This article argues that methodological pluralism (MP) can benefit from a deeper and more systematic integration of reflexive processes. In particular, reflexivity can facilitate meaningful and problem-specific ways of combining methods across different disciplinary fields, types of expertise, and practices. To develop our argument, we distinguish between two dimensions of reflexivity: critical (questioning of values, assumptions, and sociopolitical context underlying research methodology) and transformative (investigating pathways for change by mobilizing social experimentation and learning). We discuss two cases of research on environmental valuation that mobilizes reflexivity. We conclude by emphasizing the specific role of critical and transformative reflexivity in guiding methodological choices.