The authors challenge the traditional view of research methods as neutral tools, arguing that this perspective overlooks the inherent ethical and political dimensions embedded within them. The increasing use of mixed methods, particularly in interdisciplinary and co-production research addressing complex societal challenges (like those in environmental science, health, and education), necessitates a deeper understanding of these dimensions. The paper argues that the seemingly neutral choice of methods actually reflects underlying ontological, epistemological, and axiological assumptions that are often tacit and contestable. These assumptions shape research practices, from question formulation to data analysis and interpretation, and can lead to significant challenges when combining different methods. The authors contend that these differing philosophical assumptions generate distinct ethical standards and practices, and importantly, these practices have variable effects on wider society, thus introducing political considerations into the very practice of research. This paper proposes that the ability to navigate these 'ethical-political dimensions' is a key competency that should be explicitly addressed in research training and practice.

The paper draws upon existing literature highlighting the complexities of mixed methods research. It references work emphasizing the influence of philosophical assumptions on methodology and the challenges of integrating diverse approaches. The authors cite studies that discuss the 'cognitive-epistemic, social and organisational, communicative, and technical challenges' associated with mixing methods, and the need for key competencies to navigate these. Specifically, the paper refers to the concepts of 'methodological groundedness' and 'epistemological agility' as vital skills for researchers in inter- and transdisciplinary work. It also incorporates the performative view of research methods, where methods are seen not merely as descriptive tools, but also as active agents in shaping social realities. The authors connect the ethical dimensions of researcher-participant interaction with the political ramifications of the realities that research helps construct.

The authors use their own experiences leading a transdisciplinary sustainability research project, "New Normal," as a case study. This project combined photovoice (an interpretive method) and controlled behavioral experiments (a positivist method) to explore human responses to abrupt environmental change in an Arctic community. The preparation of ethics applications for this project revealed inherent tensions between the two approaches. The first tension revolved around the a priori nature of experimental design versus the responsive and iterative nature of photovoice. The authors faced challenges in balancing the need to detail the experimental design for ethical review boards while also ensuring responsiveness to the community’s context and preferences within the photovoice framework. The second tension concerned anonymity versus credit for knowledge contributions. Behavioral experiments prioritize participant anonymity to minimize bias and protect participants from potential harm. Conversely, photovoice often aims to give voice to participants and publicly acknowledge their contributions. Integrating these two methods required navigating the ethical implications of balancing anonymity in the experiment with the desire to credit participants for their knowledge and experiences in the post-experimental interviews. These dilemmas highlight the ethical-political dimensions involved in choosing and integrating methods. The authors acknowledge the difficulty and discomfort of addressing these dimensions, observing that researchers often prefer to focus on epistemological rather than ethical-political aspects of research.

The authors' experiences in the New Normal project illustrate the challenges and complexities of navigating ethical-political dimensions within mixed-methods research. They highlight the tension between a 'both-and' approach to methodological pluralism (where each method’s integrity is maintained separately) versus a more reflexive or agonistic-antagonistic approach that directly engages with the potential conflicts and contradictions between different methodological assumptions. The authors demonstrate how the choice of method is not merely a technical decision but a political act with social consequences. Their case study underscores the importance of considering the impact of research methods on both participants and society at large, particularly when working with Indigenous communities. The researchers identified that the seemingly disparate choices around a priori vs. responsive research design and anonymity vs. crediting participants’ contributions were not merely procedural but profoundly implicated notions of researcher-participant relationships, community impact, and the potential perpetuation of colonial power structures. In the context of working with an Iñupiat community, the ethical imperative was to ensure their agency and self-determination in shaping the research process, leading to a re-emphasis on context-responsiveness despite challenges to adhering to the stringent requirements of a positivist experimental design. The authors discuss how this necessitated careful deliberation and ongoing dialogue involving all stakeholders. The authors emphasize that there are no easy answers, as different methods may be more or less appropriate in diverse contexts and that the ethical choices made reflect the broader political position and values of the researchers themselves. These values and positions cannot remain neutral, and open dialogue is essential to navigate these ethical-political dimensions.

The findings of this paper strongly support the assertion that the ability to recognize and negotiate the ethical-political dimensions of research methods should be considered a key competency for researchers engaged in mixed methods, inter- and transdisciplinary, and co-production research. The authors' experiences highlight the limitations of a purely technical or epistemological approach to integrating methods and argue for a more reflexive and critically engaged approach. The authors emphasize that navigating these ethical-political dimensions is an ongoing process requiring continuous reflection and dialogue among researchers and stakeholders. The potential for conflict is acknowledged, but the paper suggests that effectively addressing these dimensions can lead to more innovative and transformative research outcomes. The authors' engagement with the complexities of their research design within the context of collaborating with an Indigenous community raises important ethical considerations that are relevant across various research settings.

The paper concludes by emphasizing the importance of incorporating the competency of navigating ethical-political dimensions of research methods into research projects, graduate training programs, and research organizations. It suggests that evaluating this competency should not solely rely on pre-determined checklists, but rather on assessing the cultivation of a specific sensibility towards knowledge production. This involves actively surfacing and discussing the underlying assumptions and potential impacts of different methodological approaches. The authors advocate for the incorporation of practices such as reflective dialogues, reading groups, and video diaries, aiming to promote critical self-awareness and collaborative deliberation among researchers.

The study is based on a single case study, limiting the generalizability of its findings. While the authors' experiences are rich and insightful, further research is needed to explore the ethical-political dimensions of research methods across diverse contexts and disciplines. The focus on a specific collaboration with an Indigenous community provides a valuable lens, but it doesn’t fully represent all forms of mixed-methods research collaborations. The authors also admit that the solutions they adopted were provisional and could be contested, further emphasizing the complexity and context-dependence inherent in navigating these ethical-political dimensions.