Jealousy as a manifold of divergent understandings: a Q methodological investigation

Stenner, Paul; Rogers, Rex Stainton

doi:10.1002/(sici)1099-0992(199801/02)28:1<71::aid-ejsp846>3.0.co;2-d

Cited by 21 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The method gained popularity in the last two decades or so (Stainton Rogers 1991, Eccleston et al. 1997, Stenner & Stainton Rogers 1998, Stenner et al. 2000), and a considerable number of studies have been published in recent years (Risdon et al.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceptions of team workers in youth care of what makes teamwork effective

Buljac-Samardžić

Wijngaarden

Wijk

et al. 2010

Health &Amp; Social Care in the Community

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In youth care, little is known about what makes teamwork effective. What is known mostly reflects the view of managers in care organisations, as objective outcome measures are lacking. The objective of this article was to explore the views of youth care workers in different types of teams on the relative importance of characteristics of teamwork for its effectiveness. Q methodology was used. Fifty-one respondents rank-order 34 opinion statements regarding characteristics of teamwork. Individual Q sorts were analysed using by-person factor analysis. The resulting factors, which represented team workers' views of what is important for effective teamwork, were interpreted and described using composite rankings of the statements for each factor and corresponding team workers' explanations. We found three views of what makes teamwork effective. One view emphasised interaction between team members as most important for team effectiveness. A second view pointed to team characteristics that help sustain communication within teams as being most important. In the third view, the team characteristics that facilitate individuals to perform as a team member were put forward as most important for teamwork to be effective. In conclusion, different views exist on what makes a team effective in youth care. These views correspond with the different types of teams active in youth care as well as in other social care settings.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceptions of team workers in youth care of what makes teamwork effective

Buljac-Samardžić

Wijngaarden

Wijk

et al. 2010

Health &Amp; Social Care in the Community

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Q is primarily an exploratory technique and can hence be seen as a precursor of the so‐called ‘grounded theory’ approach (Glazer and Strauss, 1968). It was designed expressly to deal with subjective experience and social psychologists have already employed it successfully in the context of a range of subject‐matters that share something of partnership love's diverse character, including jealousy, rebelliousness, childhood, and lesbian identity (Stenner & Stainton Rogers, 1998; Stenner & Marshall, 1995; Stainton Rogers & Stainton Rogers, 1992; Kitzinger & Stainton Rogers, 1985).…”

Section: Q Methodologymentioning

confidence: 99%

The subjective experience of partnership love: A Q Methodological study

Watts

Stenner

2005

British J Social Psychol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The social scientific literature seems increasingly to accept that defining partnership or 'romantic' love in a singular and timeless fashion might not be a realisable task (Fehr, 1988). One clearly discernible response to this situation takes the form of a turn towards studying the subjective experience of partnership love. The work of Marston, Hecht, Manke, McDaniel, and Reeder (1998) and Sternberg (1995, 1996, 1998) are highlighted as theoretical and methodological exemplars in this regard. Each successfully abstracts a range of cultural conceptions of partnership love from the subjective experiences of their participants. It is argued, however, that the subjective experiences of the participants themselves, and particularly the holistic or Gestalt nature of those experiences, are left behind in the process of abstraction. This new research seeks to rectify that situation. An alternative (but nonetheless related) approach to the study of partnership love is duly outlined and an illustrative Q-Methodological study is reported which reveals eight distinct subjective experiences of partnership love at work amongst our participants (N = 50). Each of these holistic experiences is presented in the form of a narrative account. These accounts are then discussed and situated in relation to existing academic, cultural and historical conceptions of partnership love.

show abstract

“…Q’s distinction and novelty lie within its ability to synthesise quantitative and qualitative methods. Stenner and Stainton Rogers (1998 in Watts and Stenner, 2005) refer to Q as being ‘qualiquantological’ where it offers the potential to blend the two positions together. Barry and Proops (1999) highlight how Q seeks to establish patterns within and across people as opposed to patterns across individual traits.…”

Section: The Context Of Realist Evaluation and Qmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mobilising Q methodology within a realist evaluation: Lessons from an empirical study

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Realist evaluation and Q methodology are established approaches in social science. However, integration of Q methodology within a realist evaluation is scarce. This article attempts to illustrate (through a recent evaluation) how Q methodology can support a realist evaluation. The article attempts to capture the philosophical compatibility of the two approaches creating an argument for Q’s integration within realist evaluation. Through the case study selected (a realist evaluation of an evaluation capacity building framework), the iterative methodological process is presented, capturing a snapshot of the findings from the evaluation. This illuminates how Q met the philosophical aims of a realist evaluation to make sense of how, why and under what circumstances a programme or intervention works. It is argued that Q methodology is entirely suitable for capturing the three key stages in a realist evaluation of developing, testing and refining programme theory. It is intended that this article can contribute to inspire other realist evaluators and methodologists to make use of Q as a tool in their evaluation.

show abstract

Jealousy as a manifold of divergent understandings: a Q methodological investigation

Cited by 21 publications

References 19 publications

Perceptions of team workers in youth care of what makes teamwork effective

Perceptions of team workers in youth care of what makes teamwork effective

The subjective experience of partnership love: A Q Methodological study

Mobilising Q methodology within a realist evaluation: Lessons from an empirical study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About