PCP .v. Multiple Sorting Techniques for Flexibility

FIONN STEVENSON (acsfs@garthdee1.rgu.ac.uk)
Fri, 6 Dec 1996 16:13:59 GMT

Hello anyone out there ( but perhaps particularly J.Mancuso).

I'm doing a doctorate looking at multicultural views on the natural
environment in relation to sustainable architectural design practice. In particular I am trying to elicit deep constructs and
value-systems from international students testing the hypothesis that
some cultures are more ontologically engaged with nature than others.

I have two supervisors.

One has recommended straight forward PCP using a predefined set of
elements and the binary pole system. The other has refuted this and
suggested David Canter's approach using multiple sorting and allowing
the interviewee to choose their own elements rather than prescribing
them.( Whatever I do I intend to validate the data through use of
intensive interviews based on the results obtained.)

Who is right??
Is Multiple Sorting more appropriate for research like this ?
Has there been any work on folowing up Canter's criticism's about the
invalidity of Binary poles because people may construe using several
poles of complimentarity ?

Is there anyone out there who can point me towards some useful
literature on either MST or PCP theory tht refutes Canter?

Many thanks.