Multifactorial data on risk originally collected by Fischoff et al and analysed using the method of factor analysis are reanalysed in this paper using Atkin's Q-analysis algorithm and Johnson's method of Q-discrimination analysis. These algorithms are presented as distinctive methods for interpreting data by revealing their internal structure. Unlike more familiar methods of factor analysis that can be used for a broadly similar purpose, the data are not distorted in any way, for example via the calculation of correlation coefficients. The ‘results’ which are obtained by invoking Q-analysis are contrasted with those originally obtained from factor analysis, and some comment on the apparent differences is made.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AtkinR H, 1974aMathematical Structure in Human Affairs (Heinemann Educational Books, London)
2.
AtkinR H, 1974b, “An approach to structure in architectural and urban design. 1. Introduction and mathematical theory”Environment and Planning B151–67
3.
AtkinR H, 1974c, “An approach to structure in architectural and urban design. 2. Algebraic representation and local structure”Environment and Planning B1173–191
4.
AtkinR H, 1975, “An approach to structure in architectural and urban design. 3. Illustrative examples”Environment and Planning B221–57
5.
AtkinR H, 1977Combinatorial Connectivities in Social Systems (Birkhäuser, Basel)
6.
AtkinR H, 1981Multidimensional Man (Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, Middx)
7.
BeaumontJ RGatrellA C, 1982CATMOG 34. An Introduction to Q-analysis (Geo-Abstracts, Norwich)
8.
ChapmanG, 1981, “Q analysis” in Quantitative Geography: A British View Eds WrigleyNBennettR J, (Routledge and Kegan Paul, Henley-on-Thames, Oxon) pp 235–247
9.
DuranB SOdellP L, 1974Ouster Analysis: A Survey (Springer, New York)
FischoffBSlovicPLichtensteinSReadSCombsB, 1978, “How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits”Policy Sciences9127–152
12.
FischoffBSlovicPLichtensteinS, 1981, “Lay foibles and expert foibles in judgements about risks” in Progress in Resource Management and Environmental Planning, Volume 3 Eds O'RiordanTTurnerR K, (John Wiley, Chichester, Sussex) pp 161–202
13.
GatrellA C, 1981, “On the structure of urban social areas; explorations using Q-analysis”Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers NS6228–245
14.
GoddardJKirbyA, 1976CATMOG 7. An Introduction to Factor Analysis (Geo-Abstracts, Norwich)
15.
GouldP, 1980, “Q-analysis, or a language of structure: An introduction for social scientists, geographers and planners”International Journal of Man-Machine Studies12169–199
16.
GouldP, 1983, “On the road to Colonus: Or theory and perversity in the social sciences”Geographical Analysis1535–40
17.
JohnsonJ H, 1981, “Q-discrimination analysis”Environment and Planning B8419–434
18.
JohnsonJ H, 1982, “Ordinal scales in Q-discrimination analysis: A clarification”Environment and Planning B9491–492
19.
LowranceW W, 1976Of Acceptable Risk (William Kaufman, Los Altos, CA)
20.
MacgillS M, 1982a, “An appraisal of Q-analysis” WP-345, School of Geography, University of Leeds, Leeds
21.
MacgillS M, 1982b, “A consideration of Johnson's Q-discrimination analysis”Environment and Planning B9315–330
22.
MacgillS M, 1982c, “Cluster analysis and Q-analysis” WP-349, School of Geography, University of Leeds, Leeds; to be published in International Journal of Man-Machine Studies
23.
MacgillS M, 1983, “Q-discrimination analysis: Further observations”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design10239–240
24.
OtwayH, 1982, “Reflections on risk perception and policy”Risk Analysis2147–159
25.
SlovicPFischoffBLichtensteinS, 1980, “Facts and fears: Understanding perceived risk” in Societal Risk Assessment Eds SchwingR CAlbersW A, (Plenum, New York) pp 181–213
26.
SlovicPFischoffBLichtensteinS, 1981, “Characterising perceived risk” in Technological Hazard Management Eds KatesR WHohenemserC, (Oelgeschlager, Gunn and Hain, Cambridge, MA)
