Along with the paper from Rex Stainton Rogers, and that from Simon Watts and Paul Stenner, this paper seeks to explain and illustrate to and why the Q work we are doing here (mainly in the UK, but also with some colleagues elsewhere) differs from the work with a much longer history which has been undertaken by Q scholars in the USA and their students and proteges (again, this includes work outside the primary geographical locus). While our work has much in common with the latter, there are significant differences both in our approach to carrying out Q studies and in our objectives. Our interest in Q arose from a theoretical location within a "climate of perturbation" framework, drawing from "French Theory." Q met our need for an idiographic methodology, and offered us a highly effective means to conduct discourse analytic work. We use Q to address issues of power and knowledge, and their interplay, using analytics of textuality and tectonics. These terms are defined and an illustration is provided to show how Q can be used in this way.

Additional Metadata
Persistent URL dx.doi.org/10.15133/j.os.1998.003
Journal Operant Subjectivity
Citation
Wendy Stainton Rogers. (1997). Q Methodology, Textuality, and Tectonics. Operant Subjectivity, 21(1/2), 1–18. doi:10.15133/j.os.1998.003