Methodological triangulation in researching families: Making sense of dissonant data

The research literature on triangulation has paid little attention to the problematic of 'making sense of dissonant data'. Nor has there been much discussion around the use of the technique of triangulation when researching families. Through a presentation of research findings gathered from self-report questionnaires and in-depth interviews with couples and families the possibilities of convergent, complementary and dissonant data and their interpretation are explored. The paper reflects on the ontological, epistemological and methodological tensions that must be negotiated when working with triangulated data. It is argued that given the multi-faceted context and intimate subject matter in family and couples research there is a high likelihood of dissonant findings. Recommendations are made for family researchers interested in the technique of triangulation to consider the context and process of their research in the interpretation of their data. Despite the challenges that triangulation throws up for researchers, it is argued that working within a post-positivist paradigm, triangulation enables analysis which is both more complex and more meaningful.

[1]  Miri Song Hearing Competing Voices: Sibling Research , 1998 .

[2]  N. Denzin The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods , 1977 .

[3]  A. Perlesz Complex responses to trauma: challenges in bearing witness , 1999 .

[4]  J. Lindsay,et al.  Money in heterosexual relationships , 1996 .

[5]  L. Goodwin,et al.  Are Validity and Reliability "Relevant" in Qualitative Evaluation Research? , 1984, Evaluation & the health professions.

[6]  S. Brouse Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for Analysing Talk, Text and Interaction, 2nd edition by David Silverman. Sage, London, 2001, 325 pages, £17·99, ISBN 0 761 96865 2. , 2002 .

[7]  J. Lindsay Diversity but not equality: domestic labour in cohabiting relationships , 1999 .

[8]  Hans Waege Is Current Validation Valid? Some Intriguing Problems with Traditional Validation Designs for General (Value) Surveys , 1997 .

[9]  E. Guba,et al.  Naturalistic inquiry: Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1985, 416 pp., $25.00 (Cloth) , 1985 .

[10]  D. Reiss,et al.  Debriefing the family: is research an intervention? , 1995, Family process.

[11]  Sol Levin,et al.  The McMaster Model of Family Functioning. , 1978 .

[12]  J. Brannen Mixing Methods: qualitative and quantitative research , 2017 .

[13]  D. Haraway Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective , 1988 .

[14]  Supriya Singh,et al.  Marriage Money: The Social Shaping of Money in Marriage and Banking , 1997 .

[15]  J. Finch Family obligations and social change , 1989 .

[16]  D. Olson Families: What Makes Them Work , 1983 .

[17]  J. Finch,et al.  Negotiating Family Responsibilities , 1992 .

[18]  D. Vannoy More Equal Than Others: Women and Men in Dual-Career Marriages.By Rosanna Hertz. University of California Press, 198. 245 pp. Paper, $9.95 , 1993 .

[19]  M. Bittman,et al.  Domestic Power: Negotiating an Unequal Division of Labour within a Framework of Equality , 1993 .

[20]  H. Yeung Critical realism and realist research in human geography: a method or a philosophy in search of a method? , 1997, Progress in Human Geography.

[21]  Jane Akister,et al.  Identifying families at risk: exploring the potential of the McMaster Family Assessment Device , 1991 .

[22]  M. Fine,et al.  Qualitative and quantitative methods: When stories converge , 1987 .

[23]  J. Goodnow,et al.  Men, Women and Household Work , 1994 .

[24]  Deborah R. Dillon,et al.  Family therapy and qualitative research , 1990 .

[25]  N. Denzin,et al.  Handbook of Qualitative Research , 1994 .

[26]  A. Sarris,et al.  Family Assessment Device: Reports from Mothers, Fathers, and Adolescents in Community and Clinic Families. , 1988 .

[27]  T. Jick Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Triangulation in Action. , 1979 .

[28]  Gerald Prein,et al.  Triangulation: Validity and empirically-based hypothesis construction , 1997 .

[29]  E. Guba,et al.  Competing paradigms in qualitative research. , 1994 .

[30]  M. Patton,et al.  Qualitative evaluation and research methods , 1992 .

[31]  Elizabeth Adams St. Pierre,et al.  Writing: A method of inquiry. , 1994 .

[32]  D. Silverman Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for Analysing Talk, Text and Interaction , 1994 .

[33]  R. Hertz,et al.  More Equal Than Others: Women and Men in Dual-Career Marriages , 1986 .

[34]  D. Glik,et al.  Integrating Qualitative and Quantitative Survey Techniques , 2005 .

[35]  A. Gurman,et al.  Technolatry, methodolatry, and the results of family therapy. , 1978, Family process.

[36]  C. Seale,et al.  Quality in Qualitative Research , 1999 .

[37]  D L Dowe,et al.  The Melbourne Family Grief Study, I: Perceptions of family functioning in bereavement. , 1996, The American journal of psychiatry.

[38]  Jennifer Mason,et al.  Linking qualitative and quantitative data analysis , 2002 .

[39]  V. Frankl,et al.  Man's search for meaning: An introduction to logotherapy, 4th ed. , 1992 .

[40]  N. Blaikie A critique of the use of triangulation in social research , 1991 .