Overview
Q Methodology: history & theoretical assumptions
How to do Q
Q Practical
Analysis: an example
What is Q Methodology?
Q is both a quantitative and qualitative technique which is used to study subjective experience
It has been widely used to study subjective and debatable issues e.g. Kitzinger, 1987 (sexuality); Senn, 1996 (pornography); Capdevila & Stainton Rogers, 2000 (political protest). It has been used particularly successfully in health related research, for example, by Stainton Rogers, 1991 (understandings of health & illness), Eccleston, Williams & Stainton Rogers, 1997 (chronic pain); and Stenner, Dancey & Watts, 2000, (IBS).
History & Theoretical Assumptions (1)
William Stephenson first introduced Q methodology in the 1930s
“The hallmark of sound scientific procedure nowadays, it seems, is to assert hypotheses and to confirm predictions...There is need, however, for care and discernment in these matters...Psychology, it seems to us, has by no means achieved a sophisticated theoretical status, with ideal constructs such as physics has fashioned for itself. The situations in psychology, therefore, call for an attitude of curiosity, as well as one of hypothetico-deductive logic...We should be making discoveries rather than testing our reasoning” (1953: 151).
Operant Subjectivity (observable through concrete behaviour)
Q: Theory & Practice (1)
Q involves sorting a set of statements to represent a perspective or viewpoint (the process of making subjectivity operant)
Focuses on viewpoints shared by particular groups of participants
By-person factor analysis identifies groups of Q sorts that have been completed in a similar way and can be clearly distinguished from other groups that emerge
Factors called perspectives or narratives
Q: Theory & Practice (2)
Q methodology can be seen to be a para-quantitative (Capdevila & Stainton Rogers, 2000) or qualiquantological (Stenner & Stainton Rogers, 2004)
The aim of Q methodology is not to ‘test’ its participants nor does it impose a priori meanings. Instead, participants are asked to decide for themselves what is ‘meaningful’
Q does not presuppose polarised viewpoints – allows emergence of multiple perspectives
Q: Practicalities
Q involves 4 main stages:
1. Development of the Q pack (materials)
2. Q sorting (participants)
3. Statistical analysis
4. Factor interpretation (qualitative analysis)
Developing the Q pack (1)
What are we talking about?DEFINITIONS
How should it be construed?UNDERSTANDINGS
What is to be done?POLICIES
The research question and subsequent statements need to focus on one of these areas
Developing the Q pack (2)
Collect a large sample of statements (e.g. 200)
Statements collects via cultural analysis
Piloting the statements
Agree Disagree Uncertain Unclear/Inappropriat
e
1. Enjoys taking risks. [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
1. Cannot be trusted. [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
1. Is really able to put themselves in another persons shoes [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
Statistical Analysis
Traditional factor analysis called R analysis
Variables measured on many individuals look for an association among variables
Q analysis is a pattern analysis that looks at relationships between people
Example of Rank Ordering
Descriptions ranked from: 1 most descriptive to 8 least descriptive
A B C D E F
Shy 8 4 6 1 3 5
Talkative 5 5 2 7 1 4
Cautious 7 6 3 4 2 1
Relaxed 4 1 8 6 7 6
Volatile 2 2 7 3 4 2
Suspicious 6 8 1 2 5 3
Easy-going 3 7 4 5 8 8
Thoughtful 1 3 5 8 6 7
Factor Interpretation: An Example
Selected Items F 1 F 2 F 3 F 4
Has many legs +5 0 0 -4
Hairy +5 +2 +2 -4
Carnivorous +4 -5 +5 -2
Large -4 +4 +3 0
Intelligent -3 0 +2 +5
Found in the home +4 -5 -5 +5
Factor 1: Middle Class Youth
11. Mature love
10. Inner harmony3. A sense of accomplish-ment
15. Self-respect
14. Salvation16. Social recognition
6. Equality 8. Freedom 13. Pleasure 17. True friendship 9. Happi-ness
5. A world of beauty12. National security
4. A world at peace 18. Wisdom 2. An exciting life 1. A comfortable life 7. Family security
-3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3
Factor 2: The humanist
8. Freedom
1. A comfortable life
13. Pleasure 17. True friendship
12. National security
16. Social recognition
2. An exciting life 6. Equality 7. Family security3. A sense of accomplish-ment
10. Inner harmony
14. Salvation5. A world of beauty
4. A world at peace 18. Wisdom 11. Mature love 15. Self-respect 9. Happi-ness
-3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3
Factor 3: Stability
1. A comfortable life
10. Inner harmony 14. Salvation 17. True friendship
16. Social recognition
13. Pleasure 11. Mature love12. National security
8. Freedom 15. Self-respect 7. Family security
2. An exciting life 4. A world at peace5. A world of beauty
6. Equality 18. Wisdom 9. Happi-ness3. A sense of accomplish-ment
-3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3
Factor 4: Self-Defined Adventurer
4. A world at peace
12. National security
6. Equality 18. Wisdom
13. Pleasure1. A comfortable life
5. A world of beauty
11. Mature love 9. Happi-ness 7. Family security 17. True friendship
14. Salvation 10. Inner harmony16. Social recognition
3. A sense of accomplish-ment
2. An exciting life 8. Freedom 15. Self-respect
-3 -2 -1 0 +1 +2 +3
Summary
Multiple perspectives rather than polarisation
Focus on relations/patterns in narratives rather than simple corrections of variables
Useful References & Links
Brown, S.R. (1980). Political Subjectivity: Applications of Q Methodology in Political Science. New Haven: Yale University Press.
(also available on line from http://www.qmethod.org/News/politicalsubjectivity.htm)
Capdevila, R. & Stainton Rogers, R. (2000) If You Go Down to the Woods Today…Narratives of Newbury. In Addams, H. & Proops, J. (eds.) Social Discourse and Environmental Policy. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Corr, S., Phillips, C.J. & Capdevila, R. (2003) Using Q Methodology to Evaluate a Day Service for Younger Adult Stroke Survivors. Operant Subjectivity: Journal of the International Society for the Scientific Study of Subjectivity 27(1), 1-23.
Curt, B. (1994). Textuality and Tectonics: troubling social and psychological science. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Jordon, K., Capdevila, R. & Johnson, S. (2005) Baby or Beauty: A Q study into Post Pregnancy Body Image’. Journal of Reproductive and Infant Psychology 23(1), 1-13. ISSN: 0264-6838.
Useful References & Links
Kitzinger, C. (1986). Introducing and developing Q as a feminist methodology: a study of accounts of lesbianism. In Wilkinson, S. (ed.) Feminist Social Psychology: Developing Theory and Practice. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Senn, C.Y. (1996). Q-methodology as feminist methodology: Women’s views and experiences of pornography. In
Wilkinson, S. (ed.) Feminist Social Psychologies: International Perspectives. Buckingham: Open University Press. Stainton Rogers, R. (1995). Q Methodology. In Smith J.A., Harré, R. and Van Langenhove, L. (eds.) Rethinking Methods in
Psychology. London: Sage. Stainton Rogers, R., Stenner, P., Gleeson, K. & Stainton Rogers, W. (1995). Social Psychology: A Critical Agenda
Cambridge: Polity Press. Stainton Rogers, W. (1991). Explaining Health and Illness. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester-Wheatsheaf. Stenner, P. & Marshall, H. (1995). ‘A Q-Methodological Study of Rebelliousness’. European Journal of Social Psychology.
25: 621-636. Watts, S. & Stenner, P. (2005) Doing Q methodology: theory, method and interpretation. Qualitative Research in
Psychology 2: 67-91 Watts, S. & Stenner, P. (2005) The subjective experience of partnership love: A Q Methodological study. British Journal of
Social Psychology 44(1): 85-107. You might also have a look at these Q web sites:http://www.qmethod.orghttp://www.rz.unibw-muenchen.de/~p41bsmk/qmethod/