Quick team survey to assess convergence, complementarity, and discrepancies between qualitative and quantitative data—strengthen triangulation and rigor.
What's Included
AI-Powered Questions
Intelligent follow-up questions based on responses
Automated Analysis
Real-time sentiment and insight detection
Smart Distribution
Target the right audience automatically
Detailed Reports
Comprehensive insights and recommendations
Sample Survey Items
Q1
Multiple Choice
Which components of this study did you directly contribute to? Select all that apply.
Qualitative data collection
Qualitative analysis
Survey instrument/design
Quantitative analysis
Data integration/synthesis
Interpretation/write-up
Other
Q2
Opinion Scale
How clear were the mixed-methods objectives at the study design stage?
Range: 1 – 10
Min: Not clear at allMid: Moderately clearMax: Very clear
Q3
Multiple Choice
Which data sources were included in this integration? Select all that apply.
Interviews
Focus groups
Open-ended survey responses
Observational/field notes
Administrative/transactional data
Structured survey data
Experiments
Other
Q4
Rating
Overall, to what extent do qualitative and quantitative results point to the same conclusions?
Scale: 10 (star)
Min: DivergentMax: Fully aligned
Q5
Long Text
Briefly note one example of clear convergence (or near-convergence) you observed.
Max 600 chars
Q6
Matrix
For each insight type, which strand primarily contributed most?
Rows
Mainly qualitative
Both equally
Mainly quantitative
Not observed
Mechanisms/why
•
•
•
•
Contextual nuance
•
•
•
•
Breadth/generalizability
•
•
•
•
Edge cases/outliers
•
•
•
•
New hypotheses
•
•
•
•
Q7
Opinion Scale
How substantial were the discrepancies between qualitative and quantitative findings in this project?
Range: 1 – 10
Min: None or minorMid: ModerateMax: Major
Q8
Long Text
Describe the most consequential discrepancy: what differed, and where it appeared.
Max 600 chars
Q9
Multiple Choice
What types of discrepancies were present? Select all that apply.
Directional disagreement (opposite signs/themes)
Magnitude differences (size/strength)
Subgroup inconsistency
Timing/temporal mismatch
Measurement/operationalization mismatch
Sampling/coverage bias
Analytic/modeling choices
Other
Q10
Ranking
Prioritize actions to address discrepancies (rank from highest to lowest priority).
Drag to order (top = most important)
Re-examine qualitative codebook/themes
Sensitivity checks/alternative specifications
Revisit measurement/construct alignment
Sample weighting or balance diagnostics
Collect targeted follow-up data
Cross-walk via joint display/convergence coding
Q11
Rating
How well were strands integrated across stages (design, analysis, interpretation)?
Scale: 10 (star)
Min: PoorlyMax: Exceptionally well
Q12
Long Text
If integration felt limited, what were the main barriers?
Max 600 chars
Q13
Multiple Choice
Which integration techniques did we use? Select all that apply.
Joint displays
Convergence coding matrix
Data transformation (qualitize/quantize)
Framework matrix
Meta-inferences workshop or meeting
Narrative weaving
Other
Q14
Constant Sum
Allocate 100 points across sources to reflect their influence on final conclusions.
Total must equal 100
Qualitative evidence
Quantitative evidence
Integration/synthesis process
Stakeholder/community input
Min per option: 0Whole numbers only
Q15
Opinion Scale
How confident are you in the integrated conclusions of this study?
Range: 1 – 10
Min: Not confidentMid: Somewhat confidentMax: Very confident
Q16
Multiple Choice
Attention check: To confirm you are reading the questions, please select only “I am paying attention.”
I am paying attention
I am not paying attention
Prefer not to say
Q17
Multiple Choice
Based on the current evidence, which next steps should we take? Select all that apply.
Proceed to dissemination as is
Make minor analytic refinements
Substantive re-analysis
Collect additional qualitative data
Collect additional quantitative data
Stakeholder/member-check discussion
Revise theoretical framing
Other
Q18
Long Text
Anything else we should consider for interpreting or reporting the integrated results?
Max 600 chars
Q19
Multiple Choice
What is your primary role on this project? Select one.
PI/Lead
Co-PI/Co-lead
Analyst (qualitative)
Analyst (quantitative)
Mixed-methods analyst
Project manager/Coordinator
Advisor/Subject-matter expert
Other
Q20
Multiple Choice
Years of experience with mixed-methods research. Select one.
0–1 years
2–4 years
5–9 years
10+ years
Q21
Multiple Choice
Which methodological training best describes you? Select all that apply.
Primarily qualitative
Primarily quantitative
Mixed-methods
Evaluation-focused
Implementation science
Other
Q22
Multiple Choice
Region (optional). Select one.
Africa
Asia
Europe
Latin America/Caribbean
Middle East
North America
Oceania
Prefer not to say
Q23
Chat Message
Welcome! This brief review supports our team’s mixed-methods integration. Please answer based on your direct experience with this project.
Q24
Long Text
Any final comments or notes for the integration team?
Max 600 chars
Q25
AI Interview
AI Interview: 2 Follow-up Questions on key integration issues
AI InterviewLength: 2Personality: Expert InterviewerMode: Fast
Q26
Chat Message
Thank you for your insights—your input will directly strengthen our integrated conclusions.
Ready to Get Started?
Launch your survey in minutes with this pre-built template