Looking back as the Journal of Mixed Methods Research (JMMR) begins the 14th year of publication in 2020, one of the most often addressed topics has been the role of paradigms in mixed methods research. In this virtual special issue, the first at the journal, we have collected a series of articles published in JMMR that provided pivotal ideas about paradigms in mixed methods research. We selected seven editorials and 13 articles to present the breadth and depth of the innovative and insightful ideas on the role of paradigms in mixed methods research (https:// journals.sagepub.com/topic/collections-mmr/mmr-1-paradigms_in_mixed_methods_research/mmr). While many articles published in JMMR address paradigms to a greater or lesser degree, these particular articles were chosen by virtue of a primary focus on the topic of paradigms in mixed methods. In this editorial about the virtual special issue, we provide an overview of select editorials and sentinel articles that have framed discussions about paradigms. In the oldest of the group of editorials, the founding co–chief editors, Creswell and Tashakkori (2007) identified the topic of paradigm as one of the main perspectives that mixed methods scholars had been discussing in the nascent field of modern mixed methods research (together with methods, methodology, and practice perspectives). They introduced how researchers can draw upon a paradigm perspective to discuss an overarching worldview or several worldviews as a philosophical foundation for mixed methods research. In an invited editorial, Johnson (2008) made recommendations considering mixed methods research relative to ontology, epistemology and methodology. He proposed that a paradigm for mixed methods research should be inclusive and fluid so that it can adapt to particular research questions and needs. He argued that balanced positions could be gained from living with tensions and serve as a space where most mixed methods researchers could effectively learn and practice research. In this regard, he argued for a dialectic approach based on respectful conversation as being an integral to mixed methods research. Bergman (2010) discussed how different scholars were using the term paradigm in the literature on mixed methods research. He opined that most often, ‘‘paradigm’’ was being used as authors tried to differentiate qualitative from quantitative research by considering differences on epistemological, ontological, and axiological grounds. Additionally, he posited the term paradigm to be synonymous with a worldview, approach or framework.

中文翻译：

---

关于“混合方法研究范式”的虚拟特刊

回首《混合方法研究杂志》（JMMR）于2020年出版的第14年，最常提及的主题之一是范例在混合方法研究中的作用。在这个虚拟的特刊上，这是该杂志的第一期，我们收集了在JMMR中发表的一系列文章，这些文章提供了关于混合方法研究范式的关键思想。我们选择了7篇社论和13篇文章来介绍关于范式在混合方法研究中的作用的创新性和深刻见解的广度和深度（https：// journals.sagepub.com/topic/collections-mmr/mmr-1-paradigms_in_mixed_methods_research / mmr）。尽管在JMMR中发表的许多文章都或多或少地讨论了范式，但这些特定文章的选择主要是基于混合方法中的范式主题。在这篇有关虚拟特刊的社论中，我们提供了精选社论的概述，以及定格了有关范式讨论的定点文章。在最古老的社论中，创始共同主编Creswell和Tashakkori（2007）将范式的主题确定为混合方法学者在现代混合方法研究的新生领域中讨论的主要观点之一（以及方法，方法论和实践观点）。他们介绍了研究人员如何利用范式的观点来讨论总体世界观或几种世界观，以此作为混合方法研究的哲学基础。在受邀社论中，Johnson（2008）提出了与本体论，认识论和方法论相关的混合方法研究的建议。他提出，混合方法研究的范式应具有包容性和流动性，以便可以适应特定的研究问题和需求。他认为，在紧张局势中生活可以取得平衡的位置，并且可以成为大多数混合方法研究人员可以有效学习和实践研究的空间。在这方面，他主张基于尊重性对话的辩证法是混合方法研究不可或缺的一部分。Bergman（2010）讨论了不同学者如何在混合方法研究文献中使用术语范式。他认为，“范式”经常被使用，因为作者试图通过考虑认识论，本体论和价值论基础上的差异来将定性研究与定量研究区分开。另外，