Using the Concept-Mapping Method for Empirical Studies in Construction Research
Publication: Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 139, Issue 10
Abstract
The concept-mapping method has enabled research advances in medicine and psychology. This method also seems well suited for many of the questions facing construction researchers, but its use remains limited in construction research. Concept mapping helps solicit and organize ideas from experts and stakeholders. This method can be used to categorize results into various clusters that may have competing explanations or backgrounds. It also allows for comparing results among group of participants. This method integrates qualitative group tasks of idea generation, sorting, and rating with two quantitative analyses, multidimensional scaling, and cluster analysis. One of the relevant findings of using these analyses is the creation of visual maps, which can help develop action plans and frameworks. This paper is meant as a guide for applying the concept-mapping method to construction research. Although examples for using this method in construction engineering and management are presented in this paper on the basis of the development of a sustainability framework, the emphasis is on general principles to show how various construction research topics could be explored by using this method.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge the financial support of the National Department of Science, Technology and Innovation (SENACYT) from Panama. Gratitude also must be expressed to the various experts who offered their time to participate in the concept-mapping method. Special acknowledgment is also due to Mary Kane, president of Concept Systems, Inc., and to Dr. Caroline Clevenger and Prof. Barbara Ramirez for their reviews and insight.
References
Björk, B.-C., and Bröchner, I. (2007). “The value of construction management journals to submitting authors.” 〈http://oacs.shh.fi/publications/Bjork-&-Brochner.pdf〉 (Oct. 2, 2009).
Becerik-Gerber, B., Gerber, D., and Ku, K. (2011). “The pace of technological innovation in architecture, engineering and construction education: Integrating recent trends into the curricula.” 〈http://www.itcon.org/cgi-bin/works/Show?2011_24〉 (May 4, 2012).
Bosch, S. J. (2003). “Identifying relevant variables for understanding how school facilities affect educational outcomes.” Ph.D. dissertation, Georgia Institute of Technology, Altlanta, GA.
Boyle, C., et al. (2010). “Delivering sustainable infrastructure that supports the urban built environment.” Environ. Sci. Tech., 44(13), 4836–4840.
Chinowsky, P. (2011). “Engineering project organization: Defining a line of inquiry and a path forward.” Eng. Proj. Organ. J., 1(1), 3–10.
Concept System Professional 4.0.175 [Computer Software]. Concept Systems, Ithaca, NY.
Gillen, M., and Gittleman, J. L. (2010). “Path forward: Emerging issues and challenges.” J. Saf. Res., 41(3), 301–306.
Hallowell, M. R., and Gambatese, J. A. (2010). “Qualitative research: Application of the Delphi method to CEM research.” J. Construct. Eng. Manag., 136(1), 99–107.
Jackson, K., and Trochim, W. (2002). “Concept mapping as an alternative approach for the analysis of open-ended survey responses.” Organ. Res. Meth., 5(4), 307–336.
Kane, M., and Trochim, W. (2007). Concept mapping for planning and evaluation–Applied social research methods series, L. Bickman and D. J. Rog, eds., Vol. 50, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Kruskal, J. B., and Wish, M. (1978). Multidimensional scaling, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA.
Levitt, R. E. (2007). “CEM research for the next 50 years: Maximizing economic, environmental, and societal value of the built environment.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 133(9), 619–628.
Michalski, G. V., and Cousins, J. B. (2000). “Differences in stakeholder perceptions about training evaluation: A concept mapping/patter matching investigation.” Eval. Program Plann., 23(2), 211–230.
Moore, C. M. (1987). Group techniques for idea building, Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
Novak, J. (1990). “Concept maps and vee diagrams: Two metacognitive tools to facilitate meaningful learning.” Instructional Sci., 19(1), 29–52.
Novak, J., and Cañas, A. (2008). “The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct and use them.” Technical Rep. IHMC CmapTools 2006-01 Rev 01-2008, Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition, Pensacola, FL, 〈http://cmap.ihmc.us/Publications/ResearchPapers/TheoryUnderlyingConceptMaps.pdf〉 (Sep. 2, 2009).
Rosas, S. R., and Kane, M. (2012). “Quality and rigor of the concept mapping methodology: A pooled study analysis.” Eval. Program Plann., 35(2), 236–245.
Trochim, W. (1989). “Concept mapping for evaluation and planning.” Eval. Program Plann., 12(1), 1–16.
Trochim, W. (1993). “The reliability of concept mapping.” Proc., Annual Conf. of the American Evaluation Association, American Evaluation Association (AEA), Washington, DC.
Valdes-Vasquez, R., and Klotz, L. (2013). “Social sustainability considerations during planning and design: A framework of processes for construction projects.” J. Constr. Eng. Manage., 139(1), 80–89.
Ward, J. H., Jr. (1963). “Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function.” J. Am. Stat. Assoc., 58(301), 236–244.
Woo, J., Clayton, M. J., Johnson, R. E., Flores, B. E., and Ellis, C. (2004). “Dynamic knowledge map: Reusing experts’ tacit knowledge in the AEC industry.” Autom. Constr., 13(2), 203–207.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
Volume 139 • Issue 10 • October 2013
Copyright
© 2013 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Aug 1, 2012
Accepted: Mar 27, 2013
Published online: Apr 3, 2013
Published in print: Oct 1, 2013
Discussion open until: Dec 9, 2013
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.