative data (63 percent), three articles prioritizing qualitative data
(7 percent), and 13 articles prioritizing both equally (30 percent).
Research limitations/implications – It is clear that marketing scholars recognize the benefit of
mixing qualitative and quantitative research; however, as a discipline we are not demonstrating
knowledge of the mixed method literature or procedures, as only one article recognized or mentioned
knowledge of mixed method procedures or cited mixed method research.
Practical implications – This study provides guidance for researchers in identifying design types
appropriate for various rationales or research objectives and models of different design types that have
been published in marketing journals. In addition, implications for designing mixed methods studies in
marketing include highlighting the need for scholars to specifically address issues such as the timing
and priority given to each data type (i.e. sequential or concurrent), and the integration (or mixing) of the
both data types.
Originality/value – Until now, the role of mixed methods designs in marketing has not been the
subject of formal examination. The delineation of the major forms in mixed method designs provides a
framework for looking at such design types, which helps to provide more credibility to the field of
marketing by providing examples of research designs that are substantially different than single
strand studies.
Keywords Research methods, Marketing, Publications
Paper type Research paper

In marketing, mixed methods research has received little coverage, despite the
apparent movement in many of the social sciences toward such research designs.
While national research foundations such as the National Institute of Health, the
National Science Foundation, the National Research Council, and others have offered
workshops promoting the use of mixed method research techniques (Creswell et al.,
2003), discussions in marketing regarding this methodological approach have focused Qualitative Market Research: An
International Journal
Vol. 14 No. 1, 2011
The authors would like to thank Amanda Garrett, John Creswell, and Vicki Plano Clark in the pp. 7-26
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Office of Qualitative and Mixed Method Research, University of Nebraska – Lincoln, Ann Veeck, 1352-2752
and James W. Gentry. DOI 10.1108/13522751111099300
 QMRIJ primarily on the philosophical assumptions that guide qualitative, quantitative, and
14,1 mixed method research approaches (Bahl and Milne, 2006). The post-positivist and
interpretivist paradigms have been discussed in terms of their ontological, axiological
and epistemological assumptions about the nature, values, and epistemological
assumptions that guide research (Hudson and Ozanne, 1988). An important
assumption guiding post-positivist research mandates an objective view of reality,
8 in which research is aimed to measure or explain, creating knowledge that is
generalizable across different people, time, and place (Hudson and Ozanne, 1988).
The interpretivist ontology assumes the existence of multiple realities that are socially
constructed and is focused on understanding behavior rather than predicting it. It is
argued that mixed method research with its pragmatic approach does not align itself
with a single system or philosophy (Creswell et al., 2003), and instead is most often
Downloaded by Western Michigan University At 17:12 01 February 2015 (PT)

driven by the research question, rather than being restrained by paradigmatic

assumptions ( Johnson and Onwuegbuzie, 2004). Paradigmatically, mixed method
research makes use of pragmatism as a system of philosophy. The logic of pragmatic
inquiry includes the use of induction (or discovery of patterns), deduction (testing of
theories and hypotheses), and abduction (uncovering and relying on the best of a set of
explanations for understanding one’s results) ( Johnson and Onwuegbuzie, 2004;
Morgan, 2007). The mixing of methods in social research has been given many names
including blended research, integrative, multi-method, multiple methods, triangulated
studies, ethnographic residual analysis, and mixed research. In marketing,
“multi-method” and “mixed method” research are the most commonly used labels. In
the Handbook of Mixed Methods Research, distinctions have been made between these
two terms:
(1) multi-method which involve multiple types of qualitative inquiry (e.g. case
study and ethnography) or multiple types of quantitative inquiry (surveys and
experiments); and
(2) mixed methods which involve the mixing of the two types of data (Morse, 2003).

Mixed methods research has become the most popular term for mixing qualitative and
quantitative data in a single study (Johnson et al., 2007) and is the label used in this
study. The definition of mixed methods research used in this study is one based on an
analysis of definitions used by leaders in the field of mixed methods research:
Mixed methods research is the type of research in which a researcher or team of researchers
combines elements of qualitative and quantitative research approaches (e.g. use of qualitative
and quantitative viewpoints, data collection, analysis, inference techniques) for the broad
purpose of breadth and depth of understanding and corroboration ( Johnson et al., 2007, p. 123).
This definition will be used in this study, as published marketing research will be
evaluated, particularly addressing the use of two strands of data (i.e. qualitative and
quantitative), the timing (i.e. sequential or concurrent), the priority given to each data
type, and the integration (or mixing) of the data.
The development of the mixed method research approach began in the 1980s, when
scholars began expressing concerns about the mixing of quantitative and qualitative data
without articulating defensible reasons for doing so (Greene et al., 1989). Subsequently,
scholars began identifying a number of rationales for combining data-collection methods
and research questions particular to different mixed method research designs. In a study,
 investigating the reasons given for combining qualitative and quantitative research, Mixed methods
Bryman (2006) identified 16 rationales for conducting mixed method research. designs
Descriptions of these rationales are listed in Table I, in addition to an added column
that highlights what is identified as appropriate mixed method design type for each
rationale. These design types are described in detail in the “Findings” section.
In a content analysis of research published between 1993 and 2002 in three
prominent marketing journals, 173 articles were found to mix qualitative and 9
quantitative data (Hanson and Grimmer, 2007). Implicitly, the marketing discipline
encourages mixed methods research because of the emphasis on rigorous research
(Woodruff, 2003) and, as Hunt (1994) pointed out, research using qualitative methods
could usefully complement quantitative analyses. Nonetheless, though the potential of
qualitative research is undisputed, mixed methods studies in marketing are relatively
Downloaded by Western Michigan University At 17:12 01 February 2015 (PT)

rare (Hanson and Grimmer, 2007). Again, the existing literature has taken the
beginning steps towards understanding this methodological approach by first
discussing the philosophical assumptions of such research (Bahl and Milne, 2006) and
identifying trends as far as the numbers of studies employing the approach (Hanson
and Grimmer, 2007).
This study takes the next step in this methodological discussion by updating the
recent trends in the use of mixed methods research and identifying trends in terms of
the types of mixed methods designs being employed in marketing research. Despite the
availability of mixed methods-related books, chapters, and journal articles, the use
of mixed methods research designs in marketing still is quite limited. The general
absence of mixed method research designs may be due to a number of factors including
the historical precedent of favoring quantitative research in marketing (Hunt, 1994), the
general lack of attention to diverse methodological approaches in graduate education
and training, and the difficulty in learning both method types. Scant methodological
coverage by marketing scholars suggests a need to answer the following question:
What types of mixed method research designs have been published in marketing?
Further, marketing scholars must be able to assess the appropriateness of the different
design choices and anticipate challenges with each choice. We address this issue by
proving an overview of mixed method design types and an examination of how these
designs are successfully being applied and reported in mainstream marketing journals,
providing a guide for future researchers conducting mixed method marketing research.
The paper is structured as follows. First, rationales for conducting mixed methods
research are discussed. This is followed by the presentation of a content analysis of the
mixed method marketing research including outlines of the four major mixed method
designs. The paper concludes with a discussion of the methodological implications and
future research recommendations.

Content analysis and data-collection procedures

In this paper, mixed method articles were reviewed across nine journals from 2003
to 2009: Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Marketing, Journal of Marketing
Research, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Journal of Retailing, Journal of
Consumer Psychology, Marketing Science, International Journal of Research in
Marketing, and European Journal of Marketing. The rationale for selecting these
journals is that JM, JMR, JCR, and Marketing Science are listed as the A-level
marketing journals according to the American Marketing Association, with JCP, JR,
 Downloaded by Western Michigan University At 17:12 01 February 2015 (PT)

10
14,1

Table I.
QMRIJ

design types
Rationale for mixed
methods research and
Rationale Description Design typea

Triangulation Quantitative and qualitative combined to triangulate findings to be mutually Concurrent

corroborated
Offset Combining strands offsets their weaknesses to draw on the strengths of both Concurrent
Completeness Bringing together a more comprehensive account if both quantitative and Exploratory, explanatory, or concurrent
qualitative research is employed
Process Quantitative provides an account of structures in social life but qualitative Exploratory or explanatory
provides sense of process
Different research questions Quantitative and qualitative each answers different research questions Concurrent
Explanation One is used to help explain findings generated by the other Explanatory
Unexpected results When one strand generates surprising results that can be understood by Explanatory or embedded
employing the other
Instrument development Qualitative is employed to develop questionnaire and scale items Exploratory
Sampling One approach is used to facilitate the sampling of respondents or cases Exploratory or explanatory
Credibility Employing both approaches enhances the integrity of findings Exploratory, explanatory, or concurrent
Context Qualitative providing contextual understanding coupled with either Exploratory or explanatory
generalizable, externally valid findings or broad relationships among variables
uncovered through a survey
Illustration Qualitative to illustrate quantitative findings (putting “meat on the bones” of Explanatory
“dry” quantitative findings)
Utility Among articles with an applied focus, the combining the two approaches will be Exploratory, explanatory, concurrent,
more useful to practitioners and others or embedded
Confirm and discover This entails using qualitative data to generate hypotheses and using quantitative Exploratory
research to test them within a single project
Diversity of view Combining researchers’ and participants’ perspectives through quantitative and Concurrent or embedded
qualitative research, respectively, and uncovering relationships between
variables through quantitative research while also revealing meanings among
research participants through qualitative research
Note: aAdded classification
Source: Adapted from Bryman (2006)
 JAMS, IJMR and EJM also listed as top-level journals according to some surveys Mixed methods
(Theoharakis and Hirst, 2002). These journals were chosen to provide data from designs
eminent journals and it is assumed that they represent trends in best practice research.
The rationale for selecting articles after 2003 coincides with the publication of the
Handbook of Mixed Methods Research (Tashakkori and Teddlie, 2003). Mixed method
scholars often refer to studies published before and after this time period as pre- and
post-handbook research, respectively. Further, the intent of the paper is to provide a 11
specific content analysis of mixed method research, analyzing more recent trends in
marketing research following Hanson and Grimmer’s (2007) lead. The purpose of the
Hanson and Grimmer article was to “assess the mix of qualitative and quantitative
research being published” (Hanson and Grimmer, 2007, p. 60). While they also
identified trends in the sheer number of mixed method studies published in three major
Downloaded by Western Michigan University At 17:12 01 February 2015 (PT)

marketing journals before 2002, this study examines research conducted after 2002 and
includes a focused discussion of the different mixed methods research design types
being used. Because the focus of their study was not mixed methods research
specifically, their definition of mixed methods may have allowed for the inclusion of
studies that discuss the use of multiple data sources, without the “mixing” of the
quantitative and qualitative results. It is clear from the number of articles found by
Hanson and Grimmer that mixed methods research is being conducted by marketing
scholars. What is unclear are mixed method design trends in the marketing discipline,
that is, what types of mixed methods designs are being used in marketing studies.
Other disciplines have conducted reviews in this manner to gauge trends with regard
to mixed method design types within the field (Hanson et al., 2005; Johnson et al., 2007;
Plano Clark et al., 2008; Powell et al., 2008; Truscott et al., 2010).
Content analysis is an observational technique which allows for a systematic
evaluation of recorded communications (Kolbe and Burnett, 1991). In the current
investigation, the recorded communications of interest are journal articles within the
marketing journals previously identified. For the purpose of coding, articles were
required to contain qualitative research centered on primary data collection in
non-numerical form (words, images, symbols, etc.) and quantitative research centered on
data collection in numerical form. To identify mixed method research studies, we used a
coding scheme developed by the founding editor of the Journal of Mixed Methods
Research, who uses these criteria when judging article fit with his journal (Table II).
Consistent with this scheme and others (Bryman, 2006), studies that foreground the
fact that they are using both qualitative and quantitative research, but either report just

X Quantitative rigor X Qualitative rigor

Use of theory Emerging design þ type of design mentioned

Good sampling procedure
Good sample size
Identification of instruments
Validity and reliability of scores
Detailed procedures of data collection
Level of sophistication of data analysis
(e.g. case study, ethnography)
Good sampling procedure
Good sample size
Questions for data collection
Procedures for data collection Table II.
Coding/thematic development Mixed method
Advanced level of use themes (e.g. taxonomy, chronology) scoring scheme
 QMRIJ the quantitative or qualitative data, were not included in the study. Content analyses or
14,1 studies that quantify qualitative data were excluded from this study. Multiple
approaches were used to identify articles of the study. The first approach involved
keyword searches for phrases such as “quantitative” and “qualitative”, “multi-method”,
“mixed method”, or “triangulation” appeared in the title, keywords, or abstract.
Relatively, few articles were generated by this search. The second approach involved
12 manually searching each article in each journal. This process was accelerated through
the use of online databases such as Science Direct, which offers search tools that include
bookmarks that outline each article, and Emerald and Springerlink that provide HTML
fulltext options that made for more rapid scrolling through methods and results sections.
All 2,596 articles published in the selected journals from 2003 to 2009 were examined and
99 articles were identified that mentioned the use of both qualitative and quantitative
Downloaded by Western Michigan University At 17:12 01 February 2015 (PT)

methods. These articles were then limited to include studies that reported both
qualitative and quantitative results, rather than merely mentioning that such data were
collected. From this search, 43 articles met the definition of mixed methods research and
were included in the purposive sample. These articles were then sorted to identify
examples of research employing different mixed method design types (Table III).
Table IV lists the design features of each selected article. Included as a design feature
is the priority given to the different data strands. To highlight priority and timing, Morse
(1991, 2003) developed a procedural notation system that uses plus (þ ) symbols and
arrows ( ! ), and capital and lowercase letters to represent different mixed method
procedures. A plus sign indicates that both data strands were collected concurrently and
an arrow indicates that the data were collected sequentially. Capital letters are used to
indicate higher priority for a particular method, with lowercase indicating lower
priority. For example, QUAL ! quan indicates a sequential study where qualitative
data was collected prior to the quantitative data, and that top priority is given to the
qualitative data. QUAL þ QUAN indicates that both data strands were collected at the
same time and were given equal priority. This notation system is featured in Table IV.

Findings
The timing, or sequence, in mixed method designs refers to the order in which
researchers use the two data strands. Timing procedures vary by design type, with
concurrent designs employing concurrent data-collection procedures, explanatory and
exploratory designs employing sequential data collection, and embedded designs
employing either sequential or concurrent data-collection procedures. In this study,
34 mixed method studies implement data-collection procedures sequentially
(79 percent), and eight implemented them concurrently (19 percent), and one
combined both sequential and concurrent procedures (2 percent). On the whole, priority
was skewed more toward quantitative strands, with 27 articles prioritizing
quantitative data (63 percent), three articles prioritizing qualitative data (7 percent),
and 13 articles prioritizing both equally (30 percent). This is not surprising as it has
been suggested that most articles employing mixed methods in marketing literature
have a positivist orientation (Bahl and Milne, 2006).

Exploratory designs
Four mixed methods design types appeared in the selected marketing journals during
the designated time period. In the first type, i.e. exploratory designs, researchers first
 Downloaded by Western Michigan University At 17:12 01 February 2015 (PT)

Study Design Variant Priority

Walsh and Beatty (2007) Sequential exploratory Instrument development qual ! QUAN
Wolfinbarger and Gilly (2003) Sequential exploratory Instrument development qual ! QUAN
Bruner and Kumar (2007) Sequential exploratory Instrument development qual ! QUAN
Commuri and Gentry (2005) Sequential exploratory Instrument development QUAL ! quan
Grayson and Martinec (2004) Sequential exploratory Instrument development qual ! QUAN
Hand et al. (2009) Sequential exploratory Instrument development qual ! QUAN
Russell et al. (2004) Sequential exploratory Instrument development qual ! QUAN
Thomson (2006) Sequential explanatory Follow-up explanations QUAN ! qual
Ulaga and Eggert (2006) Sequential exploratory Instrument development QUAL ! QUAN
Arnold and Reynolds (2003) Sequential exploratory Instrument development qual ! QUAN
Venable et al. (2005) Sequential exploratory Instrument development qual ! QUAN
Du et al. (2008) Sequential exploratory Instrument development QUAL ! QUAN
Griffiths-Hemans and Grover (2006) Sequential exploratory Instrument development qual ! QUAN
Brennan et al. (2003) Sequential exploratory Instrument development qual ! QUAN
Luna et al. (2008) Sequential exploratory Instrument development qual ! QUAN
Avlonitis and Indounas (2007) Sequential exploratory Instrument development qual ! QUAN
Argouslidis and McLean (2004) Sequential exploratory Instrument development QUAL ! QUAN
Mekonnen et al. (2008) Sequential exploratory Instrument development QUAL ! QUAN
Marcella et al. (2002) and Marcella and Sequential exploratory Instrument development QUAL ! QUAN
Davies (2004)
Botti et al. (2009) Sequential exploratory Instrumental development qual ! QUAN
Sogn-Grundvag and Ostli (2009) Sequential exploratory Taxonomy QUAL ! QUAN
Kirmani and Campbell (2004) Sequential exploratory Typology QUAL ! QUAN
(continued)
designs

methods studies
Mixed methods

published in marketing
Design features of mixed
Table III.
13
 Downloaded by Western Michigan University At 17:12 01 February 2015 (PT)

14
14,1
QMRIJ

Table III.
Study Design Variant Priority

Steenkamp and Geyskens (2006) Sequential explanatory Follow-up explanations QUAN ! qual
Dellande et al. (2004) Sequential explanatory Follow-up explanations QUAN ! qual
Hewett et al. (2006) Sequential explanatory Follow-up explanations QUAN ! qual
Coulter et al. (2005) Sequential explanatory Follow-up explanations QUAN ! qual
Jayachandran et al. (2004) Sequential explanatory Follow-up explanations QUAN ! qual
Horsky et al. (2004) Sequential explanatory Follow-up explanations QUAN ! qual
Grace and O’Cass (2003) Sequential explanatory Follow-up explanations QUAN ! qual
McMullan and Gilmore (2008) Sequential explanatory Follow-up explanations QUAL ! quan
West and Prendergast (2009) Sequential explanatory Follow-up explanations QUAN ! QUAL
Paul et al. (2009) Sequential explanatory Follow-up explanations qual ! QUAN
Dahl and Moreau (2007) Sequential embedded Embedded experimental model QUAN (qual)
Scott and Vargas (2007) Sequential embedded Embedded experimental model QUAN (QUAL)
Harris and Blair (2006) Sequential embedded Embedded experimental model qual ! QUAN
Daly et al. (2009) Embedded Embedded methodology QUAL þ QUAN
Andrade and Ho (2009) Embedded Embedded experimental QUAN (qual)
Lau-Gesk and Meyers-Levy (2009) Embedded Embedded experimental QUAN (qual)
Coulter et al. (2003) Concurrent convergence Convergence model QUAL þ quan
Mathwick et al. 2008 Concurrent convergence Convergence model QUAL þ QUAN
Coelho and Easingwood (2008) Concurrent convergence Convergence model QUAL þ QUAN
Voorhees et al. (2006) Concurrent convergence Typology qual þ QUAN
Simoes et al. (2005) Sequential exploratory with Hybrid (Qual ! Quan) !
concurrent follow-up (Qual þ Quan)
Note: n ¼ 34
 Mixed methods
Design type Variants Timing Weighting Mixing Notation
designs
Concurrent Convergence Concurrent: Usually Merging the data QUAN þ QUAL
quantitative and equal during the
qualitative at the interpretation or
same time analysis
Embedded Embedded Concurrent or Unequal Embed one type of QUAN (qual) or 15
experimental sequential data within a QUAL (quan)
Embedded larger designusing
correlation the other type
Embedded of data
methodology
Explanatory Follow-up Sequential: Usually Connect the data QUAN ! qual
Downloaded by Western Michigan University At 17:12 01 February 2015 (PT)

explanations quantitative quantitative between the two

followed by phases
a qualitative
Exploratory Instrument Sequential: Usually Connect the data QUAL ! quan
development qualitative qualitative between the two
Taxonomy followed by phases
a quantitative
Table IV.
Note: Words in italics denote added variant Major mixed methods
Source: Adapted from Creswell and Plano Clark (2007) design types

collect qualitative data, analyze the qualitative data, and then build on the qualitative
data for the quantitative follow-up. Building can involve identifying the types of
questions that might be asked, determining the items/variables/scales for instrument
design, and generating a typology or classification.
Exploratory designs were the most common type of design used (47 percent, n ¼ 20).
Exploratory designs are useful for exploring relationships when study variables are
unknown; developing new instruments, based on initial qualitative analysis; generalizing
qualitative findings; and refining or testing a developing theory. Exploratory designs are
most often conducted when qualitative data are only an initial exploration to identify
variables, constructs, taxonomies, or instruments for quantitative studies (Creswell et al.,
2003). Two common variants of this design type are the instrument design model and the
taxonomy development model. In instrument development designs, qualitative findings
are used to develop scale items for a quantitative survey instrument. In taxonomy
development designs, qualitative results are used to develop a taxonomy (or classifications
system), or to develop an emergent theory, and the secondary, quantitative phase tests or
develops the emergent theory, or tests or studies the quantitative results in more detail
(Creswell et al., 2003). To explain, a research question employing this design-type might
read, “To what extent do the qualitative findings generalize to a specified population?”
Though it was found that marketing scholars rarely discussed rationales for conducting
mixed method research, Grayson and Martinec (2004, p. 299) described explicitly their
reasons for using both types of data:
Rather than assuming that our conceptualization is appropriate for understanding and
meaning perceptions of authenticity at two research sites, we used open-ended interview
questions to hear, in consumers’ own words, how they experienced the sites.
 QMRIJ In one example from marketing literature, Commuri and Gentry (2005) used an
14,1 exploratory design to investigate household resource allocation in households where
wives earn more money than their husbands. The authors interviewed 20 couples a total
of 64 times and developed a grounded theory. They then tested implications of the
emergent theory in an online survey among 126 married participants. The results from
the qualitative and quantitative data were presented separately and mixed in the
16 “Discussion” section. Arnold and Reynolds (2003) also used a sequential exploratory
design, but to develop an instrument. They described the scale development process in
three phases. The qualitative inquiry phase included 98 depth interviews, coded
thematically by a three-member coding team. Phenomenological meaning statements
were used to develop domain definitions and survey items, and a table of statements was
included in an appendix. The scale purification phase involved detailed item analysis,
Downloaded by Western Michigan University At 17:12 01 February 2015 (PT)

exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, an assessment of scale

reliability, unidimensionality, and convergent and discriminant validity. The scale
validation phase activities involved the replication of the confirmatory factor structure
on an independent sample, assessment of nomological validity by correlating
the emergent constructs with existing constructs, and performing a cluster analysis.
The findings from the two data strands were presented separately. About 14 other
studies used a similar sequential exploratory design to develop an instrument (Table II).
Kirmani and Campbell (2004) used an exploratory design to investigate how
consumers respond to influence attempts by salespeople and service personnel. Three
qualitative data sets included consumer diaries from 36 participants, 34 semi-structured
interviews, and nine depth interviews. The qualitative data were used to develop a
response strategy typology. A total of 96 participants then participated in an
experimental study to test relationships within the developed typology. The results from
the qualitative study and the experimental study were presented separately and were
mixed in the “Discussion” section. Voorhees et al. (2006) also used sequential exploratory
designs to test typological relationships.
The exploratory design was found to be the dominant design type used in this study. Of
the articles that were excluded from this study, most of the articles did not fully develop or
analyze the qualitative strand of the study. The benefit of mixing methodologies is
utilizing the strengths of each approach. Many of the studies merely discussed conducting
interviews to develop scales. The strength in qualitative research is the depth of
knowledge gained from analyzing the experience of participants. Interviewing
respondents only indicates a surface level of understanding a phenomenon. The
multi-layered analytic approach used in qualitative methodologies allow for a much
deeper understanding of a phenomenon and in turn should lead to the development of
more specific and focused questions to be asked in the quantitative follow-up phase.

Explanatory designs
In explanatory designs, researchers first collect and analyze quantitative data, then
build on those findings in a qualitative follow up, which seeks to provide a better
understanding of the quantitative results. Building can involve either using the
quantitative data to select cases or to identify questions that need further explorations
in the qualitative phase.
A total of 11 articles were found that employed explanatory designs (25 percent). In
explanatory designs, quantitative results are collected and followed by qualitative data
 and unequal priority is given to the quantitative data. As the label implies, the Mixed methods
explanatory design is useful in explaining relationships or study findings. Explanatory designs
designs are most often conducted when qualitative data are needed to help explain
or build on initial quantitative data. Two variants of explanatory designs include
follow-up explanations and participant selection models (Creswell et al., 2003).
In follow-up explanation models, specific qualitative results are used to explain or expand
on quantitative results. For example, statistical differences among groups, individuals 17
who scored at extreme levels, or unexpected results are explored qualitatively. A research
question employing this design-type might read, “How do qualitative data explain the
quantitative results?” In both exploratory and explanatory designs the data sets, or
strands, are usually connected, or mixed, during the interpretation stage and in the
“Discussion” section.
Downloaded by Western Michigan University At 17:12 01 February 2015 (PT)

Jayachandran et al. (2004) used an explanatory study of consumer response

capability. After the development of a conceptual model, “(31) depth interviews were
conducted to triangulate the study findings from the survey data and to generate further
understanding of the underlying phenomenon” ( Jayachandran et al., 2004, p. 225).
The authors then discussed the rationale for mixing the data:
Since the objective of this (qualitative) phase of the research study was to gain further
understanding of the results phase, we integrate the discussion of the findings from the depth
interviews with that of the survey results ( Jayachandran et al., 2004, p. 255).
Four other studies used sequential explanatory designs, all of which employed the
follow-up variant.
Overall, the articles that collected and analyzed quantitative data first presented a
much more thorough analysis and presentation of the qualitative data in the second
phase. This may be explained by the nature and rationale for the design type. For the
most part, the qualitative phase was included to address specific issues that resulted
from the quantitative phase. Because the issues were focused, the qualitative study
was more specific in its development and analysis.
An overall trend in the marketing literature is the movement away from survey data
in recent years, as scholars are questioning the reliability of survey data. The
explanatory design is an alternative that may potentially address these concerns. The
strength in survey research is to uncover generalizable trends in specific population and
qualitative follow-up can be used to address gaps that results from unique findings.
Thus, explanatory design has the potential to illuminate the strengths of survey data.

Embedded designs
In embedded designs, researchers collect both quantitative and qualitative data either
sequentially or concurrently with one form of data playing a supporting role, or both
forms of data playing a supporting role in a larger design. In the former design, the
qualitative data may play a supporting role within an experiment or correlational
study. In the latter, the qualitative and quantitative data play a supportive role in a
case study, ethnography, narrative, or other qualitative research design. This latter
variant is identified as embedded methodology in Table I. A key question with
embedded designs is whether the secondary data type is playing a supplemental role,
i.e. would the results of the secondary data type be meaningful if it were not embedded
within the other data (Creswell and Plano Clark, 2007).
 QMRIJ Six studies were found employing embedded designs (14 percent). Embedded
14,1 designs are most often conducted when there are different questions requiring different
data. The two variants of embedded designs include experimental models, wherein
qualitative data are embedded in experimental, and correlational models, in which
qualitative data are used to explain how mechanisms work in a correlation model
(Creswell et al., 2003). For example, a research question employing this design-type
18 might read, “How do the qualitative findings enhance the interpretation of the
experiments, or correlational outcomes?”
Scott and Vargas (2007) employed an embedded design in their study of consumer
response to pictures as a form of writing. The qualitative phase was embedded in a
larger experimental design to understand better what aspects of each picture
respondents were using to deduce the intended message. Following an experimental
Downloaded by Western Michigan University At 17:12 01 February 2015 (PT)

study, 20 interviews were conducted to understand how mechanisms worked in the

experiment. Specifically, the interviews examined what aspects of images were used by
respondents to deduce the intended message. This was followed by an experimental
study of the emergent aspects and other relationships.
Dahl and Moreau (2007) also employed an embedded design in their study to
understand motivations and enjoyment in creative activities. They employed an
experimental model, wherein 12 semi-structured interviews were used to shape the
intervention. Using central themes identified in the interviews, the authors tested
experimentally the roles of constraints in the creative experience. They then identified
and tested empirically an important moderator of the creative experience, namely poor
skill level. The results from the qualitative and quantitative data were presented
separately in the “Theoretical contributions” section of the article.
The Daly et al. (2009) study offered the closest example of an embedded
methodology design in their examination of the value of improvisation training for
service employees. While the qualitative case study method was the overarching
design used in this study, both qualitative and quantitative data were collected
simultaneously, then analyzed and mixed in the “Results” section.

Concurrent designs
In concurrent designs, researchers collect both qualitative and quantitative data
simultaneously, analyze both data strands separately, and then mix the databases by
merging the data. Five articles were found employing concurrent designs (12 percent).
Concurrent designs are most often conducted to bring together the strengths of both
quantitative and qualitative research to compare results or to validate, confirm, or
corroborate quantitative results with qualitative findings. In convergence design
models, qualitative and quantitative data are analyzed separately and the different
results are converged during the interpretation (Creswell et al., 2003). A research
question employing this design-type might read, “To what extent do the qualitative
results confirm the quantitative results?”
Mathwick et al. (2008) collected both qualitative and quantitative data in their
concurrent design study examining the relational norms that determine social capital in
virtual communities. The authors collected online survey data from 1,011 visitors to a
virtual community website. They also collected observational data using netnography,
that is, they analyzed discussion threads to develop insight into community interactions
(Mathwick et al., 2008). A measurement model was estimated using the quantitative data
 with individual item reliability and convergent and discriminate validities being assessed Mixed methods
(Mathwick et al., 2008). Themes that emerged from the qualitative data provided designs
additional support for their initial characterization of virtual activity. The themes were
discussed until the authors achieved interpretive convergence. The results for each data
strand were presented separately and mixed in the “Discussion” section.
Voorhees et al. (2006) used a concurrent design to investigate non-complainers, or
customers who experience service failures but do not voice complaints. They used a 19
critical incident (CIT) survey that included both qualitative and quantitative sections to
gather data. The first goal of this study was to explore the reasons why customers do not
complain following dissatisfactory service experiences. In this study, qualitative data
were gathered from consumers in which they described a recent service experience with
which they were dissatisfied and then scale items were used to gather quantitative data
Downloaded by Western Michigan University At 17:12 01 February 2015 (PT)

surrounding their response to said incident. The results of the qualitative section of their
CIT survey reveal six general categories and 16 subcategories of non-complainer
motivations. The second goal was to compare non-complainers with complainer groups
across several key outcome variables. The results of the quantitative section of the CIT
survey indicate that the levels of repurchase intentions and negative outcomes for
non-complainers are in among the other investigated groups. Collectively, the findings
both supported and extended current knowledge of the motivations of non-complainers
and the consequences of their actions (Voorhees et al., 2006). The results were presented
separately and mixed in the “Discussion” section.
Because the data in concurrent design are collected simultaneously and equal
weight is given to both strands, the nature of this design lends itself to rigorous
collection and analysis in both data strands. While all of the concurrent design studies
asked and answered different research questions with each data strand, a few did not
provide equal weighting and may have illuminated more with a balanced design.

Hybrid design
One study was found to incorporate aspects of multiple design types (2 percent).
This study, not included in the original classification scheme, is labeled a hybrid design.
A hybrid design may be used when multiple rationales require the use of multiple
designs. This study developed a measure of the corporate identity management
construct drawing on literature, in-depth interviews, survey data, and a follow-up phase
(Simoes et al., 2005). The first two phases of the study are indicative of an exploratory
design as they interviewed managers to understand better their experience in order to
develop an instrument. The instrument was developed using exploratory factor
analysis, with discriminant and convergent validity being assessed. The authors then
incorporated a two-part follow-up concurrent design phase to further “validate, interpret
and develop the findings” (Simoes et al., 2005, p. 160). This validation phase included
interviews with ten managers and a follow-up questionnaire sent to 110 (27 returned)
managers who had been involved with the initial survey to assess the representativeness
of the scale. The data were presented separately and mixed in the “Discussion” section.

Discussion
Mixed methods research allows researchers to be “more flexible, integrative, and
holistic in their investigative techniques, as they strive to address a range of complex
research questions that arise” (Powell et al., 2008, p. 306). However, mixed methods
 QMRIJ researchers have suggested that there is a need for distinguishing between studies that
14,1 utilize the two types of data without serious integration and studies that “mix” the data
sets effectively (Tashakkori and Creswell, 2007). The benefits of such integration
include, but are not limited to, the possibility of redirecting one or both studies given
earlier results, adding questions to a revised questionnaire so that the quantitative data
address the issue more systematically, or seeing new issues from “other” responses to
20 surveys that can be supplemented qualitatively. A study that includes both data types
without integration is merely a collection of methods. Strong mixed methods studies
address the decision of how to integrate the data as well as timing and priority
(Creswell and Plano Clark, 2007). Thus, there is a need for guidance for conducting
mixed method research and for assessing the rigor of data collection and analysis of
both data types.
Downloaded by Western Michigan University At 17:12 01 February 2015 (PT)

Until now, no information has been provided as to the extent to which marketing
research is using mixed methods designs. That is, prior to this article, the role of mixed
methods design types in marketing has not been the subject of formal examination.
The delineation of the major forms in mixed method designs provides a framework for
looking at such design types, which helps to provide more credibility to the field of
marketing by providing examples of research designs that are substantially different
than single strand studies. The framework also helps advance a common language for
researchers using mixed methods techniques and provides guidance and direction for
marketing researchers to design mixed methods studies. Bryman (2006) found when
interviewing mixed methods scholars that they had a difficult time identifying
exemplary mixed methods research and an absence of “best practice” templates from
which to draw upon when it comes to combining findings. This study addresses this
issue for marketing scholars by identifying current trends and offering examples of
research employing different design types. While it is clear that marketing scholars
recognize the benefit of mixing qualitative and quantitative research, as a discipline we
are not demonstrating knowledge of the mixed method literature or procedures. This is
demonstrated by the fact that only one article recognized or mentioned knowledge of
mixed method procedures or cited mixed method research (Argouslidis and McLean,
2004). Further, having a mixed methods design plan will improve an author’s rhetoric
as to why specific designs were used to address research problems and force them to
consider what can be learned by using both qualitative and quantitative data.
It is also evident that researchers may not be maximizing the extent to which they are
using mixed method research. For example, several authors mentioned conducting
interviews to collect information prior to a quantitative study, but data from the
interviews were often under-reported and the method by which the data were analyzed
was often not used or defined. On the other hand, there were a few mixed method articles
with weak quantitative strands (e.g. simple descriptive statistics). This is not to say that
these are weak studies, they merely were not labeled mixed methods in this study.
A majority of the studies placed emphasis on the quantitative component
(63 percent, n ¼ 27). Quantitative research is more apt for answering questions about
relationships between specific variables, and questions of who, where, how many and
how much. Qualitative research is more apt for answering why and how questions.
Understanding experiences and meanings attached to experiences of individuals and
groups is the hallmark of good qualitative research. Mixed method research provides
strengths that offset weaknesses in both qualitative and quantitative research.
 This review finds that a mixed methods design typology can be used to describe the Mixed methods
types of mixed method research currently being used by marketing scholars. designs
The findings highlight patterns in mixed method research designs conducted in
marketing. Unlike other disciplines that have been found to use predominantly
concurrent designs (Hanson et al., 2005), or an evenly distributed combination of the
concurrent and sequential designs (Plano Clark et al., 2008), we found that an
overwhelming majority of the marketing studies identified were sequential designs 21
(79 percent, n ¼ 34). One reason for these results could be that a second data type came
at the behest of reviewers. For example, an author of one of the sequential designs said
that reviewers required that a quantitative study be added. Another explanation for
this trend could be the influence of commercial market research with its focus on
preliminary focus groups and textbooks that suggest that the “time” for qualitative
Downloaded by Western Michigan University At 17:12 01 February 2015 (PT)

research is to develop hypothesis to be quantified by “empirical” research.

In identifying mixed methods studies, a limitation was identified in the collecting
and compiling mixed method studies wherein only the qualitative or quantitative
results were published in different journals. By only focusing on studies wherein
results from both data types are presented, we may have missed studies that employed
mixed methods designs, but presented findings in different journal outlets.
For example, Marcella and Davies (2004) and Marcella et al. (2002) employed an
exploratory sequential design, publishing findings in different journals. While these
authors specifically discussed this issue of multiple publications, other authors using
similar strategies without exclamation could not be identified in the search.
The subjective nature of the article selection processes is recognized as a limitation;
however, this study presents a current snapshot of how mixed methods designs are
being used in marketing research. It is also acknowledged here that the nature of the
review process may result in the removal of qualitative or quantitative content, due to
space limitations and resulting manuscript streamlining. As such, it is suggested that
while a larger instance of mixed methods research may be undertaken, such research is
not making its way into the knowledge repositories of the discipline.
In a recent discussion on mixed methods research (Freshwater, 2007), warned
against uncritically accepting mixed methods as an emerging dominant discourse. She
criticizes mixed methods research because of its desire for certainty, suggesting that
the gaps in mixed methods text is that there should be no gaps (Freshwater, 2007). This
is based on the apparent goal of grasping the “whole” through mixed methods inquiry,
with little critical reflection in the assumption that the “whole” is always partial in
itself. That is, Freshwater (2007, p. 141) suggests that there is little recognition of the
impossibility of deciding between two or more competing interpretations. She suggests
that mixed methods research brings different perspectives to bear, but does not allow
for competing interpretations to coexist. Further, she suggests that it is important to
cross-validate results; however, the rationale for doing so is dependent on the
motivations of the research and the desire for such “accuracy.”
Echoing Johnson and Onwuegbuzie’s (2004, p. 23) sentiments, it is accepted that
qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method are “all superior under different
circumstances” and researchers must determine how to use different approaches. If
mixed methods is the desired approach, this study provides guidance for researchers in
identifying design types appropriate for various rationales or research objectives and
models of different design types that have been published in marketing journals.
 QMRIJ In addition, implications for the designing mixed methods studies in marketing include
14,1 highlighting the need for scholars to specifically address issues such as the timing and
priority given to each data type (i.e. sequential or concurrent), and the integration
(or mixing) of the both data types.

22 Managerial implications
For marketing managers, the inclusion of both deductive and inductive logic allows for a
more holistic view of a given marketing problem rather than a strictly positivistic or
interpretivist slant to the data. From a practical standpoint, many seemingly “empirical”
articles already utilize qualitative methods while conducting scale construction,
pre-tests, manipulation checks, and other research tasks where simply asking research
subjects their opinions is more diagnostic to researchers than running multiple tests.
Downloaded by Western Michigan University At 17:12 01 February 2015 (PT)

These results are often left out of the research or under-reported. Conversely, the
inclusion of quantitative work to qualitative research often increases its generalizability
to a larger population while maintaining the understanding and insight which has
already been generated. In this vain, it has been suggested that mixed methods research
allows for more “trustworthy” results than any single research paradigm, and that the
methods often offset each other in complimentary ways (Bahl and Milne, 2006).

References
Andrade, E.B. and Ho, T.-H. (2009), “Gaming emotions in social interactions”, Journal
of Consumer Research, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 539-52.
Argouslidis, P.C. and McLean, F. (2004), “Service elimination decision-making”, European
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 38 Nos 11/12, pp. 1355-81.
Arnold, M.J. and Reynolds, K.E. (2003), “Hedonic shopping motivations”, Journal of Retailing,
Vol. 79 No. 2, pp. 77-95.
Avlonitis, G.J. and Indounas, K.A. (2007), “An empirical examination of the pricing policies and
their antecedents in the services sector”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 41 Nos 7/8,
pp. 740-64.
Bahl, S. and Milne, G.R. (2006), “Mixed methods in interpretive research: an application to the
study of self concept”, in Belk, R.W. (Ed.), Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods in
Marketing, Edward Elgar, Northampton, MA, pp. 198-218.
Botti, S., Orfali, K. and Iyengar, S.S. (2009), “Tragic choices: autonomy and emotional responses
to medical decisions”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 337-52.
Brennan, D.R., Turnbull, P.W. and Wilson, D.T. (2003), “Dyadic adaptation in
business-to-business markets”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 37 Nos 11/12,
pp. 1636-65.
Bruner, G.C. and Kumar, A. (2007), “Gadget lovers”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 329-39.
Bryman, A. (2006), “Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: how is it done?”,
Qualitative Research, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 97-113.
Coelho, F. and Easingwood, C. (2008), “An exploratory study into the drivers of channel change”,
European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 42 Nos 9/10, pp. 1005-22.
Commuri, S. and Gentry, J.W. (2005), “Resource allocation in households with women as chief
wage earners”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 185-95.
 Coulter, R.A., Price, L.L. and Feick, L. (2003), “Rethinking the origins of involvement and brand Mixed methods
commitment: insights from postsocialist Central Europe”, Journal of Consumer Research,
Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 151-69.
designs
Coulter, R.A., Price, L.L., Feick, L. and Micu, C. (2005), “The evolution of consumer knowledge
and sources of information: Hungary in transition”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 604-19.
Creswell, J.W. and Plano Clark, V.L. (2007), Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research, 23
Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Creswell, J.W., Plano Clark, V.L., Gutmann, M.L. and Hanson, W.E. (2003), “Advanced mixed
methods research designs”, in Tashakkori, A. and Teddlie, C.B. (Eds), Handbook of Mixed
Methods in Social and Behavioral Research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 209-40.
Dahl, D.W. and Moreau, C.P. (2007), “Thinking inside the box: why consumers enjoy constrained
Downloaded by Western Michigan University At 17:12 01 February 2015 (PT)

creative experiences”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 44 No. 3, pp. 357-69.

Daly, A., Grove, S.J., Dorsch, M.J. and Fisk, R.P. (2009), “The impact of improvisation training on
service employees in a European airline: a case study”, European Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 3/4, pp. 459-72.
Dellande, S., Gilly, M.C. and Graham, J.L. (2004), “Gaining compliance and losing weight: the role
of the service provider in health care services”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 68 No. 3,
pp. 78-91.
Du, S., Sen, S. and Bhattacharya, C.B. (2008), “Exploring the social and business returns of a
corporate oral health initiative aimed at disadvantaged Hispanic families”, Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 483-94.
Freshwater, D. (2007), “Reading mixed methods research: contexts for criticism”, Journal of
Mixed Methods Research, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 134-46.
Grace, D. and O’Cass, A. (2003), “Child care services”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 37
Nos 1/2, pp. 107-32.
Grayson, K. and Martinec, R. (2004), “Consumer perceptions of iconicity and indexicality and
their influence on assessments of authentic market offerings”, Journal of Consumer
Research, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 296-312.
Greene, J.C., Caracelli, V.J. and Graham, W.F. (1989), “Toward a conceptual framework for
mixed-method evaluation designs”, Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Vol. 11
No. 3, pp. 255-74.
Griffiths-Hemans, J. and Grover, R. (2006), “Setting the stage for creative new products:
investigating the idea fruition process”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 27-39.
Hand, C., Riley, F.D.O., Harris, P., Singh, J. and Rettie, R. (2009), “Online grocery shopping: the
influence of situational factors”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 43 Nos 9/10,
pp. 1205-19.
Hanson, D. and Grimmer, M. (2007), “The mix of qualitative and quantitative research in major
marketing journals, 1993-2002”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 41 Nos 1/2, pp. 58-70.
Hanson, W.B., Creswell, J.W., Plano Clark, V.L., Petska, K.S. and Creswell, D. (2005), “Mixed
methods research designs in counseling psychology”, Journal of Counseling Psychology,
Vol. 52 No. 2, pp. 224-35.
Harris, J. and Blair, E.A. (2006), “Consumer preference for product bundles: the role of reduced
search costs”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 506-13.
 QMRIJ Hewett, K., Money, R.B. and Sharma, S. (2006), “National culture and industrial buyer-seller
relationships in the United States and Latin America”, Journal of the Academy of
14,1 Marketing Science, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 386-402.
Horsky, D., Nelson, P. and Posavac, S.S. (2004), “Stating preference for the ethereal but choosing
the concrete: how the tangibility of attributes affects attribute weighting in value
elicitation and choice”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 14 Nos 1/2, pp. 132-40.
24 Hudson, L.A. and Ozanne, J.L. (1988), “Alternative ways of seeking knowledge in consumer
research”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 508-21.
Hunt, S.D. (1994), “On rethinking marketing: our discipline, our practice, our methods”, European
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 13-25.
Jayachandran, S., Hewett, K. and Kaufman, P. (2004), “Customer response capability in a
sense-and-respond era: the role of customer knowledge process”, Journal of the Academy of
Downloaded by Western Michigan University At 17:12 01 February 2015 (PT)

Marketing Science, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 219-33.

Johnson, R.B. and Onwuegbuzie, A.J. (2004), “Mixed methods research: a research paradigm
whose time has come”, Educational Researcher, Vol. 33 No. 7, pp. 14-26.
Johnson, R.B., Onwuegbuzie, A.J. and Turner, L.A. (2007), “Toward a definition of mixed
methods research”, Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 112-33.
Kirmani, A. and Campbell, M.C. (2004), “Goal seeker and persuasion sentry: how consumer
targets respond to interpersonal marketing persuasion”, Journal of Consumer Research,
Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 573-82.
Kolbe, R.H. and Burnett, M.S. (1991), “Content-analysis research: an examination of applications
with directives for improving research reliability and objectivity”, The Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 243-50.
Lau-Gesk, L. and Meyers-Levy, J. (2009), “Emotional persuasion: when the valence versus the
resource demands of emotions influence consumers’ attitudes”, Journal of Consumer
Research, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 585-99.
Luna, D., Ringberg, T. and Peracchio, L.A. (2008), “One individual, two identities: frame
switching among biculturals”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 279-93.
McMullan, R. and Gilmore, A. (2008), “Customer loyalty: an empirical study”, European Journal
of Marketing, Vol. 42 Nos 9/10, pp. 1084-94.
Marcella, R. and Davies, S. (2004), “The use of customer language in international marketing
communication in the Scottish food and drink industry”, European Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 38 Nos 11/12, pp. 1382-95.
Marcella, R., Davies, S. and Williams, D. (2002), “The language strategies of Scottish exporters in
the food and drink sector”, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, Vol. 9
No. 4, pp. 358-69.
Mathwick, C., Wiertz, C. and de Ruyter, K. (2008), “Social capital production in a virtual p3
community”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 34 No. 6, pp. 832-49.
Mekonnen, A., Harris, F. and Laing, A. (2008), “Linking products to a cause or affinity group”,
European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 42 Nos 1/2, pp. 135-53.
Morgan, D.L. (2007), “Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: methodological implications of
combining qualitative and quantitative methods”, Journal of Mixed Methods Research,
Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 48-76.
Morse, J.M. (1991), “Approaches to qualitative-quantitative methodological triangulation”,
Nursing Research, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 120-3.
 Morse, J.M. (2003), “Principles of mixed methods and multimethod research design”, Mixed methods
in Tashakkori, A. and Teddlie, C. (Eds), Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and
Behavioral Research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 189-208. designs
Paul, M., Hennig-Thurau, T., Gremler, D.D., Gwinner, K.P. and Wiertz, C. (2009), “Toward
a theory of repeat purchase drivers for consumer services”, Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 215-37.
Plano Clark, V.L., Huddleston-Casas, C.A., Churchill, S.L., Green, D.O.N. and Garrett, A.L. (2008), 25
“Mixed methods approaches in family science research”, Journal of Family Issues, Vol. 29
No. 11, pp. 1543-66.
Powell, H., Mihalas, S., Onwuegbuzie, A.J., Suldo, S. and Daley, C.E. (2008), “Mixed methods
research in school psychology: a mixed methods investigation of trends in the literature”,
Psychology in the Schools, Vol. 45 No. 4, pp. 291-309.
Downloaded by Western Michigan University At 17:12 01 February 2015 (PT)

Russell, C.A., Norman, A.T. and Heckler, S.E. (2004), “The consumption of television
programming: development and validation of the connectedness scale”, Journal
of Consumer Research, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 150-61.
Scott, L.M. and Vargas, P. (2007), “Writing with pictures: toward a unifying theory of consumer
response to images”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 341-56.
Simoes, C., Dibb, S. and Fisk, R.P. (2005), “Managing corporate identity: an internal perspective”,
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 153-68.
Sogn-Grundvag, G. and Ostli, J. (2009), “Consumer evaluation of unbranded and unlabelled food
products: the case of bacalhau”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 43 Nos 1/2, pp. 213-28.
Steenkamp, J.-B.E.M. and Geyskens, I. (2006), “How country characteristics affect the perceived
value of web sites”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 70 No. 3, pp. 136-50.
Tashakkori, A. and Creswell, J.W. (2007), “Editorial: the new era of mixed methods”, Journal of
Mixed Methods Research, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 3-7.
Tashakkori, A. and Teddlie, C. (2003), Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral
Research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Theoharakis, V. and Hirst, A. (2002), “Perceptual differences of marketing journals: a worldwide
perspective”, Marketing Letters, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 389-402.
Thomson, M. (2006), “Human brands: investigating antecedents to consumers’ strong
attachments to celebrities”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 70 No. 3, pp. 104-19.
Truscott, D.M., Swars, S., Smith, S., Thornton-Reid, F., Zhao, Y., Dooley, C., Williams, B., Hart, L.
and Matthews, M. (2010), “A cross-disciplinary examination of the prevalence of mixed
methods in educational research: 1995-2005”, International Journal of Social Research
Methodology, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 317-28.
Ulaga, W. and Eggert, A. (2006), “Value-based differentiation in business relationships: gaining
and sustaining key supplier status”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 70 No. 1, pp. 119-36.
Venable, B.T., Rose, G.M., Bush, V.D. and Gilbert, F.W. (2005), “The role of brand personality in
charitable giving: an assessment and validation”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 295-312.
Voorhees, C.M., Brady, M.K. and Horowitz, D.M. (2006), “A voice from the silent masses:
an exploratory and comparative analysis of noncomplainers”, Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 514-27.
Walsh, G. and Beatty, S. (2007), “Customer-based corporate reputation of a service firm: scale
development and validation”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 35 No. 1,
pp. 127-43.
 QMRIJ West, D. and Prendergast, G.P. (2009), “Advertising and promotions budgeting and the role of
risk”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 43 Nos 11/12, pp. 1457-76.
14,1 Wolfinbarger, M. and Gilly, M.C. (2003), “eTailQ: dimensionalizing, measuring and predicting
e-Tail quality”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 79 No. 3, pp. 183-98.
Woodruff, R.B. (2003), “Serving the marketing discipline through journal reviews”, Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 327-30.
26
About the authors
Robert L. Harrison has a PhD from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln and is an Assistant
Professor at Western Michigan University. He is a member of the AMA and ACR. His current
research interests include family and experiential consumer behaviour. Robert L. Harrison is the
corresponding author and can be contacted at robert.harrison@wmich.edu
Downloaded by Western Michigan University At 17:12 01 February 2015 (PT)

Timothy M. Reilly is a Doctoral Student at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. His research

interests include research methodologies and consumer responses to marketing communication
crises.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
 This article has been cited by:

1. Len T. WrightQualitative Research 1-3. [CrossRef]

2. Pedro Isaias, Tomayess Issa. 2014. Promoting communication skills for information systems students
in Australian and Portuguese higher education: Action research study. Education and Information
Technologies 19, 841-861. [CrossRef]
3. Laila Shin Rohani, May Aung, Khalil Rohani. 2014. One step closer to the field: visual methods in
marketing and consumer research. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 17:4, 300-318.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
4. Robert Davis, Inna Piven, Michael Breazeale. 2014. Conceptualizing the brand in social media community:
The five sources model. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 21, 468-481. [CrossRef]
5. Fraser McLeay, David Wesson. 2014. Chinese versus UK marketing students' perceptions of peer feedback
and peer assessment. The International Journal of Management Education 12, 142-150. [CrossRef]
Downloaded by Western Michigan University At 17:12 01 February 2015 (PT)

6. Spanjaard Daniela, Young Louise, Freeman Lynne. 2014. Emotions in supermarket brand choice.
Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 17:3, 209-224. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
7. Professor Simone Guercini, Simone Guercini. 2014. New qualitative research methodologies in
management. Management Decision 52:4, 662-674. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
8. Gary D. Holt, Jack S. Goulding. 2014. Conceptualisation of ambiguous-mixed-methods within building
and construction research. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology 12:2, 244-262. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
9. Prof. T.C. Melewar and Prof. Bill Merrilees, Elizabeth Jane Wilson, Anders Bengtsson, Catharine Curran.
2014. Brand meaning gaps and dynamics: theory, research, and practice. Qualitative Market Research: An
International Journal 17:2, 128-150. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
10. Robert L. Harrison. 2013. Using mixed methods designs in the Journal of Business Research, 1990–2010.
Journal of Business Research 66, 2153-2162. [CrossRef]
11. Alex Marland, Thierry Giasson. 2013. Investigating political marketing using mixed method: the case for
campaign spending data. Journal of Public Affairs 13, 391-402. [CrossRef]
12. Dr Micael‐Lee Johnstone, Professor Kim‐Shyan Fam, Dariusz Siemieniako, Krzysztof Kubacki. 2013.
Female students' drinking seen through collages and diaries. Qualitative Market Research: An International
Journal 16:3, 296-314. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
13. Anne Rindell. 2013. Time in corporate images: introducing image heritage and image‐in‐use. Qualitative
Market Research: An International Journal 16:2, 197-213. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
14. Francisco Guzmán, Oriol Iglesias, Domingo Calvo Dopico, Cristina Calvo Porral. 2012. Sources of equity
in fashion markets. Journal of Product & Brand Management 21:6, 391-403. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
15. Lynn Metcalf, Jeffrey S. Hess, Jeffrey E. Danes, Jay Singh. 2012. A mixed‐methods approach for designing
market‐driven packaging. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 15:3, 268-289. [Abstract]
[Full Text] [PDF]
16. Pepukayi Chitakunye. 2012. Recovering children's voices in consumer research. Qualitative Market
Research: An International Journal 15:2, 206-224. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
17. Tomayess IssaTeamwork Assessment and Self/Peer Evaluation in Higher Education 350-366. [CrossRef]

View publication stats