Triangulation

Conceptual Overview and Discussion

Triangulation is an approach derived from navigation, military strategy, and surveying; it is based on the logic that researchers can move closer to obtaining a “true” picture if they take multiple measurements, use multiple methods, or examine a phenomenon at multiple levels of analysis. In social research, the term is associated with the use of multiple methods and measures of an empirical phenomenon in order to reduce bias and improve convergent validity, which is the substantiation of an empirical phenomenon through the use of multiple sources of evidence.

In accordance with its derivation, triangulation is typically described through the language of capture and constraint—of fixing, positioning, and confining. The implicit assumption in much of the social science literature on triangulation deals with developing a more effective method for the capturing and fixing of social phenomena in order to realize a more accurate analysis and explanation. For organization and management studies, for example, the concomitant phenomenal perspective is of organizations as stable empirical entities that exist and can be represented independent of their observers. This emphasis on stabilization derives from positivism, which assumes a dualist and objectivist relationship between the researcher and what can be known about the research subject.

Norman Denzin distinguished four types of triangulation: (1) data triangulation, whereby data [Page 945]are collected at different times or from different sources; (2) investigator triangulation, whereby different researchers or evaluators independently collect data on the same phenomenon and compare the results; (3) methodological triangulation, whereby multiple methods of data collection are used; and (4) theory triangulation, whereby different theories are used to interpret a set of data. Within each type of triangulation there are various subtypes; for example, methodological triangulation can include various combinations of qualitative and quantitative research designs. Beyond common paradigmatic assumptions, Marianne Lewis and Andrew Grimes argued that metatriangulation may be employed to examine relationships among different perspectives on organizational phenomena.

Application

A recent example of methodological triangulation is Charlene Yauch and Harold Steudel's use of both quantitative and qualitative methods in two exploratory case studies designed to assess the organizational cultures of two small manufacturers. They discussed definitional debates and chose to distinguish triangulation, which is aimed at corroborating data and reducing bias, from complementarity, which is aimed at deepening understanding. Recognizing these debates but not making such fine distinctions, Melanie Kan and Ken Parry also used mixed methods in their investigation of nursing leadership in New Zealand. In a grounded theory study, they used both questionnaire and qualitative data to make the point that both forms of data may be triangulated within a grounded theory approach. They argued that triangulation within the grounded theory method can help the researcher understand complex leadership processes.

...