Q methodology: An Underutilized and Powerful Approach to the Scientific Study of Beliefs and Values

Authors' Names

Adrienne TausesFollow

Presentation Type

Oral Presentation

Category

Social Sciences/Humanities

Abstract/Artist Statement

Social scientists often utilize either qualitative or quantitative methodology to study the human experience through gathering information or data on human behavior. This leads to insights into how we view individuals, learn about relationships, ways people make decisions, and relationships between beliefs and behaviors. One overlooked and underused dynamic methodology is the Q method. Q methodology offers a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods that accurately provides a unique way of gathering, sorting, and studying the values and beliefs of participant (Watts, & Stenner, 2005). The following presentation overviews the purpose, history, and practical application of the Q methodology. Examples will be explored, and participants will have an opportunity to experiment with Q method research design, to allow for better understanding of method and how it can be applied to various fields.

Limited research suggests the use of Q methodology appears less used than the more common qualitative or quantitative methodologies (Newman & Ramlo, 2010). Q methodology is designed for multiple disciplines seeking to research the held beliefs and values of participants about a particular phenomenon. This approach provides rich descriptions of different points of view that exist around a topic, often leading to finding of new perspectives and insights while using quantitative analysis. The method captures individual connections to the statements. In essence, Q methodology is a study of human subjectivity (McKeowan & Thomas, 1988).

Q methodology was designed by William Stephenson (1935) as a specific new method at the time to study the values and beliefs of research participants. While it is not a particularly new method, its uniqueness and ease of use deserves increased attention and knowledge. McKeowan & Thomas (1988) address the importance of Q methodology as a method in which ‘the respondents frame of reference’ is preserved suggesting that Q methodology is aimed for multiple disciplines that are seeing to increase rigor in the study of human subjectivity. According to Richardson, Fister, & Ramlo, (2014), a primary difference in the Q method is a process called Q sort. Q sorting, which appears as an upside-down bell curve with a scale of ‘agree to disagree’ allows the participant to be actively engaged in the communication of their view. Watts & Stenner (2005), illuminate the importance of enabling the researcher to see the ways’ themes are interconnected, rather than breaking them apart preserving participants views.

The Q approach uses participants beliefs and values about certain subjects to inform new practices. For example, a study done by Richardson, Fister, & Ramlo (2014) provided a pre-test Q sort to college-age students pursuing an exercise science degree. Q methodology was chosen due to being ideal for researching the range and diversity of subjective experiences, perspectives, and beliefs. Results revealed that students maintained some bias about working with those struggling with obesity. A specific workshop was created into the curriculum addressing potential biases and gaps in knowledge and followed up with Q sort to measure changes in beliefs and values. The uniqueness of Q methodology allows researchers to capture narrative content to create appropriate interventions. Participants of this presentation will engage in a hands-on demonstration, easing the understanding and application of a Q sort. The presentation will also include a brief overview of the factor analysis to increase understanding of use of this methodology across various disciplines.

References:

Barker, S.L., Maguire, N., Bishop, F.L & Luisa, L. (2018). Expert Viewpoints of PeerSupport for People Experiencing Homelessness: A Q Sort Study. American Psychological Association. 16 (3): 402–414 1541-1559. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ser0000258

McKeown, B. & Thomas, D. (1988). Q Methodology. Sage Publishing

Newman I, Ramlo S. (2010). Using Q methodology and Q factor analysis in mixed method research. In: Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research (2nd ed.), edited by Tashakkori A, Teddlie C. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, p. 505–530.

Richardson, L.A., Fister, C.L, Ramlo, S.E (2014). Effect of an exercise and weight control curriculum; views of obesity among exercise science students. Journal of Advanced Physiological Education. (39): 43-48.

Watts, S. & Stenner, P. (2005). Doing Q methodology: theory, method and interpretation. Qualitative Research in Psychology, (2), 67-91.

Mentor Name

Kirsten Murray

Personal Statement

My name is Adrienne Tauses. I am currently a second-year doctoral student in the Department of Counseling here at the University of Montana. To begin, I would like to express my gratitude for the opportunity of submitting a proposal for a peer reviewed conference right here on campus. While I have highly appreciated the variety of learning avenues while in the program, the idea of presenting research material continues to be a mix of exciting and intimidating. The commencement of my journey to return to school had been a far-off dream for many years. I graduated from Columbia University in New York in 2007 where I received my master’s degree in Clinical Social Work. From then, I have worked in various clinical fields gaining a growing understanding of human behavior, my love for the mind body connection and trauma and neuroscience. Due to my love of learning and continued motivation for extensive training in a variety of clinical interventions for healing, an advanced degree has always been a goal. I moved to Missoula in 2019 where I had the pleasure of working closely with a colleague from the counselor education doctoral program. She continued to share with me certain aspects of counselor education that expertly combines teaching, clinical work, and clinical supervision. I quickly became intensely focused on learning more and becoming a part of this program. My love for clinical supervision had grown, and my goals of teaching were beginning to bud. It was research, however, that I was always fascinated and intrigued by. My first year in the program introduced me to qualitative research methods and illuminated ideas about what I would be interested in researching and quandaries about what to choose! As I attended and presented at the Association of Counselor Education & Supervision (ACES) conference last year, I was exposed to Q methodology. Finally, I had found a method that combines the best qualities of qualitative and quantitative methods. For me, a central goal is counseling profession is that of healing. The value of this method spoke to me due to enhancement of learning of human behavior to inform interventions. We, as researchers need to advance our awareness about beliefs and values of others to appropriately approach a healing process that works for clients and their lives. Additional value of this presentation includes a use in multiple areas of study, increasing the need for teaching and application across various disciplines. Participants will have an opportunity to engage with an application of Q sort to ease in applying it in their field. I have thoroughly enjoyed the potential opportunity for presenting Q methodology to other researchers as a relatively uncommon methodology despite that it has been around for decades. I encourage a review of my abstract for a clearer understanding of the presentation. In conclusion, I can appreciate the level of rigor and knowledge of the desiring participants of this conference and am proud to be considered in the mix. My mentor, Kirsten Murray, has been an invaluable support to me as I begin this process of becoming a researcher. A relatively unknown passion has begun to solidify.