Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A critique of the use of triangulation in social research

  • Published:
Quality and Quantity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • BabbieE.R. (1983). The Practice of Social Research (3rd Edn). Belmont. CA: Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • BeckerH.S. and B.Geer (1957). “Participant observation and interviewing: a comparison”, Human Organization 16: 28–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • BednarzD. (1985). “Quantity and quality in evaluation research: a divergent view”, Evaluation and Program Planning 8: 289–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • BentonT. (1977). The Philosophical Foundations of the Three Sociologies. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • BentonT. (1981). “Realism and social science” Radical Philosophy 27: 13–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • BhaskarR. (1975). A Realist Theory of Science. Hassocks: Hurvester.

    Google Scholar 

  • BhaskarR. (1979). The Possibility of Naturalism. Hassocks: Humanities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blaikie, N.W.H. and S.J.G. Stacy (1984). “The generation of grounded concepts: a critical appraisal of the literature and a case study“, paper presented at the European Symposium on Concept Formation and Measurement, Rome.

  • BlumerH. (1969). Symbolic Interactionism. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • BritanG. (1978). “Experimental and contextual models of program evaluation”, Evaluation and Program Planning 1: 229–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • BryantC.G.A. 1985. Positivism in Social Theory and Research. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • BrymanA. (1988). Quantity and Quality in Social Research. London: Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • BurgessR.G. (1982). Field Research: A Sourcebook and Field Manual. London: Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • BurgessR.G. (1984). In the Field: An Introduction to Field Research. London: Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • CampbellD.T. and FiskeD.W. (1959). “Convergent and Discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix”, Psychological Bulletin 56: 81–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • CicourelA.V. (1973). Cognitive Sociology. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • ClarkD. (1947). Plane and Geodetic Surveying for Engineers, Vol. 1 (4th Edn revised and enlarged by J. Glendenning). London: Constable.

    Google Scholar 

  • ClarkD. (1951). Plane and Geodetic Surveying for Engineers, Vol. 2. (4th Edn revised and enlarged by J. Glendenning). London: Constable.

    Google Scholar 

  • CuffE.C. and PayneG.C.F. (1979). Perspectives in Sociology. London: Allen and Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • DenzinN.K. (1970a). The Research Act in Sociology: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods. London: Butterworths.

    Google Scholar 

  • DenzinN.K. (ed.) (1970b). Sociological Methods: A Sourcebook. London: Butterworths.

    Google Scholar 

  • DouglasJ.D. (1971). “Understanding Everyday Life”, pp. 3–44. in J.D.Douglas (ed.) Understanding Everyday Life: Toward the Reconstruction of Sociological Knowledge. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • DouglasJ.D. (1976). Investigative Social Research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • ElliotJ. and C.Adelman (1976). Innovation at the Classroom Level: A Case Study of the Ford Teaching Project. Unit 28 of the Curriculum Design and Development Course. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • FieldingN.G. and J.L.Fielding (1986). Linking Data: Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Social Research. Beverley Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • FilsteadW. (1979). “Qualitative methods: a needed perspective in evaluation research”, pp. 33–48 in T.D.Cook and C.S.Reichardt (eds), Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Evaluation Research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • FoxallH.G. (1957). Handbook for Practising Land and Engineering Surveyors. Sydney: The Institution of Surveyors, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • GiddensA. (1976). New Rules of Sociological Method: A Positive Critique of Interpretive Sociology. London: Hutchinson.

    Google Scholar 

  • GilkD.C., K.Parker and G.Muligande (1986). “Integrating qualitative and quantitative survey techniques”, International Quarterly of Community Health Education 7: 181–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • GlaserB.G. and A.L.Strauss (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.

    Google Scholar 

  • GreeneJ. and C.McClintock (1985). “Triangulation in evaluation: design and analysis issues”, Evaluation Review 9: 523–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • GubaE.G. and Y.S.Lincoln (1981). Effective Evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • HalfpennyP. (1979). “The analysis of qualitative data”, The Sociological Review 27: 799–825.

    Google Scholar 

  • HalfpennyP. (1982). Positivism and Sociology. London: Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • HammersleyM. and P.Atkinson (1983). Ethnography: Principles and Practice. London: Tavistock.

    Google Scholar 

  • HaralambosM. (1980). Sociology: Themes and Perspectives. Slough: University Tutorial Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • HarréR. (1970). Principles of Scientific Thinking. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • HarréR. (1972). Philosophies of Science. London: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • HarréR. (1986). Varieties of Realism. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • HeilmanJ. (1980). “Paradigmatic choices in evaluation methodology”, Evaluation Review 4: 693–712.

    Google Scholar 

  • HovlandC.I. (1959). “Reconciling conflicting results derived from experimental and survey studies of attitude change”, American Psychologist 14: 8–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • HughesJ. 1980. The Philosophy of Social Research. London: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • IanniF.A. and M.T.Orr (1979). “Towards a rapprochement of quantitative and qualitative methodologies”, pp. 87–97. in T.D.Cook and C.S.Reichardt (eds), Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Evaluation Research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jick, T.D. (1979a). Process and Impacts of a Merger: Individual and Organizational Perspectives. Doctoral dissertation, New York State School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Cornell University.

  • JickT.D. (1979b). “Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: triangulation in action”, Administrative Science Quarterly 24: 602–611.

    Google Scholar 

  • JickT.D. (1983). “Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: triangulation in action”, pp. 135–148. in J.vanMaanen (ed.). Qualitative Methodology. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • JohnsonT., C.Dandeker and C.Ashworth (1984). The Structure of Social Theory. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • KeatR. and J.Urry (1975). Social Theory as Science. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • KidderL.H. (1981). “Qualitative research and quasi-experimental frameworks”, pp. 226–56. in M.B.Brewer and B.E.Collins (eds), Scientific Inquiry and the Social Sciences. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • KidderL.H. (1987). “Qualitative and quantitative methods: when stories converge”, New Directions in Program Evaluation 35: 57–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • KnappM.S. (1979). “Ethnographic contributions to evaluation research”, pp. 118–39 in T.D.Cook and C.S.Reichardt (eds), Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Evaluation Research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • KolevzonM.S., R.G.Green, A.E.Fortune and N.R.Vosler (1988). “Evaluating family therapy: divergent methods, divergent findings”, Journal of Marital and Family Therapy 14: 277–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • KuhnT.S. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • LouisK.S. (1982). “Multisite/multimethod studies”, American Behavioral Scientist 26: 6–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • MadeyD.L. (1982). “Some benefits of integrating qualitative and quantitative evaluation”, Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 4: 223–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCallG. and J.Simmons (eds) (1969). Issues in Participant Observation: A Text and Reader. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • McClintockC. and J.Greene (1985). “Triangulation in practice”, Evaluation and Program Planning 8: 351–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • OuthwaiteW. (1983a). “Toward a Realist Perspective”, in G.Morgan (ed.). Beyond Methods: Strategies for Social Research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • OuthwaiteW. (1983b). Concept Formation in Social Science. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • OuthwaiteW. (1987). New Philosophies of Social Science: Realism, Hermeneutics and Critical Theory. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • PattonM.Q. (1980). Qualitative Evaluation Methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • PhillipsB. (1985). Sociological Research Methods: An Introduction. Homewood. Ill.: Dorsey.

    Google Scholar 

  • ReichardtT.S. and T.D.Cook (1979). “Beyond qualitative versus quantitative methods”, pp. 7–32 in T.D.Cook and C.S.Reichardt (eds), Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Evaluation Research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ritzer G. (1975). Sociology: A Multiple Paradigm Science. Allyn & Bacon.

  • SayerA. (1984). Method in Social Science: A Realist Approach. London: Hutchinson.

    Google Scholar 

  • SchutzA. (1962). Collected Papers, Vol. 1 (edited by M.Natanson) The Hague: Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • SchwartzH. and J.Jacobs (1979). Qualitative Sociology: A Method to the Madness. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • SieberS.D. (1973). “The integration of fieldwork and survey methods”, American Journal of Sociology 78: 1335–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • SilvermanD. 1985. Qualitative Methodology and Sociology: Describing the Social World. Aldershot, Hants: Gower.

    Google Scholar 

  • SmartB. 1976. Sociology, Phenomenology and Marxian Analysis. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • SmithH.W. 1975. Strategies of Social Research: The Methodological Imagination. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • SmithJ.K. 1983. “Quantitative versus qualitative research: an attempt to clarify the issues”, Educational Researcher 12(3): 6–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • TrendM.G. 1979. “On the reconciliation of qualitative and quantitative analysis: a case study”, pp. 68–86 in T.D.Cook and C.S.Reichardt (eds), Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Evaluation Research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • TrowM. (1957). “Comment on ‘Participant observation and interviewing: a comparison’”, Human Organization 16: 33–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • VidichA.J. and G.Shapiro (1955). “A comparison of participant observation and survey data”, American Sociological Review 20: 28–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • WebbE.J., D.T.Campbell, R.D.Schwartz and L.Sechrest (1966). Unobtrusive Measures: Non-reactive Research in the Social Sciences. Chicago: Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • WernerO. and D.T.Campbell (1973). “Translating, working through interpreters and the problem of decentering”, in R.Naroll and R.Cohen (eds), A Handbook of Method in Cultural Anthropology. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • WestP. (1979). “An investigation into the social construction and consequences of the label epilepsy”, The Sociological Review 27: 719–741.

    Google Scholar 

  • WilliamsR. (1976). “Symbolic interactionism: fusion of theory and research”, pp. 115–138 in D.C.Thorns (ed.). New Directions in Sociology. Totowa, NJ: Rowan & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • WilsonT.P. (1971). “Normative and interpretive paradigms in sociology”, pp. 57–79 in J.D.Douglas (ed.) Understanding Everyday Life: Toward the Reconstruction of Sociological Knowledge. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • ZelditchM. (1962). “Some methodological problems of field studies”, American Journal of Sociology 67: 566–76.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Victoria University of Technology, RMIT Campus, G.P.O. Box 2476V, 3001, Melbourne, Vic, Australia

    Norman W. H. Blaikie

Authors
  1. Norman W. H. Blaikie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Blaikie, N.W.H. A critique of the use of triangulation in social research. Qual Quant 25, 115–136 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00145701

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00145701

Keywords

Search

Navigation