Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Jumping the Methodological Fence: Q Methodology

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences

Abstract

Mixed methods research is consistently used quantitatively and qualitatively to understand and explore the many facets of a range of phenomena. Generally, mixed methods research involves the use of qualitative and quantitative methods simultaneously or concurrently, yet for the most part independently. What if these methods could be truly mixed? This chapter introduces readers to a methodology that aims to address this question – Q methodology. Q methodology allows for the sampling of subjective viewpoints and can assist in identifying patterns, including areas of difference or overlap, across various perspectives on a given phenomenon. Q methodology can be described as “‘qualiquantilogical’ combining elements from qualitative and quantitative research traditions” (Perz et al. BMC Cancer 13: 270, 2013, p. 13). This chapter will outline the five steps involved in conducting a Q methodology study: (1) developing the concourse, (2) developing the Q set, (3) selection of the P set, (4) Q sorting, and (5) Q analysis and interpretation. In order to contextualize and demonstrate how Q methodology can be used, we will present reflections on the use of this methodology with respect to constructions of sexual and reproductive health, chronic low back pain, and culturally and linguistically diverse people. These examples demonstrate how Q methodology can provide a unique and truly mixed way of studying human subjectivity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 649.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 849.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Brown SR. Political subjectivity: applications of Q methodology in political science. New Haven: Yale University Press; 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown SR. A primer on Q-methodology. Operant Subjectivity. 1993;16:91–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown RD, Pirtle T. Beliefs of professional and family caregivers about the sexuality of individuals with intellectual disabilities: examining beliefs using a Q-methodology approach. Sex Educ. 2008;8(1):59–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681810701811829.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buscemi V, Dune T, Liston MB, Schabrun SM. How do people with chronic low back pain perceive everyday stress? A Q-study. Unpublished paper in preparation for submission. 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  • Churruca K, Perz J, Ussher JM. Uncontrollable behavior or mental illness? Exploring constructions of bulimia using Q methodology. J Eat Disord. 2014;2(1):22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40337-014-0022-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coogan J, Herrington N. Q methodology: an overview. Res Second Teach Educ. 2011;1(2):24–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corr S. Exploring perceptions about services using Q methodology. In: Research in occupational therapy: methods of injury for enhancing practice. Philidelphia: FA Davis Company; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell JW, Plano Clark VL. Designing and conducting mixed methods research. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell JW, Klassen AC, Plano Clark VL, Smith KC. Best practices for mixed methods research in the health sciences. Bethesda: National Institutes of Health, Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research; 2011.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cross RM. Exploring attitudes: the case for Q methodology. Health Educ Res. 2005;20(2):206–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dune T, Perz J, Mengesha Z, Ayika D. Culture clash? Investigating constructions of sexual and reproductive health from the perspective of 1.5 generation migrants in Australia using Q methodology. Reprod Health. 2017;14:50. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12978-017-0310-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dziopa F, Ahern K. A systematic literature review of the applications of Q-technique and its methodology. Methodology. 2011;7(2):39–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellingsen IT, Størksen I, Stephens P. Q methodology in social work research. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2010;13(5):395–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fairweather J. Reliability and validity of Q-method results: some empirical evidence. Operant Subjectivity. 1981;5(1):2–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fetters MD, Curry LA, Creswell JW. Achieving integration in mixed methods designs–principles and practices. Health Serv Res. 2013;48(6 pt 2):2134–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herron-Marx S, Williams A, Hicks C. A Q methodology study of women’s experience of enduring postnatal perineal and pelvic floor morbidity. Midwifery. 2007;23(3):322–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lazard L, Capdevila R, Roberts A. Methodological pluralism in theory and in practice: the case for Q in the community. Qual Res Psychol. 2011;8(2):140–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liamputtong P. Qualitative research methods. 4th ed. Melbourne: Oxford University Press; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKeown B, Thomas B. Q-methodology. Newbury Park: Sage; 1988.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mengesha ZB, Perz J, Dune T, Ussher J. Challenges in the provision of sexual and reproductive health care to refugee and migrant women: a Q methodological study of health professional perspectives. J Immigr Minor Health. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10903-017-0611-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery CM, Gafos M, Lees S, Morar NS, Mweemba O, Ssali A, Pool R. Re-framing microbicide acceptability: findings from the MDP301 trial. Cult Health Sex. 2010;12(6): 649–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691051003736261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Omeri A, Lennings C, Raymond L. Beyond asylum: implications for nursing and health care delivery for Afghan refugees in Australia. J Transcult Nurs. 2006;17(1):30–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paige JB. Making sense of methods and measurement: Q-methodology – Part I – Philosophical background. Clin Simul Nurs. 2014;10(12):639–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2014.09.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paige JB. Making sense of methods and measurement: Q-methodology – Part II – Methodological procedures. Clin Simul Nurs. 2015;11(1):75–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2014.10.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perz J, Ussher JM, Gilbert E. Constructions of sex and intimacy after cancer: Q methodology study of people with cancer, their partners, and health professionals. BMC Cancer. 2013;13:270. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-13-270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reber B, Kaufman S. Q-Assessor: developing and testing an online solution to Q method data gathering and processing. World Association for Public Opinion Research, Amsterdam, Netherlands. 2011. Retrieved from www.file://Users/karenkavanaugh/Downloads/wapor-2011_Reber_Kaufman, 20(1).

  • Reber BH, Kaufman SE, Cropp F. Assessing Q-assessor: a validation study of computer-based Q sorts versus paper sorts. Operant Subjectivity. 2000;23(4):192–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robbins P, Krueger R. Beyond bias? The promise and limits of Q method in human geography. Prof Geogr. 2000;52(4):636–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers SR. Q methodology. In: Smith JA, Harre R, Van Langenhove L, editors. Rethinking methods in psychology. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stenner P, Dancey C, Watts S. The understanding of their illness amongst people with irritable bowel syndrome: a Q methodological study. Soc Sci Med. 2000;51(3):439–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoller EP, Webster NJ, Blixen CE, McCormick RA, Hund AJ, Perzynski AT, ... Dawson NV. Alcohol consumption decisions among nonabusing drinkers diagnosed with hepatitis C: an exploratory sequential mixed methods study. J Mixed Methods Res. 2009;3(1):65–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689808326119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tariq S, Woodman J. Using mixed methods in health research. JRSM Short Rep. 2013;4(6): 2042533313479197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tariq S, Elford J, Cortina-Borja M, Tookey PA. The association between ethnicity and late presentation to antenatal care among pregnant women living with HIV in the UK and Ireland. AIDS Care. 2012;24(8):978–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540121.2012.668284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tashakkori A, Teddlie C. Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2010.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tubergen NV, Olins RA. Mail vs. personal interview administration for Q sorts: a comparative study. Operant Subjectivity. 1978;2(2):51–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Exel J, de Graaf G. Q methodology: a sneak preview. 2005. Retrieved from http://www.qmethodology.net/PDF/Q-methodology.

  • Watts S, Stenner P. Doing Q methodology: theory, method and interpretation. Qual Res Psychol. 2005;2(1):67–91. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088705qp022oa.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watts S, Stenner P. Doing Q methodological research: theory, method and interpretation. London: Sage; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Tinashe Dune, Zelalem Mengesha & Valentina Buscemi

  2. Translational Health Research Institute, School of Medicine, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Janette Perz

Authors
  1. Tinashe Dune
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zelalem Mengesha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Valentina Buscemi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Janette Perz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tinashe Dune .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Science and Health, Western Sydney University, Penrith, NSW, Australia

    Pranee Liamputtong

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Dune, T., Mengesha, Z., Buscemi, V., Perz, J. (2019). Jumping the Methodological Fence: Q Methodology. In: Liamputtong, P. (eds) Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5251-4_101

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation