In defence of mixed method in autism research
- Lii Brooke

- 4 days ago
- 1 min read
Quant and qual, together forever.
What? No. Mixed method research is a way of bypassing difficult ideological questions. You either believe that everything is subjective interpretation or you don't. You can't just "bridge".
Maybe as an early-career doctoral researcher I'm powered by coffee, lofty ideas and naivety. But, look, it's really simple. In the real world, we already combine quant and qual, positivism and interpretivism. Every day. We must, otherwise we'd perish.
There are accepted mathematical truths in science and the beauty of inimitable individuality in humanities. You wouldn't leap off a table without care because you have chosen to interpret gravity differently one day. Similarly, you wouldn't dismiss the dark captivation of Coleridge's "Christabel" just because it's a product of one person's imagination and cannot be generalised from.
So, if we already assume the pragmatist position intuitively in order to engage with our reality, why then the war of ideologies? I believe mixed method in autism research and in social science in general is perhaps the least reductive option. It gives meaningful abstraction and human depth.

