Ramlo, Susan E. (2021, April). Q methodology as mixed analysis. In Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie & R. Burke Johnson (Eds.), The Routledge reviewer’s guide for mixed methods research analysis (pp. 199-208). London: Routledge. (ISBN 9781138305274) (Link: https://www.routledge.com/The-Routledge-Reviewers-Guide-to-Mixed-Methods-Analysis/Onwuegbuzie-Johnson/p/book/9781138305274)

Abstract: Following a general description of Q methodology and its technical procedures, including its differences from survey applications, a summary of its various stages is provided––of concourse, Q sample, Q sort, Q analysis, and interpretation––followed by an introduction of Q’s inherently mixed features, both quantitative and qualitative. An empirical illustration of Q within mixed methods research (MMR) is presented based on a study of 29 practitioners’ views of the factor-analytic stage of a Q-methodological study, which resulted in three factors: (1) a view of Q as inherently mixed and that accepts centroid analysis and judgmental rotation, (2) a utilitarian postpositivist view that prefers principal components analysis and varimax rotation, and (3) a skeptical novice view that rejects a perceived “cult of personalities” and the privileging of traditional assumptions about the methodological implementation of Q studies. A summary is included of the strengths and limitations of Q in MMR.

Susan E Ramlo <sramlo@gmail.com> is an independent researcher and consultant in Northeast Ohio, USA.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.