ABSTRACT
Current literature on impact assessment stresses the need to focus on understanding respondents and suggests Q methodology as a suitable instrument. This paper aims to compare Q methodology and the commonly used Likert scaling, to evaluate the impact of residents' perception at a film festival. A set of 23 impacts were offered to respondents and the same respondents were interviewed twice over the course of one month, first using Likert scaling, and second using Q-table. Finally, a factor analysis was conducted. The factor analysis revealed five factors for both survey techniques. However, the reliability analysis using Cronbach's alpha showed weaker internal consistency for all factors using Q-table. The research results also showed that Likert scaling provided better statistical relevance and easier interpretation of results. Likert scaling also proved that respondents tended to indicate items as “strongly agree” or “agree”, so lower impact variability is shown. Using Q-table forced respondents to diversify their impact assessments and thus provided valuable information for practical application in decision-making processes. Despite differences in both analyses, some similarities could be seen.
