10 Focus Groups: Learning Objectives
describe the history and uses of focus groups
list the elements of an interview guide for focus
groups
summarize the advantages and disadvantages of
focus group methods in public health
list design issues for focus group activities
enumerate moderator and observer/note taker
techniques
participate in or observe a focus group in class
Tony's comments on participant
observations
Group Data Collection Methods
Natural Groups
Examples
– people doing laundry by the river
– mother’s club
– men gathered around tree to play cards
– teenagers hanging around outside a 7-11
– people in a laundromat
– people at a karoke bar
– patients in a waiting room at a dentist office
Natural Groups:
usually more heterogeneous than you would
like, but used a lot because they are there
in modern developed countries, there are fewer
opportunities for natural groups, because of
the way we have been isolated by technology
How many have been in focus
groups, or run them?
experiences and insights?
Focus group: facilitated group
discussion on a focused topic
Huge industry in US
Propaganda comprises 1/7th of our economy
Hollywood studies test-market violent films using focus
groups aged 13-16 and even recruit children as young
as 9 to evaluate story concepts, commercials, theatrical
trailers and rough cuts for R-rated movies (NYT
000927)
Term applied to broad array of group exercises (buttons
pushed watching election debates)
HISTORY
first used to evaluate effectiveness of war time
propaganda over 50 years ago
KEY FEATURE:
if a focus group is going well, the
participants will interact amongst
themselves
Group interaction produces data and insights
less likely without the interaction found in a
group
Use a moderator and a recorder
When to consider using focus groups?
Understanding some issue from specific
population’s perspective
Generate hypotheses based on informants’
insights
Survey instrument development
When to consider using focus groups?
Formative research: needs assessment
Educational materials pre-testing
Health promotion techniques
Evaluating research sites, study populations, or programs
Exploration of interpretation of research results
Community participation or mobilization
Orienting oneself to a new field
Advantages of focus groups
Does not discriminate between literates & nonliterates
Can encourage participation from those who
are reluctant to be interviewed on their own
Can encourage contributions from those who
feel they have nothing to say, or are
characterized as unresponsive
Either self-contained data collection
technique, or part of a larger research
program
Choosing between focus group
discussions and alternative data
collection strategies?
FOCUS GROUPS
PARTICIPANT OBSERVATION
INTERACTION per unit time
Can observe plenty
Takes relatively more time to
observe social interaction
CONTEXT OF SOCIAL
INTERACTION
synthetic
Social behavior observed in it's
natural context
can elicit relatively spontaneous
responses
but is controlled/stimulated by
researcher
RANGE OF INFORMATION
OBTAINED
limited to verbal & associated
body language
wide range of social repertoire
obtained
PLANNING OF INFORMATION
ACQUISITION
Able to schedule and plan to
capture information about a
social interaction
Density of social interactions:
difficult to capture relevant
information within time frame
of most data collection activities
SUBJECT AREAS
information about attitudes and
cognitive processes
roles and organizational
processes.
GROUP OR SOCIAL
INTERACTION
FOCUS GROUPS
use when want
INDIVIDUAL INTERVIEWS
use when
-stimulate rich response
-be limited or non-existent
-produce new or valuable
thoughts
GROUP/PEER PRESSURE
-to challenge thinking of
respondents
-would inhibit response
-would cloud meaning of response
-to illuminate conflicting
opinions
SENSITIVITY OF
SUBJECT MATTER
-not that sensitive
-subject matter so sensitive
respondents not willing to talk openly
in a group
DEPTH OF INDIVIDUAL
RESPONSES
-topic such that most subjects can
cover what is relevant or what
they know in less than 10
minutes
-topic requires greater depth of
responses per individual
-ONE interviewer conduct
research, several groups do not
create interviewer fatigue or
boredom
-have numerous interviews
INTERVIEWER FATIGUE
-respondents very knowledgeable
-can use more than one interviewer,
since one may become bored or
fatigued in conducting ALL the
interviews
FOCUS GROUPS
use when want
INDIVIDUAL INTERVIEWS
use when
STIMULUS MATERIALS TO
BE EVALUATED
-not many materials
-large number of materials
CONTINUITY OF
INFORMATION
-single subject examined in depth
-strings of behaviors less relevant
-necessary to understand how attitudes and
behaviors link together on an indivi dual
basis
EXPERIMENTATION WITH
INTERVIEW GUIDE
-know enough to establish a
meaningful topic guide
-need develop an interview guide and alter
it after each of initial interviews
OBSERVATION
-key decision makers need to observe
"first hand" consumer information
-"first hand" consumer information not
critical
-observation not logistically possible
LOGISTICS
-can assemble acceptable number of
target respondents in one location
-respondents not geographically dispersed
-other barries to assemble people
COST AND TIMING
-quick turn around
-more time available
-limited funds
-more funds
When should you consider using
another data collection method?
Types of topics
Opinions with unknown basis in behavior or
little/no personal experience
Abstract or complex ideas
When participants would not actively or easily
discuss the topic of interest
When should you consider using
another data collection method?
Types of respondents
Adolescents
Elderly
Severe mental illness
Ethical issues
use of names/identification
Who sees data
Tape recording & data management
video taping is much much more intrusive, less
acceptable so don’t do it
– is much more difficult to analyze, better to
have printed transcripts
Inherent invasion of privacy issues
Conduct enough groups
In geographic regions
where meaningful
difference felt to exist
– climate, weather,
– local economic
conditions,
– local lifestyle,
– political leanings,
– level of literacy
Pre-testing where change
order of materials
presented
Size of groups: 4-12, ideal 6-8
SMALL
Number of participants/effect on
DYNAMICS
LARGE
sensitive to
individual
dynamics
can break up into
side conversations
can be disrupted
by "experts"
frustration by
group members
who can speak
DEPTH OF
RESPONSE
high contribution
per individual
less participation
by some
MODERATOR
INVOLVEMENT
low
high
directive
DIFFICULTY FOR
MODERATOR
easier
difficult
GENERATION OF
IDEAS
may be limited
many ideas
Smaller groups expect
greater depth of response from each participant
highly sensitive to dynamics between individuals
use a smaller group when
– topics are complex, or intense (e.g. child abuse
perpetrators or victims)
– participants have expertise on the topic, or have
authority or power, since they may be irritated if
they do not have enough time to say what they feel
is important
Larger groups expect
respondents may speak longer, with irrelevant
information, when they finally get an
opportunity to speak
frustration or dissatisfaction among group
members, because of inability to get a turn to
speak, with resulting lower quality &
quantity of output
Larger groups expect
low-level participation problems, need more moderator
involvement
more tendency for side conversation between respondents
dominant/submissive relationships evolve
more generation of ideas
generally harder to do well
Composition (sampling) of groups
Homogeneity to avoid conflict, and refusals to share
opinions-- How much is necessary?
foster discussion; so that participants are
comfortable with each other.
avoid ‘experts’ who can dominate
often useful to have a screening questionnaire for
participants
want them to share a common interest in the topic
& feel comfortable together
Factors that can lead to
problematic heterogeneity
gender,
– on some issues, having men and women can
be OK, unless there is considerable gender
based disagreement
– explore with both types of groups
SES/education, SOCIAL CLASS CRITICAL
ONE
life stage, Age, new mothers cf older mothers,
or mothers with large family
lifestyle,
Factors that can lead to problematic
heterogeneity
user status,
– users of a product or practitioners, or nonpractitioners
– sometimes can get contrasts if include both,
especially if there is no social stigma
level of expertise/experience,
– those who have used a product, or practiced a
behavior for a long time may be quite different
from a novice
Factors that can lead to problematic
heterogeneity
marital status,
– use of contraceptives among married and
unmarried women
sub-cultures/ethnicity
sometimes some heterogeneity can be useful,
e.g. young & old
can choose respondents who have
previously participated in focus
groups
Friends: to include or not?
literature says people in a focus group should
not know one another
some people may not meet with others they do
not know
in many communities it is impossible to find
strangers, everyone knows each other, yet
focus groups can be run successfully there
Setting of the groups
privacy
acoustics
– avoid noisy areas so respondents can hear one another
& moderator can hear all respondents, can be problem
when hold them in situ so have to find quietest spot
accessible to respondents, culturally conducive
for the participants
– if people travel a long way, this could affect group
results
– a brothel, a pasture, a farm field
Setting of the groups
Any external observers?
– if so, have two-way mirror, or set up partitions, or
adjacent rooms with open doorways, make this
clear to the participants (marketing does this)
Neutral sites, but familiar, don’t bring them into
your office
– schools or government buildings may induce a
desire to respond “correctly”
– natural environments, convenient locations
conducive to conversations with familiar
surroundings, may enhance quality of data
Seating Arrangements
avoid designating status, e.g. at head of table, next to
moderator
– hunkering on the floor may be appropriate in many
settings
enable moderator to have good eye contact with all
respondents, and for each respondent to be in sight
of all other participants (harder with larger groups)
visible name tags (first name or pseudonyms) can
help calling on people by name
Recruiting participants
common source of failure, too few people show up, 1
or 2 or 3, like a response rate in a survey
– use key community leaders, rather than unknown person
to approach participants
– advertising in local radio station, print media, generally
less successful
– repeated contacts, a single phone call is not sufficient, let
them know they will be contacted later to remind them at
the initial contact
– mail reminders, make additional phone calls, at least the
night before
Incentives
paying people
– usually focus group more important to the researcher
than to the participant
– market researchers pay
– often social researchers don’t have the funds
other incentives
– gives participants a voice on issues that affect them
(psychological) (stakeholders)
– social or professional interaction among peers
– food
– sometimes women may find it necessary to bring a friend
Over-recruit strategy, especially for
marginalized participants
such as prostitutes
sometimes women may find it necessary to bring a
friend
if you offer monetary incentives you might overrecruit, and if get too many people, pay the ones
who don’t participate
Duration of group
Attention span, until they get tired
Time of day, people tend to be less bright in
afternoon (when this class is held)
Maximum start to finish = 2 hrs (consider
break)
Focus Group Discussions
Field Guide
have document like an ethnographic field guide,
sometimes called a topic guide
summary statement of issues & objectives to
cover in a focus group
road map and memory aid for moderator
often have initial question to which all
participants asked to respond
Focus Group Discussions Field
Guide common errors:
mostly questions are of interest to the
researcher, and not to the participant
• start with what is of interest to the participants,
will generate lively discussion
• then shift to researcher’s central interests, when
group members feel comfortable sharing &
comparing their experiences & opinions
have too many questions so try to push group
along, rather than explore
Focus Group Discussions Field
Guide common errors:
best to outline question areas or issues, include
special probes under each of key issues
– detail depends on experience of moderator
may need different topic guides for focus groups on
same subject, with different composition of
respondents
– e.g. safer sex behavior among teenagers of
different sex or sexual identity
Topics to include
don’t cover too many issues or participants will
become bored and fatigued, group will jump
around unnaturally
– if too many issues, suggests preparatory
research hasn’t been sufficiently focused, or
need a different method at this stage
– eliminate questions that are “nice to know”, but
not relevant to research objectives
– eliminate questions such as “how many” or
“how often” that could be better addressed in a
quantitative study
Topics move from general to specific
flow of group is more natural
analyst has framework for comments made in group
key issues can emerge naturally
Order topics to avoid putting respondents in irreversible
situations or verbal “dead ends”
– e.g. if talking about legislating gun control in Montana, and
find out one person is a member of the Montana Militia
Focus Group Operational and
Logistic Issues
Introduction, warm-up
Thanks for coming, your presence is important
Describe what a focus group is
Describe role of moderator, recorder
Purpose
state purpose of group, that interest is in idea,
comments, suggestions
no right or wrong answers
all comments welcome
feel free to disagree with one another, we want to
have many points of view
Procedure
explain use of audio/video tape, and
confidentiality
– sometimes having each person speak their
name, or a pseudonym, record that and play
it back can break the ice here
tell people they can speak without waiting for
moderator to call on them
ask people to speak one at a time
tell people they can interrupt the moderator, who
may want to move the discussion along
Self Introduction
ask each participant to introduce self, say a little
about themselves
can use pseudonyms,
Body of discussion
beginning
– moderator could make a statement such as
• how did your learning you have panic attacks
change your life?
Natural progression across topics
– what ways have you notice your body changing
since you began taking Panban®?
OK to overlap between topics
Body of discussion
again avoid why questions
Transitions
– we have been talking about taking drugs for
panic attacks, I’d now like to look at other ways
of dealing with this problem
Using the guide during the FGD -- probing;
relevant deviations
Body of discussion
Ranking at the end can sometimes be helpful
giving information
– sometimes moderator has to spend a great
deal of time giving information, when seen as
an expert, provider of info, A REASON TO
NOT HAVE AN EXPERT as moderator
Closure
“before we end, I’d like to go around the room
once more and ask each of you if there is
anything else you would like to say about the
idea of labial frenulum stimulation as we’ve
described it for a way of coping with panic
attacks
Questions and answers
Don't forget thank you for time and insights
Moderators (QUALITIES AND
EXPERIENCE OF THIS PERSON
ARE CRITICAL INGREDIENT)
generally moderator is not the Achilles Heel of
FGD, it is selection & recruitment
– facilitator and moderator are different terms for
same thing
note taker could be an alternate moderator, takes
notes, feeds ideas/perspectives to moderator
Moderator characteristics style
KEY: can the moderator encourage participants to
talk about this topic?
– can sometimes be a professional, often is a
“group facilitator”
– sensitive topics may require a moderator whose
background can put participants at ease
– Moderator probing appropriate & effective
– Ability to think through contingencies vs.
thinking/interpreting literally
Moderator characteristics style
KEY: can the moderator encourage participants to
talk about this topic?
Ability to put others at ease; non-threatening
Active listening, not an interviewer
– Balance between understanding empathy and
disciplined detachment
– understand your bias, it may be hard to avoid
projecting that
– Enthusiasm, be supportive, and not judgmental
Moderator characteristics style
KEY: can the moderator encourage
participants to talk about this topic?
well versed on subject matter and on specific
objectives of research, especially for complex
questions
sometimes for highly technical or controversial
material, use a pair of moderators
Moderator Level of involvement
Low is good for exploration
Low participation -- exploratory research goals;
good for content analysis
High is good for focus
High participation -- externally generated agenda
(e.g. compare results for a new group or with
narrowly defined research question)
Same or variable moderators for
several groups
comparability vs. seniority problems
Some techniques for moderators:
Build personal context
Top-of-mind associations
Probing obvious terms ("What does 'it's hard to do
that' mean to you?"; "What about it is good?"; "In
what way is it easy to use the pill?"; "How can you
tell that the medication works?")
Conceptual mapping (how group terms)
"I'm a five-year old" DON’T CONVEY
IMPRESSION OF BEING AN EXPERT
Some techniques for moderators:
Role playing
Highlight contradictions
Repeating
Mirroring / Rephrase and ask for verification
Silence
"I'm confused"
Third person
Using the guide -- Tracking = returning to guide
throughout discussion (useful for transitions)
Cost: expensive
time intensive, require skilled researchers
may be cheaper than a larger number of
informant interviews to get comparable info,
but sometimes not so
planning, analysis take considerable cost
administrators often surprised at price-tag
Focus Group Discussions Reports and
Data Analysis
team approach to analysis, especially if cultural
factors are a focus of research
Report preparation meeting immediately after FGD
Define structure of field report
Debus HANDBOOK FOR
EXCELLENT IN FOCUS GROUP
RESEARCH
Very practical material
On reserve in library
Class Exercise begin by 2:45,
Focus group exercise with 5-6
participants from the class
Focus:
Other students to take notes,
• note techniques used,
• evaluate effort
FDG
Introduction
Thank you for taking the time to join us today.
I'm SB and I've been commissioned by the Dean's office to see what can be done to help graduate students cope with stress.
________ is here to help me as a recorder
You've been selected for this effort, I understand because you are known to have very successful ways of coping with stress
I'm going to ask you to write your first names on this tent-card so people can call on each other by name, I hope that is OK with you
We want to understand your experiences as a graduate student, the stress you perceive, and ways in which you deal with it.
There are no right or wrong answers to questions asked, we are interested in your opinions and comments, and I expect you may have
differing points of view.
Don't feel like you have to respond but if you want to follow up on something someone else has said, agree or disagree, or give an example,
please feel free to do that.
Don't feel you have to respond to me all the time. I'm here to ask questions, listen, and make sure everyone has an opportunity to participate
Initial Question
Increasingly studies show that stress causes health problems and recreation is often an important way to cope with stress. The School is
interested in student perspectives on recreation and activities to deal with stress and how it might facilitate these.
Can each of you respond to how you deal with the stress of being a graduate student?
Can you give me an example of ways you have used university facilities or people to help you cope?
Probes:
would you explain further?
can you give me an example of what you mean?
please tell me more
say more
uh huh
is there anything else?
please describe what you mean
I don't understand
does anyone else see it differently
has anyone else had a different experience?
are there other points of view?
Later on:
are there any other ideas or thoughts or experiences any of you wish to describe?
do you think we have missed anything in the discussion?
Conclusion
some of the ideas I have heard expressed are:
thank you all for taking part, it has been very valuable
NEXT TUESDAY
• Other group activities
– Nominal groups