Editorial Journal of Mixed Methods Research 7(2) 103–109 Ó The Author(s) 2013 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1558689813483987 mmr.sagepub.com Coming at Things Differently: Future Directions of Possible Engagement With Mixed Methods Research Sharlene Hesse-Biber 1 and R. Burke Johnson 2 The field of mixed methods (MM) research facilitates ‘‘coming at things differently.’’ Traditional forms of data gathering using one method for data collection may not be adequate for answering complex questions that sometimes require a variety of qualitative and quantitative methods in one study. Although the number of MM studies continues to grow, it is clear from the literature that newcomers and seasoned MM researchers encounter praxis/practice barriers that concern the ‘‘how-tos’’ of integrating MM findings. More philosophical concerns center on issues regarding whether or not paradigmatic stances can be mixed or can coexist. Still other concerns center on research conundrums that reside within and between our disciplinary con- texts, such as the impact of and interfacing with newly emergent technologies for data analysis and collection with MM research. Some of these barriers are conscious whereas others are unconscious. The Mixed Methods Community Is Multiple and Mixed We think it is important to expand the conversation about what MM is in order to grow, chal- lenge and dialogue among the diverse approaches that are reflected in the MM research com- munity. MM is traditionally defined as requiring (necessarily) the use of both qualitative and quantitative methods or data. 1 The ‘‘traditional’’ definition, however, if taken in a rigid and reductionist manner, may serve to exclude some important researchers and practitioners. We envision, therefore, an MM research and inquiry that includes ‘‘multiple and mixed’’ research projects that facilitate and reside at the intersections of multiple methods, purposes, kinds of data, and levels of analysis (e.g., micro, meso, macro), as well as a range of academic disci- plines, paradigms, axiologies, stakeholders, and cultures of research and practice. Having said this, it is critical not to lose sight of the importance of centering the research question and con- structing the appropriate design for the specific research question in a particular research con- text. Given the complexity of research problems that traverse any one disciplinary point of view, we argue for reaching out across our disciplinary divides to explore the deployment, when needed, of a plurality of methodological approaches and philosophical perspectives and 1 Department of Sociology and Women’s and Gender Studies, Boston College, Massachusetts, USA 2 Department of Professional Studies, University of South Alabama, Alabama, USA Corresponding Author: Sharlene Hesse-Biber, Department of Sociology and Women’s and Gender Studies, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA 02467, USA. Email: hesse@bc.edu