Focus Groups in Health
Education Practice:
An Introduction
A presentation for the American College Health Association
29 April 2013
Ric Underhile, Ph.D., LLPC
Grand Rapids Community College
1
What we’re going to do
Review the various traditions of qualitative inquiry
Discuss the characteristics of rigor expected from qualitative
inquiry
Consider the step-by-step process for administering focus
groups
Discuss strategies for analyzing qualitative data
View an example
Ask and respond to questions and comments
2
Some notes about this
presentation
Influenced by the work of Patricia Fabiano, Ph.D. and Linda
Lederman, Ph.D.
Focus Groups: Top Ten Misperceptions Threatening Quality
in Student Affairs Assessment (Fabiano & Underhile,
Sponsored Session; ACPA/NASPA Joint Meeting, Orlando
FL, April 2007)
My own experiences during my graduate training
3
Five traditions
Biography
The study of a single individual and his or her experiences
A single parent who relocates and strives to raise their child in a new
town
Phenomenology
A study that describes the meaning of experiences of a
phenomenon shared by several individuals
How a group of runners adjust to the recent death of one of their
friends
See, Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five
Traditions by John W. Creswell for excellent further reading.
4
Five traditions
Grounded Theory
The collection of interview data, field work, constant
comparison of information and final development of a contextspecific theory
The process of engaging in career development experienced by community
college students
5
Five traditions
Ethnography
The study of an intact social or cultural group over a period of
time. This tradition requires the researcher to deeply invest in
the field.
Following a cohort of peer health educators throughout the academic year
in an effort to chronicle their personal and academic growth
Case Study
The study of a “bounded system” with the focus being either the
case or an issue expressed by the case
How a university team of administrative leaders addressed the student
development needs of their student population
6
Rigor in qualitative inquiry
Credibility
Findings are believable and convincing.
Transferability
The findings could realistically apply to other situations that are
similar to the one being studied.
7
Rigor in qualitative inquiry
Dependability
Within reason, the findings seem similar to those of other
studies.
Confirmability
The process and product could be audited by a third party with
findings being the same.
8
Characteristics of a “good”
qualitative study
1. Multiple forms of data are gathered and analyzed. The
“data set” is visually summarized (creativity without
gimmickry is encouraged!).
2. The study is framed within the appropriate tradition.
3. The researcher begins with a single focus (not a causal or
comparative approach).
4. The study provides a detailed description of the method,
enough so that it could be replicated (approach this as you
would if you were writing a screenplay).
9
Characteristics of a “good”
qualitative study
5. The writing is persuasive (i.e., verisimilitude).
6. Analyses are layered.
7. The writing is rich with detail and brings the story to life.
8. The assumptions and characteristics of qualitative inquiry
are kept intact (e.g., evolving design, presentation of
multiple perspectives, the full engagement of the researcher
is present, trustworthiness, etc.)
10
Steps to facilitating focus groups
Define the purpose
Develop an interview guide
Train facilitators and, if necessary, scribes
Recruit and select participants
Plan and manage logistics
Conduct focus groups (typically 2-4, until saturation is reached)
Analyze data
Report results
11
Skills necessary for facilitating
focus groups
The researcher has
A clear sense of purpose
An innate ability to express sustained curiosity, while managing
time effectively
Professional training in group facilitation
Adhered to institutional or organizational standards of human
subject participant protocol
A budget for room rental, honorarium for facilitators and/or
scribes, transportation, child care, refreshments, incentives, etc.
A realistic time table for assembling, analyzing, and reviewing
data
12
An example
Purpose:
This case study seeks to discover if the college community
under study has the capacity and level of readiness to establish
and sustain a coordinated school health program (CSHP). The
secondary purpose is to explicate what shifts and or changes, if
any, need to occur to successfully implement and sustain a
CSHP in the college.
13
An example
Six questions
Each focus group lasted approximately one hour.
Participants were found and invited via email, telephone
calls, classroom announcements, and face-to-face
communication.
Each participant was provided a written description of the
project and an informed consent form.
Focus groups were audiotaped.
14
An example
Research participants were provided copies of transcripts for
verification.
Audiotapes were analyzed for words or phrases that
implicitly or explicitly reflected key concepts of the research.
While some experts recommend transcribing only key
responses, I transcribed the audiotapes verbatim.
15
Data analysis
“It is a messy, ambiguous, and
time-consuming, creative, and
fascinating process. It does not
proceed in a linear fashion; it is
not neat.”
Marshall & Rossman, 1999.
16
Data analysis
Open coding
Interview data were then color-coded.
Color-coded text was then cut (with scissors) and divided
into stacks that corresponded to predetermined themes.
Each statement was then re-coded to determine whether it
indicated a need or strength.
A complex matrix was then created with themes creating
rows and columns and then each cell was divided into
strengths and weaknesses.
17
Matrix example (excerpt)
Authorization
& Funding
Communication Personnel &
& Linkages
Organizational
Placement
Health
Education
Physical
Education
Health
Services
18
Resources
Lessons
The research question determines method. It is bad practice
to choose a method before the research question(s) is
determined.
Plan, plan, plan!
Prepare your audience to embrace and understand both your
method and findings.
Questions and discussion
for more discussion or additional questions
runderhile@grcc.edu
19