Abstract

While writing from a qualitative tradition often occurs in first person and from a quantitative tradition often occurs in third person, the pros and cons of voice in mixed methods research needs consideration. This article argues for more inclusion of the first-person in such writing, particularly as evidence for the researcher’s claims, as a way to triangulate and corroborate perspectives from a Bakhtinian dialogic theoretical framework. This article presents a discussion of the first- and third-person styles in academic writing and the effect of each on the reader. Additionally, there are dialectic and complementary justifications for such use of different perspectives within a mixed methods piece, as each style dialogues with the other, compensating for the other’s shortfalls. Such a style of writing is imperative because it brings both distance and familiarity, presenting a more complete understanding of the mixed methods research and the phenomenon investigated.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.