Methodological choices in applications of Q methodology: A systematic literature review (2024)

Dieteren, C., Patty, N., Reckers-Droog, V. (2023). Methodological choices in applications of Q methodology: A systematic literature review. Social Sciences and Humanities Open, 7(1), Article 100404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100404

Dieteren, Charlotte ; Patty, Nathalie ; Reckers-Droog, Vivian et al. / Methodological choices in applications of Q methodology : A systematic literature review. In: Social Sciences and Humanities Open. 2023 ; Vol. 7, No. 1.

@article{0dd6c6f2c645442499b422fe8c8b1288,

title = "Methodological choices in applications of Q methodology: A systematic literature review",

abstract = "Q methodology provides a foundation for the systematic study of subjectivity, people{\textquoteright}s viewpoints about a topic of interest. Over the past two decades, Q methodology has rapidly gained popularity among researchers in various disciplines. However, the variation in how the method is applied has also increased. The aim of this study was to provide insight into the methodological choices made in recent applications of Q methodology. We conducted a systematic literature review of recent Q methodology articles (2015-2019), focusing on the choices made by researchers regarding the design of their study, the collection, analysis and interpretation of their data and the reporting of their findings, covering all disciplines in which Q methodology was applied. We identified 965 articles in two databases, of which 613 were included in this review. Data extraction was based on a predefined and pilot-tested extraction form. We collected both quantitative and qualitative data and conducted the analyses in Microsoft Excel. We found considerable variation in choices made, but mostly within confined bounds. However, many articles did not report clearly or at all on many of the choices made. Based on our findings, we compiled a checklist for reporting Q methodology articles. This systematic review provides a comprehensive overview of how Q methodology has been applied in recent years, offers a frame of reference for future users and provides a research agenda. The checklist for reporting Q methodology articles will hopefully contribute to more thorough consideration of and reporting on methodological choices, which is important for the comprehensibility, quality assessment, replicability and impact of future studies.",

author = "Charlotte Dieteren and Nathalie Patty and Vivian Reckers-Droog and {van Exel}, Job",

note = "{\textcopyright} 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.",

year = "2023",

month = jan,

doi = "10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100404",

language = "English",

volume = "7",

number = "1",

}

Dieteren, C, Patty, N, Reckers-Droog, V 2023, 'Methodological choices in applications of Q methodology: A systematic literature review', Social Sciences and Humanities Open, vol. 7, no. 1, 100404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100404

Methodological choices in applications of Q methodology: A systematic literature review. / Dieteren, Charlotte; Patty, Nathalie; Reckers-Droog, Vivian et al.
In: Social Sciences and Humanities Open, Vol. 7, No. 1, 100404, 01.2023.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › Academic › peer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Methodological choices in applications of Q methodology

T2 - A systematic literature review

AU - Dieteren, Charlotte

AU - Patty, Nathalie

AU - Reckers-Droog, Vivian

AU - van Exel, Job

N1 - © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.

PY - 2023/1

Y1 - 2023/1

N2 - Q methodology provides a foundation for the systematic study of subjectivity, people’s viewpoints about a topic of interest. Over the past two decades, Q methodology has rapidly gained popularity among researchers in various disciplines. However, the variation in how the method is applied has also increased. The aim of this study was to provide insight into the methodological choices made in recent applications of Q methodology. We conducted a systematic literature review of recent Q methodology articles (2015-2019), focusing on the choices made by researchers regarding the design of their study, the collection, analysis and interpretation of their data and the reporting of their findings, covering all disciplines in which Q methodology was applied. We identified 965 articles in two databases, of which 613 were included in this review. Data extraction was based on a predefined and pilot-tested extraction form. We collected both quantitative and qualitative data and conducted the analyses in Microsoft Excel. We found considerable variation in choices made, but mostly within confined bounds. However, many articles did not report clearly or at all on many of the choices made. Based on our findings, we compiled a checklist for reporting Q methodology articles. This systematic review provides a comprehensive overview of how Q methodology has been applied in recent years, offers a frame of reference for future users and provides a research agenda. The checklist for reporting Q methodology articles will hopefully contribute to more thorough consideration of and reporting on methodological choices, which is important for the comprehensibility, quality assessment, replicability and impact of future studies.

AB - Q methodology provides a foundation for the systematic study of subjectivity, people’s viewpoints about a topic of interest. Over the past two decades, Q methodology has rapidly gained popularity among researchers in various disciplines. However, the variation in how the method is applied has also increased. The aim of this study was to provide insight into the methodological choices made in recent applications of Q methodology. We conducted a systematic literature review of recent Q methodology articles (2015-2019), focusing on the choices made by researchers regarding the design of their study, the collection, analysis and interpretation of their data and the reporting of their findings, covering all disciplines in which Q methodology was applied. We identified 965 articles in two databases, of which 613 were included in this review. Data extraction was based on a predefined and pilot-tested extraction form. We collected both quantitative and qualitative data and conducted the analyses in Microsoft Excel. We found considerable variation in choices made, but mostly within confined bounds. However, many articles did not report clearly or at all on many of the choices made. Based on our findings, we compiled a checklist for reporting Q methodology articles. This systematic review provides a comprehensive overview of how Q methodology has been applied in recent years, offers a frame of reference for future users and provides a research agenda. The checklist for reporting Q methodology articles will hopefully contribute to more thorough consideration of and reporting on methodological choices, which is important for the comprehensibility, quality assessment, replicability and impact of future studies.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85150758395&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100404

DO - 10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100404

M3 - Review article

SN - 2590-2911

VL - 7

JO - Social Sciences and Humanities Open

JF - Social Sciences and Humanities Open

IS - 1

M1 - 100404

ER -

Dieteren C, Patty N, Reckers-Droog V, van Exel J. Methodological choices in applications of Q methodology: A systematic literature review. Social Sciences and Humanities Open. 2023 Jan;7(1):100404. doi: 10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100404