When and how to use Q methodology to understand perspectives in conservation research.
When and how to use Q methodology to understand perspectives in conservation research.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/cobi.13123
复制
发表时间：
2018-10
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Mukherjee N
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Zabala A;Sandbrook C;Mukherjee N
理解人类视角在一系列保护环境中至关重要，例如，在克服冲突或制定相关利益攸关方可以接受的项目时。Q方法是一种独特的半定量技术，用于探索人类的观点。它已经在其他学科应用了几十年，最近在保护方面获得了牵引力。本文帮助研究人员评估Q何时对给定的守恒问题有用以及它的用途涉及什么。为此，我们解释了进行Q研究的必要步骤，从研究设计到结果解释。我们提供了建议，以尽量减少进行Q研究时的偏倚，这可能会影响研究设计和数据收集。我们进行了一个结构化的文献回顾52项研究，研究在什么样的经验保护背景下Q已被使用。大多数研究是国家以下或国家案例，但有些研究也涉及多国或全球问题。我们发现，Q已被应用到4大类型的保护目标：解决冲突，制定管理方案，理解政策的可接受性，并批判性地反思隐含影响研究和实践的价值观。通过这些应用程序，研究人员发现了隐藏的观点，深入理解了观点，并发现了有助于解决困难分歧的共识点。Q方法有一个明确的程序，但也很灵活，允许研究人员探索长期的观点，或关于陈述以外的项目的观点，如风景图片。我们还发现了一些不一致的应用，主要是在报告Q研究，因此，它是不可能完全理解如何进行研究或为什么一些非典型的研究决定已在一些研究。因此，我们提出了一份报告清单。
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.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
1.6
作者：
Cairns, Rose C.
通讯作者：
Cairns, Rose C.
影响因子：
1.6
作者：
Gruber, J. S.
通讯作者：
Gruber, J. S.
影响因子：
2.7
作者：
Brodt, S;Klonsky, K;Verdegaal, P
通讯作者：
Verdegaal, P
影响因子：
3.8
作者：
Cavanagh, Rachel D.;Hill, Simeon L.;Grant, Susie M.
通讯作者：
Grant, Susie M.
影响因子：
11.1
作者：
Chandran, Remi;Hoppe, Robert;Georgiadou, Yola
通讯作者：
Georgiadou, Yola