Quantifying Human Subjectivity Using Q Method: When Quality Meets Quantity

Authors

  • Sristi Kamal Jagiellonian University, Poland
  • Marcin Kocór Jagiellonian University, Poland
  • Małgorzata Grodzińska-Jurczak Jagiellonian University, Poland

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-8077.10.3.03

Keywords:

Q methodology, Human Subjectivity, Attitudes Categorization, Methodology Description, Mixed Approach

Abstract

Incorporating human subjectivity in applied disciplines of social sciences and other base sciences poses a challenge as the nature of qualitative data is often the point of contention. Q methodology is a tool that addresses this challenge as it helps quantify qualitative data using Q factor analysis. Initially developed for psychology and political sciences, Q methodology now finds its use in many research disciplines of science, especially in interdisciplinary studies that take into account human subjectivity. This article provides a detailed description on the various steps involved in conducting a Q study, with special emphasis on data interpretation. To describe the methodology and demonstrate data interpretation, we used data from our pilot case study of socio-ecological nature that documents attitudes of people towards nature conservation on private land. Additionally, we mention the specific usefulness of this method, highlight the potential challenges at each step of the approach, and provide practical advice to overcome them. In our opinion, Q methodology has been more restricted in its use on the ground of being a more social or psychological tool, and therefore, our aim is to familiarize researchers who could be interested in a mixed approach of joining quantitative data analysis with qualitative, in-depth interpretation with the approach at hand.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Sristi Kamal, Jagiellonian University, Poland

Sristi Kamal, is a doctoral student at the Institute of Environmental Sciences, Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland. Her doctoral thesis investigates the challenges and opportunities in private land conservation in Poland. Her main research interests are human–wildlife conflict, protected area management, and community-based approach to biodiversity conservation.

Marcin Kocór, Jagiellonian University, Poland

Marcin Kocór, PhD, is currently employed as an Adjunct Professor at the Institute of Sociology, Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland. His main research and scientific interests include methods of social and marketing research, questionnaire design, statistical data analysis, human capital, and labor market.

Małgorzata Grodzińska-Jurczak, Jagiellonian University, Poland

Małgorzata Grodzińska-Jurczak, Associate Professor, is employed as a researcher and lecturer at the Institute of Environmental Sciences, Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland. Her main research interests include human dimension of natural resources, human–nature conflicts, management in protected areas, Natura 2000 implementation, and environmental awareness.

References

Block, Jack. 2008. The Q-Sort in Character Appraisal: Encoding Subjective Impressions of Persons Quantitatively. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/11748-000

Bolland, John M. 1985. “The Search for Structure: An Alternative to the Forced Q-Sort Tchnique.” Political Methodology 11(1/2):91-107.
Google Scholar

Brown, Steve R. 1971. “The Forced-Free Distinction In Q Technique.” Journal of Educational Measurement 8(4):283-287.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1971.tb00939.x

Brown, Steve R. 1980. Political Subjectivity: Applications of Q Methodology in Political Science. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Google Scholar

Brown, Steve R. 1996. “Q Methodology and Qualitative Research.” Health Research 6(4):561-567.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/104973239600600408

Cent, Joanna, Cordula Mertensa, and Krzysztof Niedziałkowski. 2013. “Roles and Impacts of Non-Governmental Organizations in Natura 2000 Implementation in Hungary and Poland.” Environmental Conservation 40(2):119-128.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892912000380

Clough, Peter. 2000. Encouraging Private Biodiversity: Incentives for Biodiversity Conservation on Private Land. Report to the Treasury. Wellington: New Zealand Institute of Economic Research.
Google Scholar

Cross, Ruth. 2005. “Exploring Attitudes: The Case for Q Methodology.” Health Education Research 20(2):206-213.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/her/cyg121

Curt, Beryl C. 1994. Textuality and Tectonics: Troubling Social and Psychological Science. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Google Scholar

Deignan, Tim. 2009. “Enquiry-Based Learning: Perspectives on Practice.” Teaching in Higher Education 14:13-28.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510802602467

Gobo, Giampietro. 2011. “Back to Likert: Towards a Conversational Survey.” Pp. 228-248 in The Sage Handbook of Innovation in Social Research Methods, edited by M. Williams, W. P. Vogt. London: Sage.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446268261.n15

Grodzińska-Jurczak, Małgorzata. 2008. “Rethinking of Nature Conservation Policy in Poland: The Need of Human Dimensions Approach.” Human Dimensions of Wildlife 13:380-381.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10871200802227430

Grodzińska-Jurczak, Małgorzata and Joanna Cent. 2011. “Expansion of Nature Conservation Areas: Problems with Natura 2000 Implementation in Poland?” Environmental Management 47:11-27.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-010-9583-2

Grodzińska-Jurczak Małgorzata et al. 2012a. “Problemy społeczno-ekonomiczne przy wyznaczaniu obszarów Natura 2000 w Polsce.” Teka Kom. Ochr. Kszt. Środ. Przyr. OL PAN w Lublinie 9:64-69.
Google Scholar

Grodzińska-Jurczak, Małgorzata et al. 2012b. “Effectiveness of Nature Conservation – A Case of Natura 2000 Sites in Poland.” Pp. 183-202 in Protected Area Management, edited by B. Sladonja. Rijeka: InTech.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.5772/50664

Herberlein, Thomas A. 2012. Navigating Environmental Attitudes. New York: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar

Irwin, Alan. 2001. Sociology and the Environment. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Google Scholar

Kerlinger, Fred N. 1969. Foundations of Behavioural Research: Educational and Psychological Enquiry. London: Holt, Rinehart and Wilson.
Google Scholar

Maison, Dominika. 2007. “Jakościowe metody badań marketingowych.” Pp. 4-25 in Badania marketingowe. Od teorii do praktyki, edited by D. Maison, A. Noga-Bogomilski. Gdansk: Gdańskie Wydawnictwo Psychologiczne.
Google Scholar

Manfredo, Michel J., Jerry J. Vaske, and Daniel J. Decker. 1995. “Human Dimensions of Wildlife: Basic Concepts.” Pp. 17-32 in Wildlife and Recreationists: Coexistence Through Management and Research, edited by R. Knight, K. Gutzwiller. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Google Scholar

Manfredo, Michel J. and Ashley A. Dayer. 2004. “Concepts for Exploring the Social Aspects of Human–Wildlife Conflict in a Global Context.” Human Dimensions of Wildlife 9:317-328.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10871200490505765

Miles, Matthew B. and Michael A. Huberman. 1994. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. London: Sage.
Google Scholar

Nijnik, Maria et al. 2010. “A Study of Stakeholder’ Perspectives on Multi-Functional Forests in Europe.” Forests, Trees and Livelihoods 19(4):1-18.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14728028.2010.9752677

Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska, Agata et al. 2012. “Factors Influencing Perception of Protected Areas – The Case of Natura 2000 in Polish Carpathian Communities.” Journal for Nature Conservation 20:284-292.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2012.05.005

Ray, Lily. 2011. “Using Q-Methodology to Identify Local Perspectives on Wildfires in Two Koyukon Athabascan Communities in Rural Alaska.” Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy 7(2):18-29.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2011.11908070

Sandbrook, Chris et al. 2010. “Value Plurality Among Conservation Professionals.” Conservation Biology 25(2):285-294.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2010.01592.x

Sell, Deborah and Steven Brown. 1984. “Q Methodology as a Bridge Between Qualitative and Quantitative Research: Application to the Analysis of Attitude Change in Foreign Study Program Participants.” Pp. 79-87 in Qualitative Research in Education, edited by J. L. Vacca, H. A. Johnson. Kent: Kent State University, Bureau of Educational Research and Service.
Google Scholar

Shinebourne, Pnina. 2009. “Using Q Method in Qualitative Research.” International Journal of Qualitative Methods 8(1):93-97.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690900800109

Spurgeon, Laura et al. 2012. “A Q-Methodology Study of Patients’ Subjective Experiences of TIA.” Stroke Research and Treatment 2012:1-10.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/486261

Stainton Rogers, Rex. 1995. “Q Methodology.” Pp. 178-193 in Rethinking Methods in Psychology, edited by J. A. Smith, R. Harré, L. Van Langenhove. London: Sage.
Google Scholar

Steelman, Toddi A. and Lynn A. Maguire. 1999. “Understanding Participants Perspectives: Q-Methodology in National Forest Management.” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 18(3):361-388.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6688(199922)18:3<361::AID-PAM3>3.0.CO;2-K

Stephenson, William. 1935. “Technique of Factor Analysis.” Nature 136:297.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/136297b0

Sztabiński, Paweł B., Zbigniew Sawiński, and Franciszek Sztabiński. 2005. Fieldwork jest sztuką. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo IFiS PAN.
Google Scholar

Van Exel, Job and Gjalt de Graaf. 2005. Q Methodology: A Sneak Preview. Retrieved May 30, 2014 http://qmethod.org/articles/vanExel.pdf
Google Scholar

Watts, Simon and Paul Stenner. 2005. “The Subjective Experience of Partnership Love: A Q Methodological Study.” British Journal of Social Psychology 44:85-107.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1348/014466604X23473

Watts, Simon and Paul Stenner. 2012. Doing Q Methodological Research. Theory, Method and Interpretation. London: Sage.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446251911

Webler, Thomas, Stentor Danielson, and Seth Tuler. 2009. Using Q Method to Reveal Social Perspectives in Environmental Research. Greenfield, MA: Social and Environmental Research Institute. Retrieved May 20, 2014 http://www.seri-us.org/sites/default/files/Qprimer.pdf
Google Scholar

Woods, Peter. 2006. Qualitative Research. University of Plymouth. Retrieved June 10, 2014 http://www.edu.plymouth.ac.uk/resined/qualitative%20methods%202/qualrshm.htm
Google Scholar

Downloads

Published

2014-07-31

How to Cite

Kamal, S., Kocór, M., & Grodzińska-Jurczak, M. (2014). Quantifying Human Subjectivity Using Q Method: When Quality Meets Quantity. Qualitative Sociology Review, 10(3), 60–79. https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-8077.10.3.03

Issue

Section

Articles