A Q-methodological study of personal worldviews.

Q2 Psychology Journal for Person-Oriented Research Pub Date : 2018-12-26 eCollection Date: 2018-01-01 DOI:10.17505/jpor.2018.08
Artur Nilsson
{"title":"A Q-methodological study of personal worldviews.","authors":"Artur Nilsson","doi":"10.17505/jpor.2018.08","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Psychological research on personal worldviews has relied almost exclusively on a quantitative approach that is ill-equipped to fully capture human subjectivity. Using Q-methodology, this study revealed the multiplicity of meanings and internal structures of the worldviews of eighty Swedish adults across the domains of metaphysics, epistemology, human nature, morality, and values. Four coherent worldview Q-factors were extracted and interpreted qualitatively. Ontological and epistemological beliefs proved to be the highest in terms of subjective significance and divergence between worldviews, although they have been largely ignored in past research. The results were in part supportive of polarity theory, which describes the structure of worldviews in terms of the opposition between humanistic and normativistic positions, while also suggesting amendments to this theory, by illuminating the differences between hedonistic and openness-focused forms of humanism and between empiricist and rationalist, as well as religious and atheistic, forms of normativism, and the ways in which elements of both positions are combined or rejected. The findings illustrate how Q-methodology can be used to elaborate and correct the understandings of personal worldviews that are produced by traditional quantitative forms of inquiry.</p>","PeriodicalId":36744,"journal":{"name":"Journal for Person-Oriented Research","volume":" ","pages":"78-94"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7842614/pdf/","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for Person-Oriented Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17505/jpor.2018.08","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Psychological research on personal worldviews has relied almost exclusively on a quantitative approach that is ill-equipped to fully capture human subjectivity. Using Q-methodology, this study revealed the multiplicity of meanings and internal structures of the worldviews of eighty Swedish adults across the domains of metaphysics, epistemology, human nature, morality, and values. Four coherent worldview Q-factors were extracted and interpreted qualitatively. Ontological and epistemological beliefs proved to be the highest in terms of subjective significance and divergence between worldviews, although they have been largely ignored in past research. The results were in part supportive of polarity theory, which describes the structure of worldviews in terms of the opposition between humanistic and normativistic positions, while also suggesting amendments to this theory, by illuminating the differences between hedonistic and openness-focused forms of humanism and between empiricist and rationalist, as well as religious and atheistic, forms of normativism, and the ways in which elements of both positions are combined or rejected. The findings illustrate how Q-methodology can be used to elaborate and correct the understandings of personal worldviews that are produced by traditional quantitative forms of inquiry.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
个人世界观的q -方法论研究。
关于个人世界观的心理学研究几乎完全依赖于一种定量方法,这种方法无法充分捕捉人的主体性。运用q -方法论,本研究揭示了80名瑞典成年人在形而上学、认识论、人性、道德和价值观等领域的世界观的多重意义和内部结构。提取了四个连贯的世界观q因子并进行了定性解释。事实证明,本体论和认识论信仰在主观意义和世界观分歧方面是最高的,尽管它们在过去的研究中很大程度上被忽视了。研究结果在一定程度上支持了极性理论,该理论根据人文主义和规范主义立场之间的对立来描述世界观的结构,同时也提出了对这一理论的修正,通过阐明享乐主义和以开放为中心的人文主义形式之间的差异,以及经验主义和理性主义之间的差异,以及规范主义形式的宗教和无神论之间的差异,以及两种立场的要素结合或拒绝的方式。这些发现说明了q方法如何被用来阐述和纠正对个人世界观的理解,这些世界观是由传统的定量调查形式产生的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal for Person-Oriented Research
Journal for Person-Oriented Research Psychology-Psychology (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
23 weeks
期刊最新文献
Further Critical Reflections on the Notion of a "Population Psychology". Meaning Matters: A Person-Centered Investigation of Meaning in Life, Future Time Perspective, and Well-Being in Young Adults. Transitions and Resilience in Ecological Momentary Assessment: A Multiple Single-Case Study. The 10th yearly volume of JPOR is complete. Comment on Lundh (2023)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1