Use of mixed methods research in intervention studies to increase young people’s interest in STEM: A systematic methodological review

Introduction: Mixed methods research intervention studies integrate quantitative evaluation approaches, such as randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental designs, with qualitative research to evaluate the effectiveness, efficacy, or other results of an intervention or program. These types...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Fàbregues, Sergi, Sainz, Milagros, Romano, María-José, Escalante, Elsa, Younas, Ahtisham, López Pérez, Beatriz Soledad
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2023
País:España
Institución:Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC)
Repositorio:O2, repositorio institucional de la UOC
OAI Identifier:oai:openaccess.uoc.edu:10609/148722
Acceso en línea:http://hdl.handle.net/10609/148722
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.956300
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:mixed methods research
qualitative research
STEM
intervention
methodological review
id ES_26f5a47a5b7acd1ef217ab2deff85b49
oai_identifier_str oai:openaccess.uoc.edu:10609/148722
network_acronym_str ES
network_name_str España
repository_id_str
spelling Use of mixed methods research in intervention studies to increase young people’s interest in STEM: A systematic methodological reviewFàbregues, SergiSainz, MilagrosRomano, María-JoséEscalante, ElsaYounas, AhtishamLópez Pérez, Beatriz Soledadmixed methods researchqualitative researchSTEMinterventionmethodological reviewIntroduction: Mixed methods research intervention studies integrate quantitative evaluation approaches, such as randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental designs, with qualitative research to evaluate the effectiveness, efficacy, or other results of an intervention or program. These types of studies, which have attracted growing attention in recent years, enhance the scope and rigor of the evaluation. While various frameworks that summarize the justifications for carrying out these types of studies and provide implementation guidance have been published in the last few years in the health sciences, we do not know whether such frameworks have been properly implemented in the social and educational sciences. This review examined the methodological features and reporting practices of mixed methods intervention studies aimed at increasing young people’s interest in STEM. Methods: A systematic search was carried out in APA PsycNET, ERIC, ProQuest, Scopus, and Web of Science, and a hand search in 20 journals. We included peer-reviewed English-language articles that reported intervention studies with a quantitative component measuring outcomes specific to increasing secondary school students’ interest in STEM fields, a qualitative component conducted before, during, or after the quantitative component, and evidence of integration of both components. Qualitative content analysis and ideal-type analysis were used to synthesize the findings. Results: We found 34 studies; the majority published in the last ten years. Several patterns of mixed methods application were described in these studies, illustrating the unique insights that can be gained by employing this methodology. The reporting quality of the included studies was generally adequate, especially regarding the justification for using a mixed methods intervention design and the integration of the quantitative and qualitative components. Nonetheless, a few reporting issues were observed, such as a lack of detail in the presentation of the mixed methods design, an inadequate description of the qualitative sampling and analysis techniques, and the absence of joint displays for representing integration. Discussion: Authors must pay attention to these issues to ensure that the insights obtained by the use of mixed methods research are effectively communicated.Frontiers202320232023info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10609/148722https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.956300reponame:O2, repositorio institucional de la UOCinstname:Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC)InglésFront. Psychol. 13:956300.https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.956300CC BYhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:openaccess.uoc.edu:10609/1487222026-05-28T12:42:01Z
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Use of mixed methods research in intervention studies to increase young people’s interest in STEM: A systematic methodological review
title Use of mixed methods research in intervention studies to increase young people’s interest in STEM: A systematic methodological review
spellingShingle Use of mixed methods research in intervention studies to increase young people’s interest in STEM: A systematic methodological review
Fàbregues, Sergi
mixed methods research
qualitative research
STEM
intervention
methodological review
title_short Use of mixed methods research in intervention studies to increase young people’s interest in STEM: A systematic methodological review
title_full Use of mixed methods research in intervention studies to increase young people’s interest in STEM: A systematic methodological review
title_fullStr Use of mixed methods research in intervention studies to increase young people’s interest in STEM: A systematic methodological review
title_full_unstemmed Use of mixed methods research in intervention studies to increase young people’s interest in STEM: A systematic methodological review
title_sort Use of mixed methods research in intervention studies to increase young people’s interest in STEM: A systematic methodological review
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Fàbregues, Sergi
Sainz, Milagros
Romano, María-José
Escalante, Elsa
Younas, Ahtisham
López Pérez, Beatriz Soledad
author Fàbregues, Sergi
author_facet Fàbregues, Sergi
Sainz, Milagros
Romano, María-José
Escalante, Elsa
Younas, Ahtisham
López Pérez, Beatriz Soledad
author_role author
author2 Sainz, Milagros
Romano, María-José
Escalante, Elsa
Younas, Ahtisham
López Pérez, Beatriz Soledad
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv mixed methods research
qualitative research
STEM
intervention
methodological review
topic mixed methods research
qualitative research
STEM
intervention
methodological review
description Introduction: Mixed methods research intervention studies integrate quantitative evaluation approaches, such as randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental designs, with qualitative research to evaluate the effectiveness, efficacy, or other results of an intervention or program. These types of studies, which have attracted growing attention in recent years, enhance the scope and rigor of the evaluation. While various frameworks that summarize the justifications for carrying out these types of studies and provide implementation guidance have been published in the last few years in the health sciences, we do not know whether such frameworks have been properly implemented in the social and educational sciences. This review examined the methodological features and reporting practices of mixed methods intervention studies aimed at increasing young people’s interest in STEM. Methods: A systematic search was carried out in APA PsycNET, ERIC, ProQuest, Scopus, and Web of Science, and a hand search in 20 journals. We included peer-reviewed English-language articles that reported intervention studies with a quantitative component measuring outcomes specific to increasing secondary school students’ interest in STEM fields, a qualitative component conducted before, during, or after the quantitative component, and evidence of integration of both components. Qualitative content analysis and ideal-type analysis were used to synthesize the findings. Results: We found 34 studies; the majority published in the last ten years. Several patterns of mixed methods application were described in these studies, illustrating the unique insights that can be gained by employing this methodology. The reporting quality of the included studies was generally adequate, especially regarding the justification for using a mixed methods intervention design and the integration of the quantitative and qualitative components. Nonetheless, a few reporting issues were observed, such as a lack of detail in the presentation of the mixed methods design, an inadequate description of the qualitative sampling and analysis techniques, and the absence of joint displays for representing integration. Discussion: Authors must pay attention to these issues to ensure that the insights obtained by the use of mixed methods research are effectively communicated.
publishDate 2023
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2023
2023
2023
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10609/148722
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.956300
url http://hdl.handle.net/10609/148722
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.956300
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv Inglés
language_invalid_str_mv Inglés
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Front. Psychol. 13:956300.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.956300
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv CC BY
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv CC BY
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Frontiers
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Frontiers
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:O2, repositorio institucional de la UOC
instname:Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC)
instname_str Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC)
reponame_str O2, repositorio institucional de la UOC
collection O2, repositorio institucional de la UOC
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1869404857512755200
score 15,300719

Similares en LA Referencia