Advancing the Repertoire of Transformative Sequential Explanatory Mixed Methods Design in a Cross-Cultural Context: An Illustrative Study of African Refugees in the Southern U.S

Background: Although the utility and implications of mixed methods research (MMR) for addressing complex social issues has been established, there is a need for studies on advanced applications of MMR that demonstrate how it intersects with other research approaches and how its methodological tactics lead to measurable outcomes. One such advanced application is the sequential explanatory mixed method design combined with community-based participatory research (CBPR). While the two-phased sequential explanatory design has been widely applied, it suffers from methodological clarity. This is also true of transformative paradigm, which provides a metaphysical framework, but no clarity on pragmatic approaches for conducting transformative MMR. Therefore, we argue that transformative sequential explanatory designs must be further developed and refined to bolster MMR’s pragmatic utility.

Purpose: The purpose of our study is to exemplify and advance the repertoire of transformative sequential explanatory design in a cross-cultural context using an illustrative empirical study. We do so by adding a third phase of data integration and analysis that focused on convergence and expansion of mixed methods data as well as inclusion of community voices to define an entry point for a transformative cycle of dissemination and action.

Methods: We used a three-phased explanatory sequential mixed methods design using CBPR as the transformative lens in exploring the financial capability of African refugees. A cross-sectional community survey from a sample of resettled African refugees (N = 130) in the southern U.S. was conducted in phase I in Kiswahili, French, and Arabic. Qualitative data was collected in phase II through focus group discussion (FGD; n = 11), with refugee informants from the community survey sample. Service providers (n = 12) participated in a second FGD. Data from the two phases were used to refine and validate the moderating effect of financial literacy—the community-driven solution generated in FGDs in phase III. This continual methodological process of connecting, building, generating, and testing a model with community input demonstrated the cyclical nature of a transformative MMR approach.

Results: The conceptual moderation model showing the hypothesized interactive effect of financial literacy on the relationship between financial self-efficacy and financial stress was co-developed and refined. PROCESS macro was used to test whether levels of financial literacy changed the effect of financial self-efficacy on financial stress. Conditional effects of financial self-efficacy on financial stress based on financial literacy was tested. Financial literacy had a significant moderating effect on the relationship between financial self-efficacy and financial stress (β = -.37, p < .05). Financial self-efficacy, financial literacy, and the interaction effect (financial self-efficacy × financial literacy) accounted for 54% of the variance on financial stress (R² = .54, F = 15.16, p < .001). The interaction effect revealed a statistically significant increase in R² (ΔR² = .04, ΔF = 5.91, p < .05).

Conclusion: We offer unique contribution to the mixed methods methodology literature by expanding the methodological repertoire of transformative explanatory sequential design. Continued debate and development of the methodology will help maximize the usefulness and rigor of mixed methods research across different fields.