Ontology, epistemology, and multi-methods

Enthusiasm for multi-methods research can possibly be ascribed to the prima facie promise it holds for moving beyond, if not resolving, seemingly intractable debates on the relative merits of “qualitative” (historical, interpretive, etc.) versus “quantitative” (i.e. inferential statistical) research methods. The justification of multi-methods rests on the claim that combining a few case studies with a larger inferential—and not descriptive—statistical study manages to capture the strengths of both insofar as the discovery of causal relations is concerned. This in turn lends greater confidence that the relationships being asserted are indeed causal. The specific argument is that since inferential statistics allows for generalization (while case studies normally do not), and case studies are better at tracing what are called “causal mechanisms,” combining the two affords us the best of both worlds.