The New Era of Mixed Methods

T first issue of the Journal of Mixed Methods Research starts a new era in the conceptualization and utilization of integrated approaches across the social and behavioral sciences. For almost three decades, various scholars have discussed and debated the concepts, methods, and standards of quality for studies that utilize a combination of qualitative and quantitative approaches (Creswell, 2003~ Greene & Caracelli, 1997~ Miles & Huberman, 1994; Newman & Benz, 1998; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998,2003). Evolving from these discussions has been a body of literature devoted to issues of worldview, nomenclature, typology, design, analysis, and evaluation of mixed methods studies. Much more remains to be achieved because the field of mixed methodology is still developing. It is in the context of such development that we start the first issue of the JMMR. Hopefully, the journal will be an impetus for creating bridges between mixed methods scholars, a platform for debate and discourse about important issues in mixed methods research, and a forum for sharing ideas across disciplines, across philosophical and methodological boundaries, and among different cultures around the world. As the editors of JMMR, and on behalf of its managing editor (Vicki L. Plano Clark), associate editor (Pat Bazeley), and our editorial board, we would like to welcome our readers and contributors. Although in its early stages, the journal is enjoying a large number of high-quality submissions by authors from a wide range of disciplines, points of view, and geographic regions across the globe. We believe that we have assembled a worldclass editorial board to help review articles, and we have organized a sizable group of external reviewers who have known expertise in subject areas covered by the manuscripts to aid in the review process. Our plan is to publish two methodological/theoretical and two empirical reports in each issue. At times, this ratio may change to reflect the types of articles we receive. We also intend to include at least one book review and one software/media review in each issue. Although these media reviews are currently solicited, we would encourage you to contact Pat Bazeley, the associate editor in charge of media reviews, about books and software that need to be reviewed or reviews you would like to write. Given that mixed methods research is still evolving, we believe that it is essential to keep the discussion open about the definition of mixed methods. This might seem a trivial or commonsense issue because many scholars are often certain about what constitutes a mixed methods study. Often writers will say that a mixed methods project is one that includes, a qualitative and a quantitative substudy. Inconsistencies and disagreements start Whenone considers how the two substudies (or strands) are related to each other. During the initial discussions of JMMR, especially during our development of the Call for Papers, we became keenly aware of some of these inconsistencies in the way we (the two editors) and other scholars define or conceptualize mixed methods. Also, we became keenly aware of the historical transitions in such definitions and conceptualizations. For example, we found it necessary to distinguish between mixed methods as a collection and analysis of two types of data (qualitative and quantitative) and mixed methods as the integration of two approaches to research (quantitative and qualitative). On the surface, the