M. Ángeles López-González

Bibliometric Review of the Repertory Grid Technique: 1998–2007

This bibliometric review covers the scientific production with or about the repertory grid technique (RGT; Kelly, 1955/1991) between 1998 and 2007. An analysis of previous reviews suggests the need for a more careful and broad process of bibliographic research. With this aim, 24 bibliographic sources were used to cover a wide range of specialties. We began by drawing up an explicit protocol in which the research terms were detailed. Then we consulted the bibliographic sources, taking into account a specification of inclusion and exclusion criteria. As a result of this process, 973 references were obtained: 468 journal papers, 335 book chapters, 108 doctoral theses, and 62 books. The review also evaluates the types of documents found, the evolution of the number of works published, the repertory grids fields of application, and the degree of openness to other disciplines. The most relevant authors, their affiliations, countries, and the publication language are also revealed in this article, as well as the major journals contributing to dissemination of the work done with this technique.

On the Relation Between Subjective Importance and Elicitation Order of Constructs

The subjective importance of constructs elicited with the repertory grid technique (RGT) has been conjectured to depend on elicitation order. Constructs elicited early in an interview are assumed to be subjectively more important than later ones. For the RGT, this conjecture is based on only one empirical study with a small sample size using person role titles as elements. This study has not been replicated or tested for other domains. The research for other elicitation techniques shows that the conjecture does not always hold true for nonperson domains. To assess if the order importance relation can be replicated for person and nonperson domains, we conducted two RGT studies with different designs (German study, triadic, nonperson elements, N = 60; Spanish study, dyadic, person elements, N = 61). Construct importance was assessed using importance rankings and ratings. We found no relation between the order of elicitation and importance for the nonperson elements and only a small significant relation using persons as elements. The results indicate that the conjecture should be treated with caution, as it may be weaker than previously assumed for the personal domain and not generalizable to other domains.