Overly ambitious critics and the Medici Effect: a reply to Kampen and Tamás
The critical audit of Q methodology by Kampen and Tamás contains many errors of fact and understanding-indeed, a resistance to understanding that is compared to the Medicis' stance toward Galileo. Following a brief historical summary of similar ill-advised critiques of Q methodology in the 80 years since its introduction, responses are presented to various of the points raised: on the nature of subjectivity, the universe of subjective communicability (concourse) and samples drawn from it, the role of factor analysis and factor interpretation, the forced Q-sort distribution, the ratio between the number of participants and the number of statements in the Q sample, and sources of researcher bias.
|Keywords||Factor analysis, Q methodology, R methodology, Subjectivity|
|Persistent URL||dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11135-014-0007-x, hdl.handle.net/1765/71531|
|Journal||Quality and Quantity: international journal of methodology|
Brown, S.R, Danielson, S, & van Exel, N.J.A. (2014). Overly ambitious critics and the Medici Effect: a reply to Kampen and Tamás. Quality and Quantity: international journal of methodology, 49(2), 523–537. doi:10.1007/s11135-014-0007-x