The research methods landscape has the potential to be quite diverse. However, the paradigmatic battles between the two empirical research camps (quantitative and qualitative) and the more recent embracement of mixed-methods research has narrowly focused many fields’ attention, including that of composition studies, away from other sorts of useful methods, such as theoretical research. To address this, this sequential two-part study compares and contrasts the (a) purpose, (b) instruments, (c) data, and (d) structure of quantitative and qualitative research. Drawing on this four-part structure, this study advances composition studies research methods literature by posing and testing a definition of theoretical research through an examination of full-length core composition studies texts (N = 12). The article concludes by explaining the study’s relevance to the field and offering directions for future research.

中文翻译：

---

探索作曲研究的第四个空间

研究方法的前景可能非常多样化。然而，两个实证研究阵营（定量和定性）之间的范式之争以及最近对混合方法研究的接受使许多领域的注意力狭窄地集中，包括组合研究的领域，远离其他类型的有用方法，例如理论研究。为了解决这个问题，这项由两部分组成的连续研究比较和对比了定量和定性研究的 (a) 目的、(b) 工具、(c) 数据和 (d) 结构。利用这四部分的结构，本研究通过检查完整的核心作文研究文本（N = 12）提出和测试理论研究的定义来推进作文研究的研究方法文献。