As an illustration, Perkins tells a story he heard from a young John Kerry supporter who asked his father why he voted for President Bush. It turned out that the father believed that the licensee had a better chance of protecting them if a terrorist targeted the nuclear power plant near his home. Among the most popular reasons for the use of mixed approaches are the objectives of verification and triangulation: ensuring that results are supported by different data sets. This follows the conclusion that different methods can only provide selected pieces of the puzzle or reflect a false or distorted image, but that a combination of methods can pierce to the core and draw a complete picture. But there`s also a problem: what if the stories don`t add up? What if the mix of data and methods reveals different images? Should they be fired and rejected? Or could there be a truth that disagrees? Give them time to talk. Tell them you want to talk to them about the disagreement. Gain an understanding of each other`s perspective. To understand why the disagreement began, it can help ask questions about their views. Regardless of the power of mixed methods for poverty analysis and impact analysis, the idea that qualitative and quantitative data should lead to the same conclusion is wrong. There is as much truth in agreement as there is in disagreements, and much is gained in research with mixed methods when one gives more weight to disagreements.
To illustrate yet another quote: “Each story has three pages: your page, my page and the truth” (Robert Evans). Sensible civil disagreements – how to promote understanding, to open the mind, to locate commonalities, to support democracy – require meaningful personal commitment across borders. The widespread awareness that different methods – the combination of data or “stories” – can give a more nuanced and in-depth understanding of the subject illustrates the relevance of stories as a metaphor for data. This is certainly true for poverty studies and impact studies, the combination of methods for fine-grained assessments that tell the story from several angles. “The son understood that even if he didn`t agree with his father, his father had a story that made his voice reasonable, at least for him,” Perkins says. “The father`s explanation taught the son that people who voted otherwise are not crazy; they just came out of another story to make their decision. It`s normal to argue with people or disagree. Everyone experiences conflicts in their lives. Resolving conflicts or disagreements is not always easy. Use a mediator.
If you ask someone else to act as a mediator, you can get a different perspective on disagreements at the same time. It is important that this person is neutral in both eyes (z.B. if your friend communicates a conflict with your best friend, this may not be the best option). Talking to the person about your disagreement can be helpful as long as it is done with mutual respect. Make sure this is done constructively by thinking about the points you want to express. Approaching the person is more often effective if you are calm and not angry. “The “Let`s Swap Stories” campaign asks people to say why they believe it,” says Perkins.