Doctoral Students’ Perceived Barriers that Slow the Progress toward Completing a Doctoral Dissertation: A Mixed Analysis

The non-completion of doctoral degrees has been a concern due to its economic, social, and personal consequences. In the current study, the researchers investigated perceived barriers of select doctoral students in completing their doctoral degrees by utilizing a fully mixed sequential mixed research design. The quantitative and qualitative data were concurrently collected using identical samples (n = 205) via a Reading Interest Survey questionnaire. A sequential mixed analysis revealed 6 emergent themes: external obligations (36%), challenges to doctoral-level researchers (34%), practical/logistical constraints (23%), emotional concerns (15%), program structure (9%), and support for completion (8%). Also, 3 meta-themes were identified (i.e., dissociation, external/internal barriers, and institutional/personal barriers), which aided in explaining the relationships among the 6 primary themes. Implications of the findings are discussed

Collaboration patterns as a function of article genre among mixed researchers: a mixed methods bibliometric study.

Surprisingly, scant information exists regarding the collaboration patterns of mixed methods researchers. Thus, the purpose of this mixed methods bibliometric study was to examine (a) the distribution of the number of co-authors in articles published in the flagship mixed methods research journal (i.e., "Journal of Mixed Methods Research" ["JMMR"]) as a function of article genre (Quantitative Phase); (b) the relationship between the genre of articles published in "JMMR" and degree of collaboration in these articles (Quantitative Phase); (c) the difference between the number of authors in empirical research articles and non-empirical research articles published in "JMMR" (Quantitative Phase); and (d) select leading mixed methods researchers' collaboration experiences as a function of genre of article (Qualitative Phase). An analysis of all articles published in "JMMR" from 2007 (its inception) to 2015 (the latest complete year at the time that the study was conducted) revealed (a) a statistically significantly higher proportion of empirical research articles (63.2%) than non-empirical research articles (36.8%), (b) that empirical research articles were 1.4 times (95% confidence interval = 1.10, 1.78) more likely to involve multiple authors than were non-empirical research articles; and (c) that empirical research articles contained statistically significantly more authors than did non-empirical research articles. With respect to the qualitative phase, four themes (i.e., mental perception, mixed methods research, publication and research aids, and independent/group work) emerged regarding collaboration for empirical articles versus for non-empirical research articles. Implications of these findings are discussed