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 <email@example.com> is an independent researcher and consultant in Northeast Ohio, USA.