Remaining Open to Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed-Method Designs: An Unscientific Compromise, or Good Research Practice?¹1Author note: This paper is based on the Doctoral Research of Keith R. McVilly, which was recognized with Australian Psychological Society's 2005 Thesis Award for a thesis in the field of human relationships...

Full title: Remaining Open to Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed-Method Designs: An Unscientific Compromise, or Good Research Practice?¹1Author note: This paper is based on the Doctoral Research of Keith R. McVilly, which was recognized with Australian Psychological Society's 2005 Thesis Award for a thesis in the field of human relationships. The research was partly funded by an Australian Post Graduate Award, in the Faculty of Medicine, University of Sydney. The tension between quantitative and qualitative research paradigms are discussed together with the important contribution of mixed-method designs, particularly as they are applied in the field of disability studies. Practical issues inherent in research designs involving participants with intellectual disability are explored, including sample building, participant consent, data collection and data analysis. It is concluded, scientific debate needs to move beyond the dialectic of quantitative vs qualitative research to recognise the merit of a variety of different approaches. The question is not which design is inherently superior, but which design, or combination of designs, best addresses the research question.