Tabla 3.

1 Estándares de informes de diseño cuantitativo (JARS-Quant)

Título y página de título

Título

Identificar las principales variables y cuestiones teóricas objeto de investigación y las relaciones entre ellas.
Identificar las poblaciones estudiadas.

Nota del autor

Proporcionar reconocimiento y explicación de cualquier circunstancia especial, incluyendo

o información de registro si el estudio ha sido registrado
Uso de datos que también aparecen en publicaciones anteriores.
Informe previo de los datos fundamentales en disertaciones o artículos de congresos.
• Informar los criterios de inclusión y exclusión, incluidas las restricciones basadas en características demográficas.

Características de los participantes

• Informar las principales características demográficas (p. ej., edad, sexo, origen étnico, nivel socioeconómico) y características
importantes de temas específicos (p. ej., nivel de rendimiento en estudios de intervenciones educativas).

En el caso de investigación con animales, informe el género, la especie y el número de cepa u otra identificación
específica, como el nombre y la ubicación del proveedor y la designación de la población. Indique el número de animales
y su sexo, edad, peso, condición fisiológica, estado de modificación genética, genotipo, estado inmunológico, no haber
recibido medicamentos o pruebas y procedimientos previos a los que haya sido sometido el animal.

Procedimientos de muestreo
• Estimar y reportar coeficientes de confiabilidad para las puntuaciones analizadas (es decir, la muestra del investigador), si es posible.
Proporcione estimaciones de validez convergente y discriminante cuando sea relevante.
• Informar estimaciones relacionadas con la confiabilidad de las medidas, incluyendo
o confiabilidad entre evaluadores para medidas y calificaciones calificadas subjetivamente
o coeficientes test-retest en estudios longitudinales en los que el intervalo de retest corresponde al programa de
medición utilizado en el estudio
o coeficientes de consistencia interna para escalas compuestas en las que estos índices son apropiados para comprender la
naturaleza de los instrumentos que se utilizan en el estudio
Informe las características demográficas básicas de otras muestras si informa los coeficientes de confiabilidad o validez de
esas muestras, como los descritos en los manuales de prueba o en la información normativa para el instrumento.

Condiciones y diseño

Indique si las condiciones fueron manipuladas o observadas naturalmente. Informe el tipo de diseño según las tablas JARS-Quant:

o manipulación experimental con participantes aleatorizados

Tabla 2 y Módulo A

o manipulación experimental sin aleatorización

Reclutamiento

Proporcionar fechas que definan los períodos de contratación y medidas repetidas o de seguimiento.

Estadísticas y análisis de datos

• Proporcionar información que detalle los métodos estadísticos y de análisis de datos utilizados, incluidos los datos faltantes.
 o adecuación de los tamaños de muestra y validez del muestreo

Generalizabilidad

• Discutir la generalización (validez externa) de los hallazgos, teniendo en cuenta

Tabla 3.2 Estándares de informes de diseño cualitativo (JARS-Qual)

Pagina del titulo

Título

Identificar cuestiones/temas clave bajo consideración.

Nota del autor

Reconocer las fuentes de financiación o los contribuyentes.

Reconocer los conflictos de intereses, si los hubiera.

Abstracto

• Establecer el problema/pregunta/objetivos bajo investigación.

• Indique el diseño del estudio, incluidos los tipos de participantes o fuentes de datos, la estrategia analítica, los principales resultados/hallazgos
y las principales implicaciones/importancia.
Identifique cinco palabras clave.
Introducción

Descripción del problema o pregunta de investigación

Orientación para autores

o Los conocimientos previos relevantes para el análisis podrían incluir, entre otros, descripciones de las características
demográficas/culturales, credenciales, experiencia con fenómenos, capacitación, valores y/o decisiones de los
investigadores al seleccionar archivos o material para analizar.
 determinado en relación con el enfoque metodológico de los autores. Algunos autores determinarán un proceso de selección y luego
desarrollarán un método de reclutamiento basado en esos criterios. Otros autores desarrollarán un proceso de reclutamiento y luego
seleccionarán a los participantes de manera receptiva en relación con la evolución de los hallazgos.

Recopilación de datos

PROCEDIMIENTOS DE RECOPILACIÓN DE DATOS O IDENTIFICACIÓN

Indique la forma de los datos recopilados (por ejemplo, entrevistas, cuestionarios, medios, observación).
 separate section when elaboration or emphasis would be helpful. Issues of methodological integrity
include the following:
Assess the adequacy of the data in terms of the ability to capture forms of diversity most relevant
to the question, research goals, and inquiry approach.
Describe how the researchers’ perspectives were managed in both the data collection and analysis
(e.g., to limit their effect on the data collection, to structure the analysis).
Demonstrate that findings are grounded in the evidence (e.g., using quotes, excerpts, or
descriptions of researchers’ engagement in data collection).
Demonstrate that the contributions are insightful and meaningful (e.g., in relation to the current
literature and the study goal).
Provide relevant contextual information for findings (e.g., setting of study, information about
participants, interview question asked is presented before excerpt as needed).
Present findings in a coherent manner that makes sense of contradictions or disconfirming
evidence in the data (e.g., reconcile discrepancies, describe why a conflict might exist in the
findings).
Demonstrate consistency with regard to the analytic processes (e.g., analysts may use
demonstrations of analyses to support consistency, describe their development of a stable
perspective, interrater reliability, consensus) or describe responses to inconsistencies, as relevant
(e.g., coders switching midway through analysis, an interruption in the analytic process). If alterations
in methodological integrity were made for ethical reasons, explicate those reasons and the
adjustments made.
Describe how support for claims was supplemented by any checks added to the qualitative analysis.
Examples of supplemental checks that can strengthen the research may include
transcripts/data collected returned to participants for feedback
triangulation across multiple sources of information, findings, or investigators
checks on the interview thoroughness or interviewer demands
consensus or auditing process
member checks or participant feedback on findings
data displays/matrices
in-depth thick description, case examples, or illustrations
structured methods of researcher reflexivity (e.g., sending memos, field notes, diary, logbooks,
journals, bracketing)
checks on the utility of findings in responding to the study problem (e.g., an evaluation of whether a
solution worked)
Guidance for Reviewers
Research does not need to use all or any of the checks (as rigor is centrally based in the iterative
process of qualitative analyses, which inherently includes checks within the evolving, self-
correcting iterative analyses), but their use can augment a study’s methodological integrity.
Approaches to inquiry have different traditions in terms of using checks and which checks are most
valued.
Describe research findings (e.g., themes, categories, narratives) and the meaning and understandings
that the researcher has derived from the data analysis.
Demonstrate the analytic process of reaching findings (e.g., quotes, excerpts of data).

Findings/Results

Findings/Results Subsections
Present research findings in a way that is compatible with the study design.
Present synthesizing illustrations (e.g., diagrams, tables, models), if useful in organizing and
conveying findings. Photographs or links to videos can be used.
Guidance for Authors
Findings presented in an artistic manner (e.g., a link to a dramatic presentation of findings) should
also include information in the reporting standards to support the research presentation.
Use quotes or excerpts to augment data description (e.g., thick, evocative description, field notes,
text excerpts), but these should not replace the description of the findings of the analysis.
Guidance for Reviewers
 The Findings section tends to be longer than in quantitative papers because of the demonstrative
rhetoric needed to permit the evaluation of the analytic procedure.
Depending on the approach to inquiry, findings and discussion may be combined or a personalized
discursive style might be used to portray the researchers’ involvement in the analysis.
Findings may or may not include quantified information, depending upon the study’s goals,
approach to inquiry, and study characteristics.

Discussion

Discussion Subsections
Describe the central contributions and their significance in advancing disciplinary understandings.
Describe the types of contributions made by findings (e.g., challenging, elaborating on, and
supporting prior research or theory in the literature describing the relevance) and how findings can be
best utilized.
Identify similarities and differences from prior theories and research findings.
Reflect on any alternative explanations of the findings.
Identify the study’s strengths and limitations (e.g., consider how the quality, source, or types of the
data or the analytic processes might support or weaken its methodological integrity).
Describe the limits of the scope of transferability (e.g., what readers should bear in mind when using
findings across contexts).
Revisit any ethical dilemmas or challenges that were encountered, and provide related suggestions
for future researchers.
Consider the implications for future research, policy, or practice.
Guidance for Reviewers
Accounts could lead to multiple solutions rather than a single one. Many qualitative approaches
hold that there may be more than one valid and useful set of findings from a given data set.

Authors must decide how sections should be organized within the context
of their specific study. For example, qualitative researchers may combine the
Results and Discussion sections because they may not find it possible to
separate a given finding from its interpreted meaning within a broader
context. Qualitative researchers may also use headings that reflect the values
in their tradition (such as “Findings” instead of “Results”) and omit ones that
do not. As long as the necessary information is present, the paper does not
need to be segmented into the same sections and subsections as a quantitative
paper.
Qualitative papers may appear different from quantitative papers because
they tend to be longer. This added length is due to the following central
features of qualitative reporting: (a) In place of referencing statistical
analyses, researchers must include detailed rationales and procedural
descriptions to explain how an analytic method was selected, applied, and
adapted to fit each specific question or context; (b) researchers must include a
discussion of their own backgrounds and beliefs and how they managed them
throughout the study; and (c) researchers must show how they moved from
Reporting Standards for Mixed Methods Research
3.18 Basic Expectations for Mixed Methods Research Reporting
Whereas standards for reporting information in the abstract and introduction
of a paper are common to all kinds of research (see Sections 3.3–3.4), there
are specific reporting standards for mixed methods research articles. The
basic expectations for reporting mixed methods research are presented in
Table 3.3. Standards specific to quantitative and qualitative research are
presented in Sections 3.5 to 3.12 and 3.13 to 3.17, respectively.

Table 3.3 Mixed Methods Design Reporting Standards (JARS–Mixed)

Title and Title Page

Title
See the JARS–Quant and JARS–Qual Standards (Tables 3.1–3.2).
Guidance for Authors
Refrain from using words that are either qualitative (e.g., “explore,” “understand”) or quantitative
(e.g., “determinants,” “correlates”) because mixed methods stands in the middle between
qualitative and quantitative research.
Reference the mixed methods, qualitative methods, and quantitative methods used.
Author Note

See the JARS–Quant and JARS–Qual Standards (Tables 3.1–3.2).

Abstract
See the JARS–Quant and JARS–Qual Standards (Tables 3.1–3.2).
Indicate the mixed methods design, including types of participants or data sources, analytic strategy,
main results/findings, and major implications/significance.
Guidance for Authors
Specify the type of mixed methods design used. See the note on types of designs in the Research
Design Overview section of this table.
Consider using one keyword that describes the type of mixed methods design and one that
describes the problem addressed.
Describe your approach(es) to inquiry and, if relevant, how intersecting approaches to inquiry are
combined when this description will facilitate the review process and intelligibility of your paper. If
your work is not grounded in a specific approach(es) to inquiry or your approach would be too
complicated to explain in the allotted word count, however, it would not be advisable to provide
explication on this point in the abstract.

Introduction
Description of Research Problems/Questions

See the JARS–Quant and JARS–Qual Standards (Tables 3.1–3.2).

Instagram and Telegram: @PDFEnglish

 Guidance for Authors
This section may convey barriers in the literature that suggest a need for both qualitative and
quantitative data.
Guidance for Reviewers
Theory or conceptual framework use in mixed methods varies depending on the specific mixed
methods design or procedures used. Theory may be used inductively or deductively (or both) in
mixed methods research.

Study Objectives/Aims/Research Goals

See the JARS–Quant and JARS–Qual Standards (Tables 3.1–3.2).
State three types of research objectives/aims/goals: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods.
Order these goals to reflect the type of mixed methods design used.
Describe the ways approaches to inquiry were combined, as it illuminates the objectives and mixed
methods rationale (e.g., descriptive, interpretive, feminist, psychoanalytic, postpositivist, critical, post-
modern, constructivist, or pragmatic approaches).
Guidance for Reviewers
A mixed methods objective, aim, or goal may not be familiar to reviewers. It describes the results to
be obtained from using the mixed methods design type where “mixing” or integration occurs (e.g.,
the aim is to explain quantitative survey results with qualitative interviews in an explanatory
sequential design). For instance, the goal of a qualitative phase could be the development of a
conceptual model, the goal of a quantitative phase could be hypothesis testing based upon that
model, and the goal of the mixed methods phase could be to generate integrated support for a
theory based upon quantitative and qualitative evidence.
Method

Research Design Overview

See the JARS–Quant and JARS–Qual Standards (Tables 3.1–3.2).
Explain why mixed methods research is appropriate as a methodology given the paper’s goals.
Identify the type of mixed methods design used and define it.
Indicate the qualitative approach to inquiry and the quantitative design used within the mixed methods
design type (e.g., ethnography, randomized experiment).
If multiple approaches to inquiry were combined, describe how this was done and provide a rationale
(e.g., descriptive, interpretive, feminist, psychoanalytic, postpositivist, critical, postmodern,
constructivist, or pragmatic approaches), as it illuminates the mixed method in use.
Provide a rationale or justification for the need to collect both qualitative and quantitative data and the
added value of integrating the results (findings) from the two data sets.
Guidance for Reviewers
Because mixed methods research is a relatively new methodology, it is helpful to provide a
definition of it from a major reference in the field.
Mixed methods research involves rigorous methods, both qualitative and quantitative. Refer to the
qualitative and quantitative standards for details of rigor.
One of the most widely discussed topics in the mixed methods literature would be research
designs. There is not a generic mixed methods design but rather multiple types of designs. Basic,
core designs include convergent design, explanatory sequential design, and exploratory sequential
design. Although the names and types of designs may differ among mixed methods writers, a
common understanding is that the procedures for conducting a mixed methods study may differ
from one project to another. Further, these basic procedures can be expanded by linking mixed
methods to other designs (e.g., an intervention or experimental trial mixed methods study), to
theories or standpoints (e.g., a feminist mixed methods study), or to other methodologies (e.g., a
participatory action research mixed methods study).
PARTICIPANTS OR OTHER DATA SOURCES
See the JARS–Quant and JARS–Qual Standards (Tables 3.1–3.2).
When data are collected from multiple sources, clearly identify the sources of qualitative and
quantitative data (e.g., participants, text), their characteristics, and the relationship between the data

Instagram and Telegram: @PDFEnglish

 sets, if there is one (e.g., an embedded design).
State the data sources in the order of procedures used in the design type (e.g., qualitative sources
first in an exploratory sequential design followed by quantitative sources), if a sequenced design is
used in the mixed methods study.
Guidance for Authors
Because multiple sources of data are collected, separate descriptions of samples are needed when
they differ. A table of qualitative sources and quantitative sources is helpful. This table could
include type of data, when data were collected, and from whom. This table might also include study
aims/research questions for each data source and anticipated outcomes of the study. In mixed
methods research, this table is often called an “implementation matrix.”
Rather than describe data as represented in numbers versus words, it is better to describe sources
of data as open-ended information (e.g., qualitative interviews) and closed-ended information (e.g.,
quantitative instruments).
RESEARCHER DESCRIPTION
See the JARS–Qual Standards (Table 3.2).
Guidance for Authors
Because mixed methods research includes qualitative research, and reflexivity is often included in
qualitative research, we recommend statements as to how the researchers’ backgrounds influence
the research.
Guidance for Reviewers
It is helpful to establish in a publication the researchers’ experiences (or research teams’
experiences) with both qualitative and quantitative research as a prerequisite for conducting mixed
methods research.
Participant Recruitment
PARTICIPANT SAMPLING OR SELECTION
See the JARS–Quant and JARS–Qual Standards (Tables 3.1–3.2).
Describe the qualitative and the quantitative sampling in separate sections.
Relate the order of the sections to the procedures used in the mixed methods design type.
PARTICIPANT RECRUITMENT
See the JARS–Quant and JARS–Qual Standards (Tables 3.1–3.2).
Discuss the recruitment strategy for qualitative and quantitative research separately.
Data Collection

DATA–COLLECTION/IDENTIFICATION PROCEDURES
See the JARS–Quant and JARS–Qual Standards (Tables 3.1–3.2).
RECORDING AND TRANSFORMING THE DATA
See the JARS–Qual Standards (Table 3.2).

Data Analysis
See the JARS–Quant and JARS–Qual Standards (Tables 3.1–3.2).
Devote separate sections to the qualitative data analysis, the quantitative data analysis, and the
mixed methods analysis. This mixed methods analysis consists of ways that the quantitative and
qualitative results were “mixed” or integrated according to the type of mixed methods design used
(e.g., merged in a convergent design, connected in explanatory sequential designs and in exploratory
sequential designs).

Validity, Reliability, and Methodological Integrity

See the JARS–Quant and JARS–Qual Standards (Tables 3.1–3.2).

Indicate methodological integrity, quantitative validity and reliability, and mixed methods validity or
legitimacy. Further assessments of mixed methods integrity are also indicated to show the quality of
the research process and the inferences drawn from the intersection of the quantitative and qualitative
data.

Instagram and Telegram: @PDFEnglish

 Findings/Results

Findings/Results Subsections

See the JARS–Quant and JARS–Qual Standards (Tables 3.1–3.2).

Indicate how the qualitative and quantitative results were “mixed” or integrated (e.g., discussion;
tables of joint displays; graphs; data transformation in which one form of data is transformed to the
other, such as qualitative text, codes, or themes transformed into quantitative counts or variables).
Guidance for Authors
In mixed methods research, the Findings section typically includes sections on qualitative findings,
quantitative results, and mixed methods results. This section should mirror the type of mixed
methods design in terms of sequence (i.e., whether quantitative strand or qualitative strand comes
first; if both are gathered at the same time, either qualitative findings or quantitative results could
be presented first).
Guidance for Reviewers
In mixed methods Results sections (or in the Discussion section to follow), authors are conveying
their mixed methods analysis through “joint display” tables or graphs that array qualitative results
(e.g., themes) against the quantitative results (e.g., categorical or continuous data). This enables
researchers to directly compare results or to see how results differ between the quantitative and
qualitative strands.

Discussion
Discussion Subsections
See the JARS–Quant and JARS–Qual Standards (Tables 3.1–3.2).
Guidance for Authors
Typically, the Discussion section, like the Method and Findings/Results, mirrors in sequence the
procedures used in the type of mixed methods design. It also reflects on the implications of the
integrated findings from across the two methods.
Note.JARS–Qual = qualitative journal article reporting standards; JARS–Quant = quantitative journal article reporting
standards.

The inherent assumption of mixed methods research is that the combined

qualitative findings and quantitative results lead to additional insights not
gleaned from the qualitative or quantitative findings alone (Creswell, 2015;
Greene, 2007; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2010). In mixed methods research, the
thoughtful integration of qualitative findings and quantitative results leads to
a deeper understanding of the data and enhanced insights. In addition, authors
can publish multiple papers from a single mixed methods study, such as a
qualitative study paper, a quantitative study paper, and a mixed methods
overview paper.

Incorporating Both Quantitative and Qualitative Standards. The

thoughtful and robust use of mixed methods requires researchers to meet the
standards of both quantitative and qualitative research methodology in the
design, implementation, and reporting stages. To this end, various mixed

Instagram and Telegram: @PDFEnglish