Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Mixed Methods Research in Criminology and Criminal Justice: a Systematic Review

  • Published:
American Journal of Criminal Justice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The field of criminology and criminal justice encompass broad and complex multidisciplinary topics. Most of the research that falls under these areas uses either quantitative or qualitative methodologies, with historically limited use of mixed methods designs. Research utilizing mixed methods has increased within the social sciences in recent years, including a steadily growing body of mixed method research in criminal justice and criminology. The goal of this study was to examine how mixed method designs are being employed within research related to criminal justice and criminology. Our systematic review located 327 mixed method articles published between 2001 and 2017. Findings indicated most criminology and criminal justice research is being conducted within the specialty area of victimology. This study provides an overview of mixed methods research in criminology and criminal justice and also illustrates that most publications are not including methodological concepts specific to mixed methods research (e.g., integration). Along with our systematic review, we offer a series of recommendations to move mixed methods research forward in criminology and criminal justice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aarons, G. A., Fettes, D. L., Sommerfeld, D. H., & Palinkas, L. A. (2012). Mixed methods for implementation research: Application to evidence-based practice implementation and staff turnover in community-based organizations providing child welfare services. Child Maltreatment, 17(1), 67–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, E. (1999). Code of the street: Decency, violence, and the moral life of the inner city. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, V. R. (2015). Introduction to mixed methods approaches. In L. A. Jason & D. S. Glenwick (Eds.), Handbook of methodological approaches to community-based research: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods (pp. 233–241). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bazeley, P. (2018). Integrating analyses in mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brent, J. J., & Kraska, P. B. (2010). Moving beyond our methodological default: A case for mixed methods. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 21(4), 412–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryman, A. (1988). Quantity and quality in social research. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckler, K. (2008). The quantitative/qualitative divide revisited: A study of published research, doctoral program curricula, and journal editor perceptions. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 19(3), 383–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burrell, N. A., & Gross, C. (2018). Quantitative research, purpose of. In M. Allen (Ed.), The SAGE Encyclopedia of Communication Research Methods (pp. 1378–1380). Los Angeles: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81–105. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, R., Fehler-Cabral, G., Bybee, D., & Shaw, J. (2017). Forgotten evidence: A mixed methods study of why sexual assault kits (SAKs) are not submitted for DNA forensic testing. Law and Human Behavior, 41(5), 454–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, R., Goodman-Williams, R., Feeney, H., & Fehler-Cabral, G. (2020). Assessing triangulation across methodologies, methods, and stakeholder groups: The joys, woes, and politics of interpreting convergent and divergent data. American Journal of Evaluation, 41(1), 125–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1, 37–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Copes, H., Beaton, B., Ayeni, D., Dabney, D., & Tewksbury, R. (2020). A content analysis of qualitative research published in top criminology and criminal justice journals from 2010 to 2019. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 45, 1060–1079. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-020-09540-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Copes, H., Brown, A., & Tewksbury, R. (2011). A content analysis of ethnographic research published in top criminology and criminal justice journals from 2000 to 2009. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 22(3), 341–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Sage.

  • Creswell, J. W., Klassen, A. C., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Best practices for mixed methods research in the health sciences. Washington, DC: National Institute for Health https://www.obssr.od.nih.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Best-Practices-for-Mixed-Methods-Research-in-the-Health-Sciences-2018-01-25.pdf.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crow, M. S., & Smykla, J. O. (2013). A mixed methods analysis of methodological orientation in national and regional criminology and criminal justice journals. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 24(4), 536–555.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Culbert, G. J., Bazazi, A. R., Waluyo, A., Murni, A., Muchransyah, A. P., Iriyanti, M., Finnahari, Polonsky, M., Levy, J., & Altice, F. L. (2016). The influence of medication attitudes on utilization of antiretroviral therapy (ART) in Indonesian prisons. AIDS and Behavior, 20(5), 1026–1038.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curry, L., & Nunez-Smith, M. (2015). Mixed methods in health sciences research: A practical primer. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Denzin, N. (1978). Sociological methods. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eadie, D., MacAskill, S., McKell, J., & Baybutt, M. (2012). Barriers and facilitators to a criminal justice tobacco control coordinator: An innovative approach to supporting smoking cessation among offenders. Addiction, 107(2), 26–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission JRC. (2007). Quantitative versus qualitative methods. Retrieved from http://forlearn.jrc.ec.europa.eu/guide/4_methodology/meth_quanti-quali.htm.

  • Fàbregues, S., & Molina-Azorín, J. F. (2017). Addressing quality in mixed methods research: A review and recommendations for a future agenda. Quality and Quantity, 51, 2847–2863.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, J. C., & Caracelli, V. J. (Eds.). (1997). Advances in mixed-method evaluation: The challenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms: New directions for evaluation, 74. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(3), 255–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, L. C., Smith, S. Z., Swars, S. L., & Smith, M. E. (2009). An examination of research methods in mathematics education (1995–2005). Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 3(1), 26–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heap, V., & Waters, J. (2019). Mixed methods in criminology. Routledge.

  • Hesse-Biber, S., & Johnson, R. B. (2013). Coming at things differently: Future directions of possible engagement with mixed methods research [Editorial]. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 7(2), 103–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hovey, A., Rye, B. J., & Stalker, C. A. (2013). Factors influencing perceptions of abuse victims: Do therapists’ beliefs about sexual offending affect counseling practices with women? Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 22, 572–592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hovey, A., Stalker, C. A., & Rye, B. J. (2014). Perpetrators of sexual abuse and considerations for treatment. Asking women survivors about thoughts or actions involving sex with children: An issue requiring therapist sensitivity. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 23, 442–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howe, K. R. (2016). Against the quantitative-qualitative incompatibility thesis or dogmas die hard. Educational Researcher, 17(8), 10–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howell Smith, M. C., & Shanahan Bazis, P. (2020). Conducting mixed methods research systematic methodological reviews: A review of practice and recommendations. Journal of Mixed Methods Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689820967626.

  • Islam, F., & Oremus, M. (2014). Mixed methods immigrant mental health research in Canada: A systematic review. Journal of Immigrant Minority Health, 16, 1284–1289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 112–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleck, G., Tark, J., & Bellows, J. J. (2006). What methods are most frequently used in research in criminology and criminal justice? Journal of Criminal Justice, 34, 147–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maruna, S. (2009). Mixed method research in criminology: Why not go both ways? In A. R. Piquero & D. Weisburd (Eds.), Handbook of Quantitative Criminology (pp. 123–140). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, H. V., Miller, J. M., & Barnes, J. C. (2016). Reentry programming for opioid and opiate involved female offenders: Findings from a mixed methods evaluation. Journal of Criminal Justice, 46, 129–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The PRISMA Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molina-Azorin, J. F., & Fetters, M. D. (2016). Mixed methods research prevalence studies: Field-specific studies on the state of the art of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 10(2), 123–128. https://doi.org/10.1177/155868981663670.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plano Clark, V. L., & Ivankova, N. V. (2016). Mixed methods research: A guide to the field. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, C. R. (1966). The jack-roller: A delinquent boy’s own story. University of Chicago Press.

  • Sullivan, C. J., & Maxfield, M. G. (2003). Examining paradigmatic development in criminology and criminal justice: A content analysis of research methods syllabi in doctoral programs. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 14(2), 269–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tashakkori, A., & Creswell, J. W. (2007). The new era of mixed methods [editorial]. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(3), 207–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Testa, M., Livingston, J. A., & Vanzile-Tamsen, C. (2011). Advancing the study of violence against women using mixed methods: Integrating qualitative methods into a quantitative research program. Violence Against Women, 17(2), 236–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tewksbury, R., DeMichele, M. T., & Miller, J. M. (2005). Methodological orientations of articles appearing in criminal justice’s top journals: Who publishes what and where. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 16(2), 265–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tewksbury, R., Dabney, D. A., & Copes, H. (2010). The prominence of qualitative research in criminology and criminal justice scholarship. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 21, 391–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, R. T., & Decker, S. H. (1997). Armed robbers in action: Stickups and street culture. Boston: Northeastern University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We greatly appreciate Christina Poole’s assistance with coding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Teachers-Dyer Complex, School of Criminal Justice, University of Cincinnati, 2610 McMicken Circle, Cincinnati, OH, 45221, USA

    Nicole Wilkes, Valerie R. Anderson & Lillian Mae Bedell

  2. Department of Sociology, Hartwick College, P.O. Box 4022, Oneonta, NY, 13820, USA

    Cheryl Laura Johnson

Authors
  1. Nicole Wilkes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Valerie R. Anderson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Cheryl Laura Johnson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lillian Mae Bedell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicole Wilkes.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

ESM 1

(DOCX 38 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wilkes, N., Anderson, V.R., Johnson, C.L. et al. Mixed Methods Research in Criminology and Criminal Justice: a Systematic Review. Am J Crim Just 47, 526–546 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-020-09593-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-020-09593-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation