focus group discussions

The Focus Group Method: Where It Came From & How It Is Used

The following is a modified excerpt from Applied Qualitative Research Design: A Total Quality Framework Approach (Roller & Lavrakas, 2015, pp. 109-110).

The focused interview approach used with individuals and groups as described by Merton and Kendall (1946) was never intended as a stand-alone research method. Rather, the purpose was to “test” certain hypotheses or assumptions that resulted from content analyses conducted on “a particular situation,” such as reactions to a radio program. In other words, group interviewing, from the early days of Merton, served the purpose of supporting quantitative research by affirming or denying theories derived from survey data, or generating new ideas and hypotheses that could be verified by further survey research. To this point, Merton emphasized that from the results of group discussions, “there is no way of knowing in advance of further quantitative research which plausible interpretations (hypotheses) will pan out and which will not” (Merton, 1987, p. 558).

Focus group discussions today are, to some degree, used in conjunction with quantitative research (as prescribed by Merton) and, indeed, are an effective method for exploring new ideas and informing the design of a survey questionnaire (e.g., in terms of subject matter and language) as well as evaluating and deepening the researcher’s understanding of the survey data. The work of O’Donnell, Lutfey, Marceau, and McKinlay (2007) on physician decision making is one example of how group discussions have been integrated with the research process to improve the quantitative component. Other examples come from Vogt, King, and King (2004), who conducted focus groups with Gulf War veterans concerning war-related stressors to aid in the development of their instrument to assess psychological Read Full Text

Learning to Find Meaning in Qualitative Research: 6 Articles

“Learning to Find Meaning” is a compilation of six articles concerning the importance of and techniques to finding Learning to Find Meaning in Qualitative Research Data Collection meaning when gathering qualitative data. There are many (many) articles in Research Design Review that discuss various aspects of qualitative data collection; however, the articles selected for this short compilation are narrowly focused on deriving meaning by determining the sense and the context of participants’ lived experiences as defined by participants. To any qualitative researcher, this seems obvious. And yet, as discussed in these articles, finding meaning is often missed due to erroneous assumptions, absence of required skills, or failure to invest the necessary time with participants.

All but one of these articles appeared in Research Design Review in the 2014-2022 time period.

“Learning to Find Meaning: 6 Articles on the Importance of & Techniques to Finding Meaning in Qualitative Research” is available for download here.

Eight other compilations of RDR articles, devoted to particular methods or techniques, are also available:

“Qualitative Content Analysis: 6 Articles on the Definition & Quality Design Considerations” is available for download here.

“Unique Attributes of Qualitative Research: 16 Articles on the 10 Unique Attributes of Qualitative Research” is available for download here.

“Ethnography & the Observation Method: 15 Articles on Design, Implementation, & Uses” is available for download here.

“The Focus Group Method: 18 Articles on Design & Moderating” is available for download here.

“The In-depth Interview Method: 12 Articles on Design & Implementation” is available for download here.

“Reflexivity: 10 Articles on the Role of Reflection in Qualitative Research” is available for download here.

“Qualitative Data Analysis: 16 Articles on Process & Method” is available for download here.

“Qualitative Research: Transparency & Reporting” is available for download here.

A Lesson in Guide Development: Part 2

“A Lesson in Guide Development: Part 1” discusses the importance of giving careful attention to the research objectives and related constructs when developing an in-depth interview (IDI) or focus group discussion guide. One of the useful ways to learn about guide development is to study the guides created by others.

In that spirit, “Part 1” provided a basic guide structure that was adapted from a published focus group research study. The reader was asked to think about “how, if at all, you would change the design of the questions and/or the order in which the questions are asked.” You might want to go back and look at the guide structure presented in “Part 1” before looking at the approach discussed below.

A significant concern with the guide outlined in “Part 1” is that it fails to prioritize gaining the necessary context that the moderator needs in order to effectively achieve the research objective — “To identify the barriers to purchasing & consuming fresh fish, and explore options for reducing these barriers.” The discussion begins with “Why do you eat fish?” But that is not what the moderator really wants to learn about at this early point in the discussion. What the moderator needs to learn about at the onset of the discussion is participants’ preferences in food along with their purchase and consumption behavior. It is only within this context that the moderator can fully understand and effectively question group participants pertaining to the research objective concerning fresh fish.

It is the four-stage funnel approach to guide development that enables the moderator to achieve the necessary context, from which the moderator can truly learn about the participants as it relates to the research objective. As a quality approach to guide development, the four-stage funnel design begins broadly and then increasingly narrows the focus of discussion to reach the key objective(s).

As an example, the guide structure presented in “Part 1” has been recreated using the four-stage funnel approach and is outlined below.

fish guide development-funnel approach