When and how to use Q methodology to understand perspectives in conservation research

Abstract

Understanding human perspectives is critical in a range of conservation contexts, for example, in overcoming conflicts or developing projects that are acceptable to relevant stakeholders. The Q methodology is a unique semiquantitative technique used to explore human perspectives. It has been applied for decades in other disciplines and recently gained traction in conservation. This paper helps researchers assess when Q is useful for a given conservation question and what its use involves. To do so, we explained the steps necessary to conduct a Q study, from the research design to the interpretation of results. We provided recommendations to minimize biases in conducting a Q study, which can affect mostly when designing the study and collecting the data. We conducted a structured literature review of 52 studies to examine in what empirical conservation contexts Q has been used. Most studies were subnational or national cases, but some also address multinational or global questions. We found that Q has been applied to 4 broad types of conservation goals: addressing conflict, devising management alternatives, understanding policy acceptability, and critically reflecting on the values that implicitly influence research and practice. Through these applications, researchers found hidden views, understood opinions in depth and discovered points of consensus that facilitated unlocking difficult disagreements. The Q methodology has a clear procedure but is also flexible, allowing researchers explore long-term views, or views about items other than statements, such as landscape images. We also found some inconsistencies in applying and, mainly, in reporting Q studies, whereby it was not possible to fully understand how the research was conducted or why some atypical research decisions had been taken in some studies. Accordingly, we suggest a reporting checklist.

Networking the Blue Economy in Seychelles: pioneers, resistance, and the power of influence

“…We followed a Q methodology to establish how policy makers and practitioners in Seychelles perceive the Blue Economy. Q methodology combines quantitative and qualitative techniques to understand values and perspectives of various actors (McKeown and Thomas 1988;Watts and Stenner 2005;Zabala, Sandbrook and Mukherjee 2018). Q methodology does not aim for a representative sample, since as opposed to "R methodology" it is not concerned with the prevalence of opinions in populations (Zabala, Sandbrook and Mukherjee 2018), and therefore large and random samples are not required (McKeown and Thomas 1988).…”

“…These were inductively coded under five emergent themes: Conservation, Culture and Identity, Economy, Equity, and Rhetoric. The coded statements were then organized into a comprehensive list of statements (a concourse) that reflects the entire spectrum of opinions about the Blue Economy, as expressed by the respondents and in official documents (Zabala, Sandbrook and Mukherjee 2018). We reduced the concourse to 32, by removing repetitive statements, and these reflected opinions on: Conservation (6 statements), Culture and Identity (5), Economy (10), Equity (8), and Rhetoric (3).…”

Untangling the motivations of different stakeholders for urban greenspace conservation in sub-Saharan Africa

“…To better understand sorting patters, the Q-methodology can be complemented by 141 information on the socio-demographic background of participants, and in-depth interviews, which 142 allow researchers to capture motivations for how statements were sorted, particularly those 143 statements placed at the extremes of the forced normal distribution (Milcu et al, 2013). The Q-144 methodology has the advantage of providing numerical results to support the interpretation of 145 viewpoints (Zabala et al, 2018). While the a priori aim of Q-methodology is not to compare the views 146 across different categories of participants, this can be done by using similar Q-sets across participant 147 categories and analysing their sorts separately (Watts and Stenner, 2012).…”

Exploring card sort methods: Interaction and implementation for research, education, and practice

“…Q methodology, in that it is inexpensive and portable (Durning & Osuna, 1994), forces participants to prioritize among competing values, and provides participants with an opportunity for reflection and learning. Drawbacks of Q methodology include researcher bias in the creation of the Q sample (Zabala, Sandbrook, & Mukherjee, 2018), concerns about language barriers, and the inflexible nature of the Q sample once it is developed.…”