Overview

Key Concepts and Terms

• Focus group research vs. group interviewing. In group interviewing a standard survey instrument is administered to respondents simultaneously. In focusgroup studies, in contrast, there is no standard instrument, only a topic to be explored through the exchange of group discussion. For instance, a start-up topic question might be, "What are the present satisfactions and dissatisfactions with X and those of Y?" The discussants have a strong influence on the subtopics which are examined and the insights which are yielded. Where survey research, even group survey research, requires a priori theory or at least a list of subtopics as a guide for selection of items to be included in the survey instrument, there is no a priori theory in focus group research. Focus groups are a method of choice where the dynamics which determine outcomes are not well known and surprises are expected, as in marketing research where focus groups are brought together to react to product or candidate ads.

• Role of the moderator. The role of the focus group moderator is to facilitate, not dominate discussion. The moderator encourages the participation of everyone and seeks to limit the domination of discussion by a few discussants. The moderator may also give prompting questions ("probes") to elicit expansion on interesting subtopics, such as "Give us an example of ...," "Tell us more about that," "Keep talking," or "Can someone summarize what we've been saying." The moderator will no ask closed-ended, yes-no questions, such as "Do you prefer X?", instead always using non-directive prompts like "What is your reaction to X?" The moderator may also seek to return conversation to the topic at hand. Finally, the moderator may take notes or record the conversation of the group, though often that role is left to an assistant moderator. The moderator must record not only overt statements, but must also be sensitive to omissions, choice of words. non-verbal communications, expressions of emotion, energy levels, and the roles played by the discussant. Because of the strong role of the moderator, usually the same one is used if there are multiple groups, in an attempt to control for the influence of the moderator.

• Implementation. In terms of implementation, some recommend a focus group size of 6 - 10, though examples can be found both smaller and larger. Focus group facilitators, however, usually regard even 10 as becoming unwieldy and counterproductive. Usually the participants do not know each other. Most studies bring the focus group together for one session, but a sequence of meetings is also possible, usually for one or two hours each. Tape excerpts from one meeting may be played back to a subsequent group to obtain reactions. The broader and more ambitious the purposes of doing focus group research, the more groups are necessary. A study of "women's attitudes toward health services" will require many more groups than one on "Boston consumers' preferences for detergent," for instance. Use of follow-up groups, bringing back past participants, can be very fruitful.

  The number of topics explored per meeting is usually at most three (often just one), with subtopics under each. Meetings are usually held in neutral locations such as hotel meeting rooms (not, for instance, in the workplace in a study involving employees). Participants may be selected at random or through information, using a snowball reference technique in which the first informant recommends others, who in turn recommend yet others. Participants should be informed of the purposes of the focus group study. Often they are encouraged to participate on a first-name basis, which encourages informality and openness while suggesting greater anonymity. The ethics guidelines regarding use of human subjects, discussed in a previous chapter, apply to focus groups.

  • Ice-breaking exercises are often used to start a focus group discussion. One example is the "eyes closed exercise," in which the moderator asks members of the focus group to close their eyes, imagine the last time they were involved with the subject of the study, and to articulate their remembrance of this. This sharing of experiences while eyes are closed is intended to break down formalities and get conversation rolling as discussants feel closer as a result of the sharing experience. Another example of an ice-breaking exercise is to have the discussants draw a cartoon or picture of the best of worst aspects of X, then share their work with the group. A third example is word association, asking discussants quickly and without thinking to finish prompts like "The worst thing about X is ...." or "People who like X tend to be ....". Participants write their answers on a sheet of paper, then share them with the group. Many other projective exercises are possible.

• Drawbacks of the focus group method include the potentially strong influence, one way or the other, of the discussion moderator; the difficulty of separating individual viewpoints from the collective group viewpoint; and the difficulty of obtaining a representative sample within a small focus group. In a group context, individuals may be less willing to reveal sensitive information because assurance of confidentiality is lost, in spite of the practice of urging participants not to reveal discussions of the group. The focus group method may also have positive or negative effects on the subjects, particularly when members of the group are associated in work or other social contexts.

Assumptions

• Focus groups are not a panacea for tapping "true" feelings. People often do not themselves understand their own motivations and preferences and thus cannot articulate them well. People have complex, even conflicting motivations which may come together in unpredictable ways given only slightly varying ways of presenting a stimulus. People may give acceptable or politically correct responses in front of peers, and they may act differently in real situations compared with hypothetical ones. They may be aware of the study's sponsorship and tell the researcher what they believe he or she wants to hear. People tend to express views which enhance their own image of themselves, and they also may formulate opinions "on the spot," lacking any real commitment to what they say. And people lie.

Frequently Asked Questions

• When is the focus group approach not recommended?
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
• When is the focus group approach not recommended?
  Focus groups are generally a poor choice when quantitative information is desired (ex., when one wants to know the percentage of people who will buy product X or vote for candidate X). The small size of focus groups makes any estimates of quantitative proportions unreliable, even if the members of the focus group are representative of the target population. By the same token, focus group research is a poor choice for multivariate research, where one again needs the stability of large random samples to be ably to disaggregate the effects of explanatory variables through statistical techniques. Finally, focus group research is a poor choice for predicting future action in settings yet to emerge since focus group discussants will articulate their views in terms of their own present experiences.

Bibliography

• Flores, J. G. and C. G.Alonso (1995). Using focus groups in educational research. Evaluation Review 19(1): 84-101.

• Kreuger Richard A. (1988). Focus groups: a practical guide for applied research. London: Sage.

• Krueger, Richard A. and Mary Anne Casey (2000). Focus groups : A practical guide for applied research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

• Merton R.K. and P. L. Kendall (1946). The focused interview. American Journal of Sociology (51): 541-557.

• Morgan D.L. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research, Second Edition. London: Sage Publications. First edituibm 1988.

• Stewart D.W. and P. N. Shamdasani (1992). Focus groups: theory and practice. London: Sage Publications.