While writing from a qualitative tradition often occurs in first person and from a quantitative tradition often occurs in third person, the pros and cons of voice in mixed methods research needs consideration. This article argues for more inclusion of the first-person in such writing, particularly as evidence for the researcher's claims, as a way to triangulate and corroborate perspectives from a Bakhtinian dialogic theoretical framework. This article presents a discussion of the first- and third-person styles in academic writing and the effect of each on the reader. Additionally, there are dialectic and complementary justifications for such use of different perspectives within a mixed methods piece, as each style dialogues with the other, compensating for the other's shortfalls. Such a style of writing is imperative because it brings both distance and familiarity, presenting a more complete understanding of the mixed methods research and the phenomenon investigated.