are different to your own.
Ensure the group is a judgement-free space.
Vocalise judgements about statements made.
Engage in healthy discussion.
Disrespect group members.
Each group member needs to be included –
individuals may need to be called on to provide their responses.
Allow the loudest group member too much talking
time; loud group members could be asked not to answer a question.
Facilitate free-flowing discussion.
Let group members talk over each other.
Power imbalances. When setting up a focus group, the facilitator should pay strict attention to how homogenous the group needs to be concerning the topic, and how possible power imbalances might affect the data collection. For example, if the research question seeks to understand why drug administration errors occur in hospitals, it would not be a good idea to have doctors, nurses and pharmacists in the same group. Why? Because they might not feel comfortable expressing views in front of the very people they have seen make errors. Instead, you could run three separate groups: one with doctors, one with nurses and another with pharmacists. Conducting separate group discussions helps to avoid the chance that a powerful group might dominate the discussion and enables each group member to express their views openly.
Participant identity. The facilitator should invite participants to introduce themselves to other group members, to encourage familiarity; name tags can help participants remember each other’s names. The researchers will need to maintain a list of participants and any necessary demographic details.
Risk. The possibility of distress or harm occurring must always be considered in a focus group. Participants may become distressed because sensitive topics are being discussed, and there is always a risk that some participants might overshare their experiences. The facilitator will need to judge when to stop the discussion if it becomes clear that one or more participants are distressed. 8 Researchers should have a clear protocol developed that provides advice about how to handle distress.
Once the discussion is concluded, participants should be thanked for their time and contributions. Explain how participants might contact the researcher if they have any questions or would like to provide the facilitator with follow-up information. If the focus group has covered sensitive topics or any participants have become distressed during the discussion, make sure that you spend some time privately with the participant to provide appropriate referrals and follow-up (see Section 6 ). Referrals and follow-up are usually described in the protocol addressing distress.
Data analysis is discussed in Section 4 , but it is important to know what to do immediately after each focus group is completed. Download (or upload) the recording from the audio-recording device to ensure it is saved in a secure location that can only be accessed by people on the research team (see Chapter 34). The recording should be transcribed; that is, reproduced verbatim, for data coding and analysis. The transcription of data is an important step in the analysis process, and it is important to note that this is a highly time-consuming task. Transcribing a 60-minute focus group discussion can take up to 10 hours.
Title | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
van der Spek, 2013 | Visser, 2021 | Moynihan, 2017 | Sabet Sarvestani, 2012 | |
To describe:1. the meaning-making themes that play a role in cancer survivors,2. the experienced changes in meaning making after cancer treatment, and3. the perceived needs for help in this particular area | To explore, using focus groups, patients’ experiences and wellbeing after injury, and which factors impede or facilitate patients' wellbeing | To explore community awareness of the overdiagnosis of osteoporosis and related controversies surrounding the condition, including the definition of osteoporosis, whether it is best understood as a “disease” or a “risk factor”, and the perceived value of the most common medications, as well as responses to potentially new information about these issues | To characterise traditional male circumcision (TMC) practices in Uganda and the cultural implications, using a comprehensive focus group discussion and qualitative analysis | |
Descriptive | Phenomenology | Phenomenology | Descriptive (culture) | |
The Netherlands | The Netherlands | Australia | Uganda | |
Existential distress and meaning making | Experiences and consequences of injury | Community understanding of overdiagnosis | Understanding cultural implications | |
4 focus groups3 groups of 6 and 1 group of 5 | 6 focus groups3–7 in each group (total of 28) | 5 focus groups7–9 in each group (total 41) | 26 focus groups6–12 in each group (total 208) | |
120 minutes | 60–90 minutes | 135 minutes | 60 minutes | |
1. What is meaningful in your life at the moment?2. Did meaning in your life change after you were diagnosed with cancer? And if so, how did it change?3. Have you ever had the feeling that you couldn’t find meaning? And how did you deal with that?4. What helps you to find meaning, despite possible problems in your life?5. Are there aspects of meaning making that you wish you received help with? And if so, what kind of help would you like to receive?[Table 2] | 1. Which experiences after injury impressed you the most?2. Can you describe the consequences of injury on your life?3. Could you describe your feelings after injury, hospitalisation, and rehabilitation?4. Does someone (i.e. another participant) recognise these experiences, consequences or feelings?5. In what way do you experience changes in wellbeing?[In-text (data collection)] | 1. What is osteoporosis?2. Apart from bone density, are there other things increasing fracture risk?3. How well do common medications for osteoporosis work?4. Among people diagnosed, how many will never have a fracture?[Supporting information files S2 text] | 1. What are the traditions, customs and rituals associated with male circumcision in your ethnic group? 2. What are the reasons parents decide to circumcise their sons traditionally? 3. What are the techniques used for traditional circumcision cuts in your ethnic group? Is there any variation among cutters’ methods? How much foreskin is cut? 4. Have you ever heard of a circumcision that has resulted in an adverse event? If yes, what was the reason? Who is to blame if an adverse event happens?5. Have the traditions, customs, and rituals associated with circumcision in this region changed over time? If yes, how? Why? 6. Would you support changes in TMC practice to make it safer? What type of changes would you consider? | |
Thematic analysis within the framework approach. Under three topics:1. Meaning making2. Changes in meaning making3. Need for help with meaning making | Analysis using a phenomenological approach. Data analysis proceeded stepwise using the open, axial and selective coding techniques. | Thematic analysis was based on framework analysis, as described by Ritchie and colleagues | Predetermined themes with codebook developed | |
1. Sources of meaning: relationships, experiences, creativity, work 2. Enhanced meaning through relationships, experiences, resilience, goal orientation, leaving a legacy3. Loss of meaning through experiences, social roles, relationships, uncertainty about the future4. Searching for meaning5. Meaninglessness: isolation, threats to identity, physical limitations, confrontation with death, fear of passing cancer to offspring, loss of freedom | 1. Impact on relatives2. Dependent of care3. Social support4. Communication health care provider to patient5. Take self-initiative to receive medical care6. Communication: health care providers to relatives, between medical staff, hospital to GP and to authorities, authorities to patient7. Media attention8. Practical problems | 1. Risk factor' versus ‘disease’: preference for risk factor2. The dilemma of diagnosis: awareness of downsides, belief in early diagnosis3. Medications and prevention: underwhelmed by drugs, interest in other strategies4. Overdiagnosis: complexities in communicating counter-intuitive concept5. Overdiagnosis in osteoporosis: changing perceptions after new information6. Questioning the definition of osteoporosis: unease over young women’s bones defined as normal | Predetermined themes, such as TMC’s cultural importance, logistics of the practice, cutters’ training procedures and tools used during TMC were selected prior to holding the focus groups |
Focus groups and (individual interviews) are the most common data collection techniques in qualitative research. The success of a focus group depends on the group composition and the effectiveness of the facilitator. It is important to formulate open-ended focus group questions that are understandable and easy for participants to engage with. Setting up the focus group discussion guide, rules and other considerations will enhance the experience of the focus group for the participant and the researchers, as well as the quality of the data collected.
Qualitative Research – a practical guide for health and social care researchers and practitioners Copyright © 2023 by Tess Tsindos is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.
Focus groups bring individuals from the study population together in a specific setting in order to discuss an issue as a group. The discussion generates research data.
Focus groups typically have these features:
Researchers conduct several individual focus group meetings to produce a series. The number of focus groups in the series depends on the study’s aim, methods and resources.
Focus groups use a group setting to generate data different to that obtained in a one-to-one interview. The group context may allow for better examination of beliefs, attitudes, values, perspectives, knowledge and ideas.
Focus groups can be useful in action research methodology and other study designs which seek to empower research participants. Focus groups are also useful in multimethod studies utilising different forms of data collection.
Harrison, M., Ryan, T., Gardiner, C., & Jones, A. (2017). Psychological and emotional needs, assessment, and support post-stroke: a multi-perspective qualitative study . Top Stroke Rehabil, 24 (2), 119-125. doi: 10.1080/10749357.2016.1196908
Shilubane, H. N., Ruiter, R. A., Bos, A. E., Reddy, P. S., & van den Borne, B. (2014). High school students' knowledge and experience with a peer who committed or attempted suicide: a focus group study . BMC Public Health, 14 , 1081. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-1081
Wiles, J. L., Leibing, A., Guberman, N., Reeve, J., & Allen, R. E. (2012). The meaning of "aging in place" to older people . Gerontologist , 52(3), 357-366. doi: 10.1093/geront/gnr098
Kitzinger, J. (1995). Qualitative research: introducing focus groups . BMJ, 311 (7000), 299. doi: 10.1136/bmj.311.7000.299
Rice, P. L., & Ezzy, D. (1999). Qualitative research methods: a health focus . South Melbourne, Australia: Oxford University Press.
An official website of the United States government
The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.
The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.
Email citation, add to collections.
Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.
Affiliation.
This paper introduces focus group methodology, gives advice on group composition, running the groups, and analysing the results. Focus groups have advantages for researchers in the field of health and medicine: they do not discriminate against people who cannot read or write and they can encourage participation from people reluctant to be interviewed on their own or who feel they have nothing to say.
PubMed Disclaimer
Full text sources.
NCBI Literature Resources
MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer
The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.
Photo: http://bit.ly/2tqEBFw
Adapted from Qualitative Research Methods: A Data Collector's Field Guide
An official website of the United States government
The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.
The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.
Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .
This paper introduces focus group methodology, gives advice on group composition, running the groups, and analysing the results. Focus groups have advantages for researchers in the field of health and medicine: they do not discriminate against people who cannot read or write and they can encourage participation from people reluctant to be interviewed on their own or who feel they have nothing to say.
Full text is available as a scanned copy of the original print version. Get a printable copy (PDF file) of the complete article (1.1M), or click on a page image below to browse page by page. Links to PubMed are also available for Selected References .
p301-a on p.301
Click on the image to see a larger version.
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
What is a Focus Group | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples
Qualitative Research: Introducing focus groups
Zooming into Focus Groups: Strategies for Qualitative ...
The research focus group has many similarities with all these uses but is specifically tailored to a research (rather than applied) interest. The line between application and research use can be blurry, however. ... Qualitative Research 9(1):31-59. An examination of the efficacy and value of focus groups by comparing three separate projects ...
Interviews and focus groups in qualitative research
Robert C. Ford, PhD, Arizona State University, is Professor of Management Emeritus at the University of Central Florida and is a Visiting Professor at Rollins College.Besides publishing several books, he has published in both top research and practitioner journals. Bob was editor of The Academy of Management Executive and an active member of the Southern Management Association (SMA) which he ...
Focus Groups as Qualitative Research
Methodological Aspects of Focus Groups in Health Research
Definition: A focus group is a qualitative research method used to gather in-depth insights and opinions from a group of individuals about a particular product, service, concept, or idea. The focus group typically consists of 6-10 participants who are selected based on shared characteristics such as demographics, interests, or experiences.
This article discusses four challenges to conducting qualitative focus groups: (1) maximizing research budgets through innovative methodological approaches, (2) recruiting health-care professionals for qualitative health research, (3) conducting focus groups with health-care professionals across geographically dispersed areas, and (4) taking into consideration data richness when using ...
Chapter 14: Focus groups - Qualitative Research
A Qualitative Framework for Collecting and Analyzing Data ...
Methods of data collection in qualitative research
Focus groups use a group setting to generate data different to that obtained in a one-to-one interview. The group context may allow for better examination of beliefs, attitudes, values, perspectives, knowledge and ideas. Focus groups can be useful in action research methodology and other study designs which seek to empower research participants.
Publication Date: 2018. Focus Groups by Richard A. Krueger; Mary Anne Casey. ISBN: 9781483365244. Publication Date: 2014-08-14. Print book available through Interlibrary Loan. Focus groups as qualitative research by David L. Morgan. ISBN: 0761903429. Focus Groups in Social Research by Michael Bloor; Jane Frankland; Michelle Thomas; Kate Stewart.
The most common methods of data collection used in qualitative research are interviews and focus groups. While these are primarily conducted face-to-face, the ongoing evolution of digital technologies, such as video chat and online forums, has further transformed these methods of data collection. This paper therefore discusses interviews and ...
PDF | This paper introduces focus group methodology, gives advice on group composition, running the groups, and analysing the results. ... Qualitative Research: Introducing Focus Groups. August ...
Steps to conduct a focus group retrieved from (Focus Groups, 2017). Besides, Anderson et al. (1998) also recommended some tips for data collection in the focus group discussion. The researcher ...
Abstract. This paper introduces focus group methodology, gives advice on group composition, running the groups, and analysing the results. Focus groups have advantages for researchers in the field of health and medicine: they do not discriminate against people who cannot read or write and they can encourage participation from people reluctant ...
Consists of a small group usually made up of six to twelve people; Gathers opinions, beliefs, and attitudes about issues of interest Group is led through an open discussion by a skilled moderator
Morgan, D.L. (1997) Focus groups as qualitative research. London: Sage. Bryman, A. (2004) Social Research Methods, Oxford University Press: Oxford Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, Y. S. (1994) Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA Example 01 The template below is a discussion guide developed for a focus group to evaluate
Abstract. This paper introduces focus group methodology, gives advice on group composition, running the groups, and analysing the results. Focus groups have advantages for researchers in the field of health and medicine: they do not discriminate against people who cannot read or write and they can encourage participation from people reluctant ...
Greenbaum Thomas (1988), The Practical Handbook and Guide to Focus Group Research. Boston: D. C. Heath and Company. Google Scholar. Krueger Richard A. (1989), ... Morgan David L. (1988), Focus Groups as Qualitative Research, Sage University Paper Series on Qualitative Research Methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Google Scholar.
ive research: an update for the digital ageP. Gill*1 and J. Baillie2. Key pointsHighlights that qualitative research is used increasingly in dentistry. Intervi. ws and focus groups remain the most ...