TO ADD: More book quote bits

Silverman, D., 2004. Theory, method and practice

 Sue Wilkinson in Silverman (2004)

Focus groups:

Prior to the late 1970s focus group research was mainly used in market research but has since become popular in social science (Wilkinson, 2004; p.177)

Focus group methodology is, at first sight, deceptively simple. It is a way of collecting qualitative data, which essentially involves engaging a small number of people in an informal group discussion (or discussions), ‘focused’ around a particular topic or set of issues. The informal group discussion is usually based on a series of questions (the focus group schedule), and the researcher generally acts as a ‘moderator’ for the focus group: posing questions, keeping the discussion flowing and enabling group members to participate fully (Wilkinson, 2004;  p.178).

Although focus groups are sometimes referred to as ‘group interviews’, the moderator does not ask questions of each focus group participant in turn, but rather, facilitates group discussion, actively encouraging group members to interact with each other. This interaction between research participants, and the potential analytic use of such interaction has been described as the ‘hallmark’ of focus group research (Morgan, 1988; p.12).

*Morgan, D.L. (1988) Focus groups as qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage

Typically, the focus group discussion is recorded, the data transcribed, and then analysed using conventional techniques for qualitative data, most commonly content or thematic analysis (Wilkinson, 2004;  p.178).

Undoubtedly, one reason for the contemporary popularity of focus groups in social science research is the flexibility of the method. Focus groups can be used as a stand-alone qualitative method, or combined with quantitative techniques as part of a multi-method project (Wilkinson, 1999) (Wilkinson, 2004;  p.178).

*Wilkinson, S. (1999) Focus groups: A feminist method. Psychology of women quarterly, 23: 221-44

They can be used within the classroom to study the social world, especially in action research projects (Wilkinson, 2004; p.178).

A focus group can involve a single group of participants meeting on a single occasion, or it can involve many groups, with single or repeated meetings. It can involve as few as two, or as many as a dozen or so, participants (the norm is between four and eight) (Wilkinson, 2004;  p.178).

To enable full participation, the moderator may need to encourage quiet participants, to discourage talkative ones, and to handle any ‘interactionally difficult’ occasions (Wilkinson, 2004;  p.179).

Setting ground rules and having a debriefing should be considered (Wilkinson, 2004;  p.180)

One of the advantages of focus groups is that they are more naturalistic than interviews, and closer to everyday conversation in that they typically include a range of communication processes such as storytelling, joking, arguing, boasting, teasing, persuasion, challenge and disagreement. They dynamic quality of group interaction, as participants, discuss, debate and (sometimes) disagree about key issues, is generally a striking feature of focus groups. In fact focus groups because of this are well suited to exploring sensitive topics and may facilitate personal disclosures (Wilkinson, 2004;  p.180)

Focus group interactions also ‘allow respondents to react to and build upon the responses of others (p.180). This is known as the ‘synergistic effect’ (Stewart and Shamdasani, 1990; p.16) which ends up with the production of more elaborated accounts and a consensual piling up of the fine detail (Wilkinson, 2004;  p.181).

*Stewart, D.W. and Shamdasani, P.N. (1990) Focus groups: Theory and practice. London: Sage.

The relatively free flow of discussion and debate between members of a focus group offers researchers and excellent opportunity for hearing the language of and vernacular used by respondents, particularly respondents who may be very different from themselves (Bers, 1987; p.26).

*Bers, T.H. (1987) Exploring institutional images through focus group interviews. In R.S. Lay and J.J. Endo (eds), Designing and using market research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Another benefit of focus groups offers an opportunity for those uncomfortable talking in interviews, but maybe happy to talk with others, particularly others they already know and especially in the safe and familiar context of their own turf (Plaut et al, 1993; p.216).

*Plaut, T., Landis, S., and Trevor, J. (1993) Focus groups and community mobilisation: a case study from Rural North Carolina. In D.L. Morgan (eds), Successful focus groups: Advancing the state of the art. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Reduced researcher control allows focus group participants to follow their own agendas and develop themes important to them (). One particular benefit of this is to draw researchers attention to previously neglected or unnoticed phenomenon (Wilkinson, 2004;  p.181).

Focus group research may then result in unexpected insights (Wilkinson, 2004;  p.182).

For analysis, techniques suitable for analysing one-to-one interview data are equally applicable for use with focus group data (Wilkinson, 2004;  p.182).

Focus group participants do not always agree, and sometimes they misunderstand one another, question one another or try to persuade each other around points of view and sometimes they vehemently disagree (Kitzinger, 1994; p.170).

*Kitzinger, J. (1994) Focus groups: Method or madness? In M. Boulton (ed.), Challenge and innovation: methodological advances in social research on HIV/AIDS. London: Taylor and Francis.

Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2000:

Group interviews:

The advantages of group interview include the potential for discussions to develop, thus yield a wide range of responses (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2000; p.287).

Group interviews are useful where the range of people have a common purpose or where it is important that everyone concerned is aware of what others in the group are saying (Watts and Ebbutt, 1987) (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2000; p.287).

Participants challenge and extend each others ideas and introduce new ideas to the discussion generating a wider set of responses than in individual interviews (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2000; p.287).

Quicker and less intimidating than individual interviews (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2000).

Group size can be an issue; too few and it can put pressure on individuals, too large and the group fragments and loses focus (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2000; p.287).

Lewis (1992) suggests that a group of around six or seven is an optimum size (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2000; p.287).

Lewis (1992) refers to the problem of coding up the responses of group interviews (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2000; p.288).

Focus groups:

The use of focus groups is growing in educational research (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2000; p.288).

Focus groups are a form of group interview, though not in the same sense of a backwards and forwards between interviewer and group. Rather the reliance is on the interaction within the group who discuss a topic supplied by the researcher (Morgan, 1988; Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2000).

It is from the interaction of the group that the data emerges (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2000; p.288).

Focus groups are useful for orientating a particular fir of focus; developing topics, themes and schedules for subsequent research; generating hypotheses that derive from insights or gathering feedback and insights (Morgan, 1988; Krueger, 1988; Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2000).

Focus groups might be useful to triangulate with more traditional forms of interviewing, questionnaires or observations (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2000; p.288).

Creswell, 2013

Pragmatists do not see the world in an absolute unity, researchers look to many approaches to collecting and analysing data rather than subscribing to only one way, for example, multiple qualitative approaches (Creswell, 2013; p.28).

In practice, researchers using a pragmatic world view will use multiple methods of data collection to best answer the research question, will employ multiple sources of data collection, will focus on the practical implications of the research, and will emphasise the importance of conducting research that best addresses the research problem (Creswell, 2013; p.28).

Qualitative research begins with assumptions and the use of  interpretive/theoretical frameworks that inform the study of the research problems addressing the meaning individuals or groups ascribe to a social or human problem (Creswell, 2013; p44)

Qualitative researchers using mixed methods typically gather multiple forms of data, such as interviews, observations and documents, rather than rely on a single data source. Then they review all of the data and make sense of it, organising it into categories or themes that ct across all of the data sources (Creswell, 2013; p.45).

Researchers conduct qualitative research when they want to empower individuals to share their stories, hear their voices, and minimise the power relationships that often exist between a researcher and the participants in a study (Creswell, 2013; p.48).

We collect qualitative research because we want to understand the contexts or settings in which participants in a study address a problem or issue (Creswell, 2013; p.48).

Qualitative inquiry means researchers need to commit to extensive time in the field, engage in time consuming data analysis due to sorting through large amounts of data to be able to reduce them to categories or themes, be prepared to write long passages due to the multiple perspectives and accept that qualitative research does not have a set of firm guidelines and others might judge and challenge it when the study is complete (Creswell, 2013; p.49).