Applying a Quality Framework to the Focus Group Method

Applying a Quality Framework to the Focus Group Method ● February 2016
Margaret R. Roller, MA
rmr@rollerresearch.com
www.rollerresearch.com
www.researchdesignreview.com
Applying a Quality Framework to
the Focus Group Method

Adapted from: Applied Qualitative Research Design: A Total Quality Framework Approach (Roller & Lavrakas, 2015) ©Margaret R. Roller
 4 Types
 Full group (7-10 participants)
 Mini group (4-6 participants)
 Triads (3 participants)
 Dyads (2 participants)
 Group composition: Heterogeneity v. homogeneity
 Should participants
• be in the same age range &/or stage of life?
• be the same gender, race, &/or ethnicity?
• be at a similar income, socioeconomic, &/or educational
level?
• reside in the same community, be members of the same
organization?
• have similar involvement, experience, &/or knowledge with
the research topic?
1
Focus Group Method
Brief Overview

Adapted from: Applied Qualitative Research Design: A Total Quality Framework Approach (Roller & Lavrakas, 2015) ©Margaret R. Roller 2
Focus Group Method
Brief Overview (continued)

 Key moderator skill: Managing group dynamics
 Diversity of personality types, e.g., shy person.
 Disruptive behavior, e.g., “dominator.”
 Potential for a “runaway” discussion.
 Potential for “group think.”
 Modes
 Face-to-face
 Telephone
 Online
3
Focus Group Method

 Strengths
 Participant interaction
• Stimulates ideas & personal disclosures
• Creates a supportive environment
• Reveals the basis by which opinions change
 A range of attitudes & experience within one group
 Presence of observers
 Limitations
 Social context may mask individual differences
 Critical role of the moderator
 Ethical considerations, esp., confidentiality
4
Focus Group Method

Adapted from: Applied Qualitative Research Design: A Total
Quality Framework Approach (Roller & Lavrakas, 2015)

Total Quality Framework

 Number of groups
 Considerations during the design phase
• Geographic dispersion of target population.
• Homogeneity or heterogeneity of the group participants.
• Anticipated variation of outcomes across geographic
regions &/or population segments.
• Depth of discussions, e.g., topic or issue.
• Available resources & project deadline.
 Considerations during the field phase
• Similar to the 10 questions to ask in the IDI method.
• Degree of interactivity, participation, e.g., Did a few
participants dominate one or more discussions?
Focus Group Method
7
Applying the TQF: CREDIBILITY- Scope

Applying the TQF: CREDIBILITY- Scope (continued)
Gaining Cooperation
 Similar to the IDI method, e.g., explaining the purpose,
incentives, identifying the sponsor, communication.
 Incentives are particularly important for face-to-face
groups to motivate “non-customers” & account for
costs related to transportation, child care, etc.
 Flexibility of time and location (face-to-face mode) to
fit the needs of the participant type, e.g., working
mothers may have limited availability given their job &
child care responsibilities, business executives may
prefer a breakfast focus group.
 Follow-up contact.
8
Focus Group Method

 Discussion content
 Moderator bias
 Moderator inconsistency
 Participant effects
9
Applying the TQF: CREDIBILITY- Data Gathering
Focus Group Method

 Discussion Content
 Broad to narrow topic areas (“funnel” approach).
10
Focus Group Method
Applying the TQF: CREDIBILITY- Data Gathering (continued)

 Enabling & Projective Techniques
 Enabling techniques: To simplify a direct question.
• Sentence completion
– The best thing about the new city transit system is _________.
• Word association
– What is the first word or words you think of when I say “healthy
eating”?
• Storytelling
– Tell me a story about the last time you visited your local library.
11
Focus Group Method

 Enabling & Projective Techniques (cont.)
 Projective techniques: To explore less conscious, less
rational or socially acceptable attitudes/feelings.
• Guided imagery
– Close your eyes & imagine walking into a Target store. Describe
what you see, how it makes you feel, where you go in the store.
• Picture sort or collage
– Use online images & Pinterest to answer the question, “How do
you feel when you are in a large social gathering with strangers.”
• Psychodrawing
– Draw a depiction of what it would be like to be without your
mobile phone.
• Personification
– Imagine the brand as a person & describe this person’s lifestyle.
12
Focus Group Method

 Enabling & Projective Techniques (cont.)
 Projective techniques can be problematic & of limited
value from a TQF perspective.
• Short duration of a group exercise does not allow sufficient
time to truly explore personal meaning and context.
• Moderator is typically not qualified to make valid
interpretations of the outcomes & link them back to the
research objectives.
• Can result in a high-degree of subjectivity by the researcher.
• For example, the moderator is unable to sufficiently explore
& analyze separate photo collages from 10 participants.
What do they mean separately & collectively? Do they tap
into an unconscious belief relevant to the objective? Do they
tap into deep-seeded cultural biases or social awareness?
13
Focus Group Method

 Moderator Bias
 Moderators can negatively impact the credibility of a
discussion by
• Giving selective attention to participants.
• Giving affirmation or voicing his/her own opinion.
• Losing track of the group dynamics & not identifying
inconsistencies in participants’ comments.
• His/her physical appearance
 Pretesting helps identify how the moderator may be
influencing responses.
 Colleagues should observe &/or review the first couple
of groups to provide constructive feedback to the
moderator to help eliminate bias.
14
Focus Group Method

 Moderator Bias (cont.)
 Moderator should use a reflexive journal to identify
ways he/she may be biasing the outcomes.
• Listen to the audio recording (or watch the video
recording) after each discussion & reflect on how
participants’ comments may have been influenced by
the moderator’s words or behavior.
15
Focus Group Method

 Moderator Inconsistency
 Moderators face a great challenge: Managing multiple
points of view while ensuring full engagement from all
participants within a limited time period.
 Inconsistency in the data can happen if group dynamics
are not well-managed.
• Discussion guide is not fully covered in all groups due to
domineering participants in some groups that forced the
moderator to skip content in the guide.
16
Focus Group Method

 Moderator Inconsistency (cont.)
 Moderator training is essential to mitigate inconsistency
by giving moderators the ability to
• Discriminate between content in the discussion guide that
must be stated in the same manner in all groups from
content where exactness is not important.
– Product concepts & definitions should always be stated the same
from group to group.
• Manage time & content to ensure thorough coverage of
the guide across groups.
• Maintain focus during each discussion, asking follow-up
questions & pursuing emerging thoughts/ideas.
17
Focus Group Method

 Participant Effects
 Social environment of the focus group may cause
participants to be unwilling to freely comment.
• Sensitive topics, e.g., personal grooming habits.
• Topics governed by social norms, e.g., church attendance,
alcohol use, healthy eating.
 This introduces inaccurate information & diminishes the
credibility of the outcomes.
18
Focus Group Method

 Participant Effects (cont.)
 Building rapport is important to overcoming
participants’ unwillingness to honestly engage in the
discussion.
 The group dynamic environment makes building rapport
a more difficult challenge than in the IDI method.
 To build rapport, the moderator needs to
• Contact participants at least twice prior to the discussion.
• Provide a friendly, warm welcome at the onset.
• Show genuine interest in each participant, e.g., via follow-
up questions, active listening.
(continued)
19
Focus Group Method

 Participant Effects (cont.)
 To build rapport, the moderator needs to
• Encourage participants to engage with each other.
– Susan, why don’t you tell George what you like about the new
exhibit at the City art museum.
• Stay attuned to verbal & nonverbal cues.
– Audible hesitations, drawn-out sighs, laughter, private remarks.
– Frown, distracted behavior, no eye contact.
• Be forthcoming, transparent
– Respond honestly to participants’ questions.
20
Focus Group Method

 Credibility – Scope
 Heterogeneity of participants, level of participation, & other
factors should be used to determine the appropriate number of
groups.
 Incentives, flexibility, & communication are important to gaining
cooperation & lessen “no shows.”
 Credibility – Data Gathering
 Projective techniques can be problematic from a TQF
perspective & should be used cautiously.
 Moderator bias can be mitigated by reflective exercises.
 Moderators can avoid inconsistency with proper training on
content that should be presented the same way across all
groups & managing group dynamics.
 Building rapport is particularly important in the social
environment of the focus group. 21
Focus Group Method

 Processing focus group data is more complex than
in the IDI method.
 More data sources, not just audio.
• Video
• Photos, images
• Group exercises, e.g., writing, drawing
 Verbal & nonverbal cues from multiple participants.
 Participant interaction.
22
Focus Group Method
Applying the TQF: ANALYZABILITY- Processing

 It is participant interaction that sets focus groups
apart from IDI research, yet researchers often pay
little attention to this in their analyses.
 An analysis of participant interaction may reveal
important insight regarding discussion outcomes.
 One way to analyze interaction is to use the template
from Lehoux et al. (2006), addressing questions like
“What types of interactions occur among
participants?” & “To what extent do these
interactions reflect the broader social context?”
23
Focus Group Method
Applying the TQF: ANALYZABILITY- Processing (continued)

Focus Group Method
Group processes Epistemological content
What type of interactions occur among
participants (e.g., limited-significant, empathic-
challenging, educational-personal, negative-
constructive)?
What do dominant and passive positions
reveal about the topic at hand?
To what extent do these interactions reflect
the broader social contexts (e.g., age, gender,
status, authority)
What types of knowledge claims (e.g.,
clinical-experiential knowledge, self-care
skills, strategies, and resources mobilized)
are endorsed and/or challenged by
participants? On what basis?
Which participants dominate the discussion?
How does this affect the contribution of other
participants?
What types of knowledge claims receive
less support? Why?
Which participants adopt a passive role? How
do other participants respond to this position?
From Lehoux et al. (2006)

 In addition to the 6 qualities discussed in the IDI
method – knowledge, training, sensitivity,
thoroughness, language and conversation expertise
– the transcriptionist for group discussions must also
be attentive to group dynamics & interactivity of
participants.
 Transcriptionist should, ideally, be an experienced
moderator &/or someone who was involved in
conducting or observing the discussions.
 Transcriptionist should provide a sense of the dynamic
environment by including audible (or visual, if working
from a video recording) cues, e.g., signs of exasperation,
expressions of agreement.
25
Focus Group Method

 Use of computer-assisted qualitative data software
(CAQDAS) as a standalone aid in focus group analysis
is not recommended.
 CAQDAS can not effectively provide the nuanced
dimensions of the interactive focus group environment.
 Focus group data is complex & demands a multifaceted
approach that looks at all the data sources & goes
beyond what is said by also considering participant
interaction – i.e., context.
• A participant’s comment, “A woman’s place is in the
home,” might be coded “traditional values,” or
“intolerance,” or “importance of home and home life.”
26
Focus Group Method

 Due diligence to uncover additional information that
supports or refutes the researcher’s interpretations.
 Reflexive journal, peer debriefing, triangulation, &
deviant case analysis were discussed for the IDI
method.
 Ideally, independent analyses of the data should be
performed by one or more skilled researchers who
 Are knowledgeable about the study.
 Have broad & social savvy language skills.
 Know how to “read” manifest & latent communication.
 Will attend to the minutiae of conversations.
 Are highly organized & committed to quality.
27
Focus Group Method
Applying the TQF: ANALYZABILITY- Verification

 Observers (behind a mirror in face-to-face, in the
virtual backroom in the online mode) are an
important source of verification in focus group
research.
 Debriefing after each discussion is essential to gain
observers’ perspectives.
 Observers often think differently about the outcomes
of a discussion & offer a different point of view.
 The moderator may not agree with the observers’
takeaways, but they provide an important perspective
that should be weighed during analysis.
28
Focus Group Method
Applying the TQF: ANALYZABILITY- Verification (continued)

 A “thick” description allowing other researchers to
derive similar interpretations &/or apply the focus
group research in other contexts
 In addition to the types of details discussed earlier,
special attention in the focus group method should be
given to
 Level of cooperation, e.g., show rate.
 Operational logistics, e.g., type of facility/room for face-
to-face groups, fidelity of recordings, observers (who &
how they may have impacted outcomes.
 Participants’ interactions.
 Enabling & projective techniques that were used.
29
Focus Group Method
Applying the TQF: TRANSPARENCY

 Ultimate usefulness of focus group research enables users
to do something with the results & gives them confidence
that the
 Sample was fair & balanced, and all key issues were addressed.
 Findings are based on a systematic & thorough approach to
analysis.
 Final document contains the details of each research step.
 Usefulness is derived from:
 Representative coverage + reliable & valid data gathering
(Credibility).
 Thorough processing & verification of the data (Analyzability).
 Full documentation of the “life” of the study, including decision
making (Transparency).
30
Focus Group Method
Applying the TQF: Usefulness

Lehoux, P., Poland, B., & Daudelin, G. (2006). Focus group research and “the patient’s
view.” Social Science & Medicine, 63(8), 2091–2104.
Roller, M. R., & Lavrakas, P. J. (2015). Applied Qualitative Research Design: A Total
Quality Framework Approach. New York: Guilford Press.
31
References

Applying a Quality Framework to the Focus Group Method

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (14)

Similar to Applying a Quality Framework to the Focus Group Method

Similar to Applying a Quality Framework to the Focus Group Method (20)

More from Roller Research

More from Roller Research (8)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Applying a Quality Framework to the Focus Group Method

Editor's Notes