CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 233Q Methodology ApplicationsQualitative Research Methods and ApplicationsPsychometric Methodologies and Testing

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 57 of the 57 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Systematic Literature Review of the Applications of Q-Technique and Its Methodology

Dziopa, Fiona, Ahern, Kathy·2011·Methodology
DOI 10.1027/1614-2241/a000021
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Q-methodology is a technique incorporating the benefits of both qualitative and quantitative research. Q-method involves Q-sorting, a method of data collection and factor analysis, to assess subjective (qualitative) information. The use of Q-sorting and factor analysis has often resulted in the misconception that Q-methodology involves psychometric or quantitative assessment, although Q as a methodology actually enables the systematic assessment of qualitative data. Misconceptions regarding Q have resulted in a heterogeneous collection of Q-applications in the extant literature, which has obscured the fundamental principles of Q-methodology. The purpose of this paper is to present a systematic review of Q-based research to investigate the criteria researchers have used to develop Q-studies. Published research studies between January 2008 and December 2008 that employed Q-techniques and methodology were assessed. Data were extracted and synthesized through the development and use of the Assessment and Review Instrument for Q-methodology (ARIQ). Fourteen research studies met the inclusion criteria for the review. The Q-methodological studies were disparate in their application of terminology, instrument development, and factor analysis, although data extraction and synthesis processes revealed two types of studies: those which aimed to apply conventional Q-methodology and those which applied variations of Q-techniques. It is concluded that variations of Q-technique and its methodology are unavoidable. However, this does not obviate the need for researchers to explicitly state their rationale for decisions to deviate from conventional Q-methodology if they are to produce demonstrably valid research. The review instrument (ARIQ) developed for this review will facilitate this end.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1027/1614-2241/a000021

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 52 references

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Brown S. R., 1980, Political subjectivity: Application of Q-methodology in political science
  2. Brown S. R., 1993, Operant Subjectivity, 16, 91
  3. Donner J. C., 2001, Social analysis: Selected tools and techniques social development papers
  4. Hurd R. C., 2005, Operant Subjectivity, 28, 58
  5. Karim K., 2001, Journal of Community Nursing, 15, 8
  6. Kerlinger F. N., 1986, Foundations of behavioral research
  7. Prasad R. S., 2001, Clinical Research and Methods, 33, 772
  8. Reber B. H., 2000, Operant Subjectivity, 24, 192

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 231

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Dziopa, F., & Ahern, K.
Affiliations
The University of Queensland (AU)
Venue
Methodology
Publisher
Hogrefe Publishing Group
Published
2011-01
Volume
7
Issue
2
Pages
39-55
ISSN
  • 1614-1881 (ISSN-L)
  • 1614-2241
DOI
10.1027/1614-2241/a000021
OpenAlex
W2111875134
Cited by
233
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 7
FWCI
2.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Methodology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › General Social Sciences › Q Methodology Applications
  • Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Keywords
Q methodology, Q-technique, Q-sorting, factor analysis, research validity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review