Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Abduction has the potential to act as a critical philosophical and methodological conduit in mixed methods research (MMR), offering innovative approaches to integrative and iterative research processes. Despite its potential, abductive reasoning in MMR is often framed narrowly, aligned with pragmatism or simplified as a tool for integrating qualitative and quantitative methods. This manuscript argues for a broader conceptualization of abduction in MMR, emphasizing its role beyond integration to enhance methodological innovation. Q methodology, a 90-year-old mixed method intertwining qualitative and quantitative techniques, exemplifies the essential role of abduction throughout, from data collection to interpretation. Drawing on prior literature within Q methodology, this study illustrates how abduction enables deeper insights into human behavior, even amid incomplete or complex data.

Keywords

abduction abductive inference abductive reasoning C.S. Peirce Q methodology

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Albright

E. A.

Christofferson

McCabe

Montgomery

(2020). Lessons learned: Some guidelines to factor interpretation. Operant Subjectivity, 41(1), 134–146. https://doi.org/10.22488/okstate.20.100581

Arrighi

Ferrario

(2008). Abductive reasoning, interpretation and collaborative processes. Foundations of Science, 13(1), 75–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-007-9117-4

Banks-VanAllen

C. E.

Midgley

B. D.

Brown

S. R.

(2023). Single cases and the laws of subjectivity. Theory & Psychology, 33(6), 792–813. https://doi.org/10.1177/09593543231185354

Bellucci

Pietarinen

A.-V.

(2020). Icons, interrogations, and graphs: On peirce’s integrated notion of abduction. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, 56(1), 43–61. https://doi.org/10.2979/trancharpeirsoc.56.1.03

Bernauer

J. A.

Hartle

(2022). Detectives and the legal system: A paradigm to support scholarly inquiry and mixed methods research in the social sciences. The Qualitative Report, 27(11), 2546–2555. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2022.5729

Brown

S. R.

(1970). On the use of variance designs in Q methodology. The Psychological Record, 20(2), 179–189. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03393928

Brown

S. R.

(1980). Political subjectivity: Applications of Q methodology in political science. Yale University Press.

Brown

S. R.

(2008). Q methodology. In Given

L. M.

(Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods (pp. 700–704). Sage.

Christensen

J. H.

(2022). Enhancing mixed methods pragmatism with systems theory: Perspectives from educational research. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 39(1), 104–115. https://doi.org/10.1002/sres.2751

10.

Clausius

(1850). On the motive power of heat, and on the laws which can be deduced from it for the theory of heat. Poggendorff’s Annalen der Physik, 79(3), 368–397. https://doi.org/10.1002/andp.18501550306

11.

Douven

(2017). Abduction. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/abduction/

12.

Duarte

(2019). On abduction and interpretation. Crítica (México D. F. En Línea), 51(151), 65–84. https://doi.org/10.22201/iifs.18704905e.2019.03

13.

Feilzer

M. Y.

(2010). Doing mixed methods research pragmatically: Implications for the rediscovery of pragmatism as a research paradigm. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(1), 6–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689809349691

14.

Franks

(2018). The context of inference. History and Philosophy of Logic, 39(4), 365–395. https://doi.org/10.1080/01445340.2018.1439257

15.

Grice

H. P.

(1975). Logic and conversation. In Cole

Morgan

J. L.

(Eds.), Syntax and semantics (3, pp. 41–58). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368811_003

16.

Grinnell

(2019). Abduction in the everyday practice of science: The logic of unintended experiments. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, 55(3), 215–227. https://doi.org/10.2979/trancharpeirsoc.55.3.01

17.

Haig

B. D.

(2008). Scientific method, abduction, and clinical reasoning. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 64(9), 1013–1018. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.20505

18.

Hanson

N. R.

(1958). Patterns of discovery. Cambridge University Press.

19.

Harman

G. H.

(1965). The inference to the best explanation. The Philosophical Review, 74(1), 88–95. https://doi.org/10.2307/2183532

20.

McKaughan

D. J.

(2008). From ugly duckling to swan: C. S. Peirce, abduction, and the pursuit of scientific theories. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, 44(3), 446–468.

21.

McKeown

Thomas

(2013). Q methodology. Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483384412

22.

Mirza

N. A.

Akhtar

D. N.

Noesgaard

Martin

Staples

(2014). A concept analysis of abductive reasoning. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 70(9), 1980–1994. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.12379

23.

Mitchell

(2018). A review of mixed methods, pragmatism and abduction techniques. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 16(3), 103–116.

24.

Morgan

D. L.

(2007). Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: Methodological implications of combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 48–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/2345678906292462

25.

Mukumbang

F. C.

(2023). Retroductive theorizing: A contribution of critical realism to mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 17(1), 93–114. https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898211049847

26.

Mulaik

S. A.

(1987). A brief history of the philosophical foundations of exploratory factor analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 22(3), 267–305. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr2203_3

27.

Nagy

W. E.

Herman

P. A.

Anderson

R. C.

(1985). Learning words from context. Reading Research Quarterly, 20(2), 233–253. https://doi.org/10.2307/747758

28.

Paavola

(2004). Abduction as a logic and methodology of discovery: The importance of strategies. Foundations of Science, 9(3), 267–283. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:FODA.0000042843.48932.25

29.

Paavola

(2023). Abduction as a logic of discovery. In Magnani

(Ed.), Handbook of abductive cognition (pp. 43–60). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-68436-5_9-1

30.

Patokorpi

(2007). Logic of sherlock holmes in technology enhanced learning. Educational Technology & Society, 10(1), 171–185.

31.

Proudfoot

(2023). Inductive/deductive hybrid thematic analysis in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 17(3), 308–326. https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898221126816

32.

Ramlo

(2022). Mixed methods research and quantum theory: Q Methodology as an exemplar for complementarity. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 16(2), 226–241. https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898211019497

33.

Ramlo

(2023). It's not the notes that makes it jazz: Why structure is important in jazz, the natural sciences, and Q methodology. Operant Subjectivity: The International Journal of Q Methodology, 45, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.22488/okstate.23.100501

34.

Ramlo

(2024a). Integrated data collection in Q Methodology: Using ChatGPT from concourse to Q-sample to Q-sort. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 19(2), 191–205. https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898241262824

35.

Ramlo

(2024b). Non-statistical, substantive generalization: Lessons from Q Methodology. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 47(1), 65–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2023.2173735

36.

Ramlo

(2025). Examining Subjectivity with Q Methodology. Routledge.

37.

Schickore

(2022). Scientific discovery. In Zalta

E. N.

Nodelman

(Eds.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2022/entries/scientific-discovery

38.

Shannon-Baker

(2015). Making Paradigms Meaningful in Mixed Methods Research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 10(4), 319–334. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689815575861

39.

Shapiro

Kissel

T. K.

(2024). Classical logic. In Zalta

E. N.

Nodelman

(Eds.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2024/entries/logic-classical/

40.

Stephenson

(1953). The study of behavior: Q-technique and its methodology. University of Chicago Press.

41.

Stephenson

(1961a). Scientific creed, 1961: Philosophical credo. The Psychological Record, 11, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03393380

42.

Stephenson

(1961b). Scientific creed, 1961: Abductory principles. The Psychological Record, 11(1), 9–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03393381

43.

Stephenson

(1967). The play theory of mass communication. University of Chicago Press.

44.

Stephenson

(1978). Concourse theory of communication. Communication, 3(1), 21–40. https://doi.org/10.22488/okstate.78.100517

45.

Stephenson

(1980). Consciring: A general theory for subjective communicability. In: Communication Yearbook, Nimmo

(Ed.), Transaction Books. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.1980.11923791

46.

Stephenson

(1982). Newton’s fifth rule and Q methodology: Application to self psychology. Operant Subjectivity, 5(2), 37–57. https://doi.org/10.22488/okstate.82.100593

47.

Stephenson

(1983). Against interpretation. Operant Subjectivity, 6(3), 73–103. https://doi.org/10.22488/okstate.83.100517

48.

Stephenson

(1986). Play theory of communication. Operant Subjectivity, 9(4), 109–122. https://doi.org/10.22488/okstate.86.100583

49.

Stephenson

(1987). William james, niels bohr, and complementarity: III —Schrodinger’s cat. The Psychological Record, 37(4), 523–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03394997

50.

Stephenson

(1988). Quantum theory of subjectivity. Integrative Psychiatry, 6(3-4), 180–187.

51.

Stephenson

(1993). Introduction to Q-Methodology. Operant Subjectivity, 17(1/2), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.22488/okstate.93.100509

52.

Stephenson

(2007). Consciring: A general theory for subjective communicability. Operant Subjectivity, 30(3/4), 89–136. https://doi.org/10.22488/okstate.07.100562

53.

Trajkovski

Williamson

(2021). Abduction, perception, emotion, feeling: Body maps and pattern recognition. Philosophical Perspectives, 35(1), 404–418. https://doi.org/10.1111/phpe.12142

54.

Wolff

S. L.

(2013). Rudolph clausius – A pioneer of the modern theory of heat. Vacuum, 90, 102–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vacuum.2012.02.029