This is a matter of personal taste. If the author did this intentionally, I believe they were trying to emphasize the nuance of by covering various possible spellings. Similar examples include and . One may also argue that switching kanji/kana too much in a single word is visually displeasing, but I personally doubt that is the main reason.
Here are the hit counts of BCCWJ:
* : 604
* : 1005
* : 293
* : 5
* * *
**EDIT:** This is not limited to ...
* : 224; : 193; : 9; : 0
* : 2; : 183; : 9; : 0
* : 8; : 24; : 3; : 0
* : 823; : 354; : 4; : 0
Maybe the users of are treating the second part somewhat like a long okurigana...? I personally do not do this, but it is true that there are writers who like this style.