Transcript A few notes on focus group research

A few notes on focus
group research
JMS3 JDD 2006
References
 Wimmer, R and Dominick, J. 1991. Qualitative
Research Methods. In Mass Media Research.
 Fontana, A and Frey, J. 1994. Interviewing: The
Art of Science.’ In NK Denzin and YS Lincoln
(eds.) The Handbook of Qualitative Research.
What are focus groups?
 Focus group/ group interview is a controlled
group discussion to gather preliminary
information for a research project.
 Focus groups generate:
 discussion – reveals both the meanings that
people read into the discussion topic and how
they negotiated those meanings;
 diversity and difference, either within or
between groups.
What are they for?
 Simulates ethnographic processes of talk and
argumentation
 6-12 people interviewed simultaneously.
 Moderator leads interaction and inquiry in a
structured or unstructured way, depending on
interviewer’s purpose.
 Our purpose is exploratory – relatively
unstructured?
 Moderator must be flexible, objective, empathic,
persuasive, a good listener.
Advantages of focus groups
 Allows for collection of preliminary information
 Can be conducted quickly – most time is spent
recruiting the participants
 Flexibility in question design (not rigid set of
questions as in conventional surveys)
 Moderator works from a list of broad questions as
well as more refined probe questions – therefore
easy to follow-up on points raised by participants.
 Focus group responses are often more complete,
less inhibited than individual interviews – one
respondent’s remarks stimulate others to pursue
new lines of thinking (snowball effect)
Disadvantages of focus group
 Some groups become dominated by selfappointed group leader – imposes his/ her
opinion on others
 Could have negative effect on performance of
group (group culture may interfere with individual
expression, problem of “group think”)
 Dependent on the skills of the moderator – must
know when to prove for further information, when
to stop respondents from discussing irrelevant
topics, how to encourage participation from all
 Recording equipment or physical environment
may inhibit respondents
Role of the moderator
 Moderator’s role important – must manage the
dynamics of the group.
 “The group interviewer must simultaneously
worry about the script of questions and be
sensitive to the evolving patterns of group
interaction.” (Frey and Fontana)
A critical approach
 Lund, P. 1996. ‘Rethinking the focus group in media and
communications research’. Journal of Communication.
 Critical approach




What is the researcher’s own position in the interviews?
How did he or she find and get on with the interviewees?
What were the reasons that people took part in the research?
(These questions connected to the power of researcher,
exploitation/ empowerment of the researched?)
Some questions
 Should focus groups meet more than once? Give
members time to create a unique culture, with its
own history, humour, preoccupations and
concerns – learn together by sharing
experiences?
 Should we use a ‘funnelling process’, i.e. “allow
groups initially to determine their own agendas as
much as possible before urging them to focus on
specific issues”. (Schlesinger, Dobash and
Weaver)
More questions
 Focus groups allow opportunity for unanticipated
issues to arise, but perhaps we need a broadly
standardised format with a schedule of topics
that must be addressed (for group
comparability)?
 Groups context of focus groups – does this bias
the data so strongly as to render it useless?
Examples are:
 group think (false consensus) or;
 a shift towards unrepresentative extremes.
 But, focus group researchers are more interested
in socially expressed, and contested, opinions and
discourses than in individual attitudes.
 Choice of group interviews on grounds that “much
individually based interview research is flawed by
focus on individuals as social atoms divorced from
their social context”. (Morley)
 Interpersonal relations in focus groups may be part
of the research data (not just interfering,
problematic distractions).