Q methodology blends qualitative and quantitative, yet was only recently identified as a mixed method. Q has had a challenging 80-year history that can inform the broader but younger mixed methods community. This article introduces Q methodology and its position within mixed methods before discussing Q’s struggles against dismissive voices and faulty assumptions. The benefits of research communities and mentoring are also discussed within the context of Q’s history. Many of the struggles of mixed methods currently can be seen within Q’s history. The purpose of this article is to use the experiences within the Q community to benefit and inform the practice of mixed methods researchers in ways that assist all of us to best study our world.
BrownS. R. (1972). A fundamental incommensurability between objectivity and subjectivity. In BrownS. R.BrennerD. J. (Eds.), Science, psychology, and communication: Essays honoring William Stephenson (pp. 57-94). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
2.
BrownS. R. (1978). The importance of factors in Q methodology: Statistical and theoretical considerations. Operant Subjectivity, 1, 117-124.
3.
BrownS. R. (1980). Political subjectivity: Applications of Q methodology in political science. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
4.
BrownS. R. (1993). A primer on Q methodology. Operant Subjectivity, 16(3/4), 91-138.
5.
BrownS. R. (1996). Q methodology and qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 6, 561-567.
6.
BrownS. R. (1998). The history and principles of Q methodology in psychology and the social sciences. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Political Science, Kent State University, Kent, OH.
7.
BrownS. R. (2008). Q methodology. In GivenL. M. (Ed.), The Sage encyclopedia of qualitative research methods (pp. 700-704). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
8.
BrownS. R. (2009). Q technique, method, and methodology: Comments on Stentor Danielson’s article. Field Methods, 21, 238-241. doi:10.1177/1525822X09332080
9.
BrownS. R.DanielsonS.van ExelJ. (2015). Overly ambitious critics and the Medici Effect: A reply to Kampen and Tamás. Quality & Quantity, 49, 523-537, doi:10.1007/s11135-014-0007-x
10.
BrownS. R.DurningD. W.SeldenS. C. (2008). Q methodology. In MillerG. J.YangK. (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in public administration (2nd ed., pp. 721-764). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
11.
BurtC. (1941). The factors of the mind; An introduction to factor-analysis in psychology. New York, NY: Macmillan.
12.
BurtC.StephensonW. (1939). Alternative views on correlations between persons. Psychometrika, 4, 269-281.
13.
CraganJ. F.ShieldsD. C. (1981). The identifying characteristics of public fire safety educators: An empirical analysis. In CraganJ. F.ShieldsD. C. (Eds.), Applied communication research: A dramatistic approach (pp. 219-234). Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.
14.
CreswellJ. W. (2010). Mapping the field of mixed methods research. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 45-68). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
15.
DavisC. H.MichelleC. (2011). Q methodology in audience research: Bridging the qualitative/quantitative “divide?”Participations, 8, 559-593.
16.
DenzinN. K. (2010). Moments, mixed methods, and paradigm dialogs. Qualitative Inquiry, 16, 419-427. doi:10.1177/1077800410364608
17.
DuitR.TreagustD. F. (1998). Learning in science: From behaviourism towards social constructivism and beyond. In FraserB. J.TobinK. G. (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 3-26). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
18.
DziopaF.AhernK. (2011). A systematic literature review of the applications of Q-technique and its methodology. Methodology, 7, 39-55. doi:10.1027/1614-2241/a000021
19.
FrelsR. K.NewmanI.NewmanC. (2015). Mentoring the next generation in mixed research. In Hesse-BiberS.JohnsonB. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed and multimethod research (pp. 333-353). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
20.
FrelsR. K.OnwuegbuzieA. J. (2013). Administering quantitative instruments with qualitative interviews: A mixed research approach. Journal of Counseling & Development, 91, 84-194. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6676.2013.00085.x
21.
GoodJ. M. M. (2010). Introduction to William Stephenson’s quest for a science of subjectivity. Psychoanalysis and History, 12, 211-243. doi:10.3366/pah.2010.0006
22.
GreeneJ. (2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry. San Francisco, CA, John Wiley.
23.
Hesse-BiberS. (2010). Emerging methodologies and methods practices in the field of mixed methods research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16, 415-418. doi:10.1177/1077800410364607
24.
JohnsonR. B.OnwuegbuzieA. J.TurnerL. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 112-133. doi:10.1177/1558689806298224
25.
JohnsonR. M. (1970). Q analysis of large samples. Journal of Marketing Research, 7, 104-105.
26.
KampenJ. K.TamásP. (2014). Overly ambitious: Contributions and current status of Q methodology. Quality & Quantity, 48, 3109-3126. doi:10.1007/s11135-013-9944-z
27.
KerlingerF. (1972). Q methodology in behavioral research. In BrownS. R.BrennerD. J. (Eds.), Science, psychology, and communication: Essays honoring William Stephenson (pp. 3-38). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
28.
MaxwellJ. A. (2010). Using numbers in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16, 475-482. doi:10.1177/1077800410364740
29.
McKeownB.ThomasD. (1988). Q methodology. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
NewmanI.BenzC. R. (1998). Qualitative-quantitative research methodology: Exploring the interactive continuum. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
32.
NewmanI.NewmanD.NewmanC. (2010). Writing research articles using mixed methods: Methodological considerations to help you get published. In RoccoT.HatcherT. (Eds.), The handbook of scholarly writing and publishing (pp. 191-208). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley.
33.
NewmanI.RamloS. (2010). Using Q methodology and Q factor analysis to facilitate mixed methods research. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 505-530). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
34.
NunnallyJ. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
35.
OnwuegbuzieA. J. (2012). Introduction: Putting the MIXED back into quantitative and qualitative research in educational research and beyond: Moving toward the radical middle. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 6, 192-219.
36.
OnwuegbuzieA. J.CombsJ. P. (2010). Emergent data analysis techniques in mixed methods research: A synthesis. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 397-430). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
37.
OnwuegbuzieA. J.FrelsR. K.LeechN. L.CollinsK. M. T. (2013). Conclusion: A four-phase model for teaching and learning mixed research. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 7, 133-156. doi:10.5172/mra.2013.7.1.133
38.
OnwuegbuzieA. J.LeechN. L. (2005). On becoming a pragmatic researcher: The importance of combining quantitative and qualitative research methodologies. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8, 375-387. doi:10.1080/13645570500402447
39.
RamloS. (2008). Student perspectives on learning physics and their relationship with learning force and motion concepts: A study using Q methodology. Human Subjectivity, 2, 73-90.
40.
RamloS. (2015). Theoretical significance in Q methodology: A qualitative approach to a mixed method. Manuscript submitted for publication.
41.
RamloS.NewmanI. (2011a). Q methodology and its position in the mixed methods continuum. Operant Subjectivity, 34, 173-192. doi:10.15133/j.os.2010.009
42.
RamloS.NewmanI. (2011b). Reply to Stenner regarding Q methodology and its position in the mixed methods continuum. Operant Subjectivity, 34, 205-208. doi:10.15133/j.os.2010.011
43.
RidenourC. S.NewmanI. (2008). Mixed methods research: Exploring the interactive continuum. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Stainton-RogersR. (1995). Q methodology. In SmithJ. A.HarréR.van LangenhoveL. (Eds.), Rethinking methods in psychology (pp. 178-192). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
46.
StennerP. (2009). Between method and ology: Introduction to special issue. Operant Subjectivity, 32, 1-5.
47.
StennerP. (2011). Q Methodology as qualiquantology: Comment on “Q methodology and its position in the mixed methods continuum.”Operant Subjectivity, 34, 192-208.
48.
StennerP.Stainton-RogersR. (2004). Q methodology and qualiquantology: The example of discriminating between emotions. In ToddZ.NerlichB.McKeownS.ClarkeD. D. (Eds.), Mixing methods in psychology (pp. 99-118). Hove, NY: Psychology Press.
49.
StephensonW. (1935). Technique of factor analysis. Nature, 136, 297. doi:10.1038/136297b0
50.
StephensonW. (1953a). Postulates of behaviorism. Philosophy of Science, 20, 110-120.
51.
StephensonW. (1953b). The study of behavior: Q-technique and its methodology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
52.
StephensonW. (1954). Comments on Cronbach and Gleser’s review of “The study of behavior: Q-technique and its methodology.”Psychometrika, 19, 331-333.
53.
StephensonW. (1986). Protoconcursus: The concourse theory of communication (Part 1). Operant Subjectivity, 9, 37-58. doi:10.15133/j.os.1985.002
54.
TamásP. A.KampenJ. K. (2015). Heresy and the church of Q: A reply. Quality & Quantity, 49, 539-540. doi:10.1007/s11135-014-0031-x
55.
TashakkoriA.NewmanI. (2010). Mixed methods. In PetersonP.BakerE.McGawB. (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education (3rd ed., pp. 514-520). Oxford, England: Elsevier. doi:10.1016/B978-0-08-044894-7.00287-6
TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
58.
ThorntonR. K.SokoloffD. R. (1998). Assessing student learning of Newton’s Laws: The force and motion conceptual evaluation and the evaluation of active learning laboratory and lecture curricula. American Journal of Physics, 66, 338-352.
59.
WattsS.StennerP. (2005). Doing Q methodology: Theory, method and interpretation. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 2, 67-91.
