A Critical Reflection of Generalization in Mixed Methods Research

Quan Nha Hong & Sergi Fàbregues

Evaluation Review2025https://doi.org/10.1177/0193841x251331723article
AJG 1ABDC A
Weight
0.48

Abstract

Mixed methods research, that is, research that integrates qualitative and quantitative methods, has become increasingly popular in program evaluation because of its potential for understanding complex interventions. Despite recent constructive and fruitful developments that have led to the consolidation of mixed methods as a distinctive methodology, fundamental methodological issues such as generalization have received little attention. The purpose of this paper is to provide a critical reflection on how the concept of generalization has been used in mixed methods research. The paper is structured into four main parts. First, we discuss the relevance of external validity and mixed methods research in impact evaluation. Second, we summarize how generalization is conceptualized in mixed methods research. Third, we present the results of a literature review on generalization practices in mixed methods research. Finally, we conclude with a discussion of threats to and strategies for enhancing generalization in mixed methods research.

5 citations

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0193841x251331723

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{quan2025,
  title        = {{A Critical Reflection of Generalization in Mixed Methods Research}},
  author       = {Quan Nha Hong & Sergi Fàbregues},
  journal      = {Evaluation Review},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0193841x251331723},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

A Critical Reflection of Generalization in Mixed Methods Research

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.48

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.41 × 0.4 = 0.16
M · momentum0.63 × 0.15 = 0.09
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.