{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03634232121922626, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.188405797101449, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Mixed Methods Research

Contemporary mixed methods research (MMR) veers away from a “loosely bounded” to a “bounded” concept that has important negative implications for how qualitatively driven mixed methods approaches are positioned in the field of mixed methods and overall innovation in the praxis of MMR. I deploy the concept of reification defined as taking an object/abstraction and treating it as if it were real such that it takes on the quality of “thing-ness,” having a concrete independent existence. I argue that the contemporary reification of mixed methods as a “thing” is fueled by three interrelated factors: (a) the growing formalization of mixed methods as design, (b) the unexamined belief in the “synergy” of mixed methods and, (c) the deployment of a “practical pragmatism” as the “philosophical partner” for mixed methods inquiry.