Application of the mixed methods offers comprehensive, more thorough, and wealthier understanding of research aspects than any of the approaches singly applied. This value is based on the characteristics of EBOs are a high level of structure of the intervention, and application of some form of observation to guarantee that the intervention is distributed with trustworthiness (Aarons, Fettes, Sommerfeld & Palinkas, 2012). Through applying this approach, exploration, and deeper depth of understanding previously impossible in a single approach is made possible. Utilizing mixed method research in determining evidence-based practices in counseling is useful as it tests and confirms hypotheses, which have been previously applied. The methods are increasingly utilized to enhance deep understanding in counseling and prevail over barriers to implementation (Aarons, Fettes, Sommerfeld & Palinkas, 2012).
Mixed Methods to Evidence-based Practice approach offers strength to offset challenges experienced both in qualitative and quantitative research. Thus, the strength of one approach makes up for the weakness of another approach (Palinkas, 2011). A complete and comprehensive understanding of the research problem that is missing in either approach is derived. The approach offers methods for better development and more context of given instruments. In this approach, further definition of the findings of the causal processes of work is made possible. It is however complicated to conduct this form of research design since more time and other resources are necessary for the planning and implementation of this form of research. It is besides complicated to chart and execute one approach by drawing on the results of another approach. Applying Mixed Methods to Evidence-based Practice is still unclear in resolving discrepancies, which may arise due to the interpretation of the results.
Previous studies prove that utilizing mixed methods involve the application of the quantitative together with qualitative design, data collection, and other analytic approaches, which are particularly well matched in comprehending the process and the results of the dissemination and application in counseling. This approach greatly improves the quality and extent of implementation studies as well as determines strategies for facilitating implementation (Palinkas, 2011). In applying both qualitative and quantitative methods, researchers can derive benefits from both since the quantitative method is best suited for testing and confirming hypotheses as established within the conceptual framework. Qualitative method, on the other hand, is useful for the purposes of identification, and selection of the appropriate samples as well as increases the scope of understanding of predictors.
Aarons, A. G., Fettes, L. D., Sommerfeld, H. D. & Palinkas, L. (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. Retrieved on October, 23rd.
Palinkas, A. L. et al. (2011). Mixed Method Designs in Implementation Research.
Administration Mental Health. Jan 38, Issue 1: 44-53.