You can access here SAGE articles that explain how methods are used in practice. The articles here focus specifically on how we mix methods, as well as how we take a geographical approach to data collection. The landmark paper by Bryman (2006) sets the scene for how you might combone qualitative and quantitative methods. The paper by DeLyser and Sui (2012) provides a recent discussion of some of the most novel ways in which geographers are ‘mashing up’ their methods. The paper by Pain and colleagues (2006) provides a working example of how methods can be mixed. Here they bring together hot-spot GIS mapping with qualitative data to examine the relationships between street lighting, fear, crime and urban experience. The paper by Anderson et al. (2010), discussed the final section of Chapter 9, explores how we take seriously ‘place’ in doing research.

• Mixing methods: an introduction
  Reference: Bryman, A. (2006) ‘Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: how is it done?’, Qualitative Research 6 (1): 97‒113.
   
• Mashing up methods: recent approaches
  Reference: DeLyser, D. and Sui, D. (2013) ‘Crossing the qualitative-quantitative divide II. Inventive approaches to big data, mobile methods, and rhythmanalysis’,  Progress in Human Geography 37 (2): 293‒305.
   
• Mixing methods to understand fear of crime
  Reference: Pain, R., MacFarlane, R., Turner, K. and Gill, S. (2006) ‘”When, where, if, and but”: qualifying GIS and the effect of streetlighting on crime and fear’, Environment and Planning A 38 (11): 2055‒74.

• A ‘polylogic’ approach: taking place seriously when doing research
  Reference: Anderson, J., Adey, P. and Bevan, P. (2010) ‘Positioning place: polylogic approaches to research methodology’,  Qualitative Research 10 (5): 589‒604.