Subjective Science: Normal and Abnormal (Continued)

Abstract

Q methodology's role and status is appraised I light of the 12
intervening years since the keynote speech carrying the same title was
read at the first (1985) Q conference. The pervasiveness of subjectivity
is stressed, as is Q's role in measuring and conceptualizing it.
Evidence is provided that Q methodology has achieved certain
characteristics of a normal science (as defined by Kuhn), and an
inventory is made of conceptual errors and of the kings of resistances
to Q's implications Summaries are also provided of the variety of
projects in which Q methodology has a central role. The conclusion is
reached that Q remains outside the mainstream, but that there have been
marked improvements in its status within the past decade. These comments
constituted an address to the Thirteenth Annual Conference of the
International Society for the Scientific Study of Subjectivity, Syracuse
University, October 23-35, 1997.