Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

  • Knowledge Base

Methodology

  • What Is a Focus Group? | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples

What is a Focus Group | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples

Published on December 10, 2021 by Tegan George . Revised on June 22, 2023.

A focus group is a research method that brings together a small group of people to answer questions in a moderated setting. The group is chosen due to predefined demographic traits, and the questions are designed to shed light on a topic of interest.

What is a focus group

Table of contents

What is a focus group, step 1: choose your topic of interest, step 2: define your research scope and hypotheses, step 3: determine your focus group questions, step 4: select a moderator or co-moderator, step 5: recruit your participants, step 6: set up your focus group, step 7: host your focus group, step 8: analyze your data and report your results, advantages and disadvantages of focus groups, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about focus groups.

Focus groups are a type of qualitative research . Observations of the group’s dynamic, their answers to focus group questions, and even their body language can guide future research on consumer decisions, products and services, or controversial topics.

Focus groups are often used in marketing, library science, social science, and user research disciplines. They can provide more nuanced and natural feedback than individual interviews and are easier to organize than experiments or large-scale surveys .

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

  • Academic style
  • Vague sentences
  • Style consistency

See an example

qualitative research and focus groups

Focus groups are primarily considered a confirmatory research technique . In other words, their discussion-heavy setting is most useful for confirming or refuting preexisting beliefs. For this reason, they are great for conducting explanatory research , where you explore why something occurs when limited information is available.

A focus group may be a good choice for you if:

  • You’re interested in real-time, unfiltered responses on a given topic or in the dynamics of a discussion between participants
  • Your questions are rooted in feelings or perceptions , and cannot easily be answered with “yes” or “no”
  • You’re confident that a relatively small number of responses will answer your question
  • You’re seeking directional information that will help you uncover new questions or future research ideas
  • Structured interviews : The questions are predetermined in both topic and order.
  • Semi-structured interviews : A few questions are predetermined, but other questions aren’t planned.
  • Unstructured interviews : None of the questions are predetermined.

Differences between types of interviews

Make sure to choose the type of interview that suits your research best. This table shows the most important differences between the four types.

Structured interview Semi-structured interview Unstructured interview Focus group
Fixed questions
Fixed order of questions
Fixed number of questions
Option to ask additional questions

Topics favorable to focus groups

As a rule of thumb, research topics related to thoughts, beliefs, and feelings work well in focus groups. If you are seeking direction, explanation, or in-depth dialogue, a focus group could be a good fit.

However, if your questions are dichotomous or if you need to reach a large audience quickly, a survey may be a better option. If your question hinges upon behavior but you are worried about influencing responses, consider an observational study .

  • If you want to determine whether the student body would regularly consume vegan food, a survey would be a great way to gauge student preferences.

However, food is much more than just consumption and nourishment and can have emotional, cultural, and other implications on individuals.

  • If you’re interested in something less concrete, such as students’ perceptions of vegan food or the interplay between their choices at the dining hall and their feelings of homesickness or loneliness, perhaps a focus group would be best.

Once you have determined that a focus group is the right choice for your topic, you can start thinking about what you expect the group discussion to yield.

Perhaps literature already exists on your subject or a sufficiently similar topic that you can use as a starting point. If the topic isn’t well studied, use your instincts to determine what you think is most worthy of study.

Setting your scope will help you formulate intriguing hypotheses , set clear questions, and recruit the right participants.

  • Are you interested in a particular sector of the population, such as vegans or non-vegans?
  • Are you interested in including vegetarians in your analysis?
  • Perhaps not all students eat at the dining hall. Will your study exclude those who don’t?
  • Are you only interested in students who have strong opinions on the subject?

A benefit of focus groups is that your hypotheses can be open-ended. You can be open to a wide variety of opinions, which can lead to unexpected conclusions.

The questions that you ask your focus group are crucially important to your analysis. Take your time formulating them, paying special attention to phrasing. Be careful to avoid leading questions , which can affect your responses.

Overall, your focus group questions should be:

  • Open-ended and flexible
  • Impossible to answer with “yes” or “no” (questions that start with “why” or “how” are often best)
  • Unambiguous, getting straight to the point while still stimulating discussion
  • Unbiased and neutral

If you are discussing a controversial topic, be careful that your questions do not cause social desirability bias . Here, your respondents may lie about their true beliefs to mask any socially unacceptable or unpopular opinions. This and other demand characteristics can hurt your analysis and lead to several types of reseach bias in your results, particularly if your participants react in a different way once knowing they’re being observed. These include self-selection bias , the Hawthorne effect , the Pygmalion effect , and recall bias .

  • Engagement questions make your participants feel comfortable and at ease: “What is your favorite food at the dining hall?”
  • Exploration questions drill down to the focus of your analysis: “What pros and cons of offering vegan options do you see?”
  • Exit questions pick up on anything you may have previously missed in your discussion: “Is there anything you’d like to mention about vegan options in the dining hall that we haven’t discussed?”

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

It is important to have more than one moderator in the room. If you would like to take the lead asking questions, select a co-moderator who can coordinate the technology, take notes, and observe the behavior of the participants.

If your hypotheses have behavioral aspects, consider asking someone else to be lead moderator so that you are free to take a more observational role.

Depending on your topic, there are a few types of moderator roles that you can choose from.

  • The most common is the dual-moderator , introduced above.
  • Another common option is the dueling-moderator style . Here, you and your co-moderator take opposing sides on an issue to allow participants to see different perspectives and respond accordingly.

Depending on your research topic, there are a few sampling methods you can choose from to help you recruit and select participants.

  • Voluntary response sampling , such as posting a flyer on campus and finding participants based on responses
  • Convenience sampling of those who are most readily accessible to you, such as fellow students at your university
  • Stratified sampling of a particular age, race, ethnicity, gender identity, or other characteristic of interest to you
  • Judgment sampling of a specific set of participants that you already know you want to include

Beware of sampling bias and selection bias , which can occur when some members of the population are more likely to be included than others.

Number of participants

In most cases, one focus group will not be sufficient to answer your research question. It is likely that you will need to schedule three to four groups. A good rule of thumb is to stop when you’ve reached a saturation point (i.e., when you aren’t receiving new responses to your questions).

Most focus groups have 6–10 participants. It’s a good idea to over-recruit just in case someone doesn’t show up. As a rule of thumb, you shouldn’t have fewer than 6 or more than 12 participants, in order to get the most reliable results.

Lastly, it’s preferable for your participants not to know you or each other, as this can bias your results.

A focus group is not just a group of people coming together to discuss their opinions. While well-run focus groups have an enjoyable and relaxed atmosphere, they are backed up by rigorous methods to provide robust observations.

Confirm a time and date

Be sure to confirm a time and date with your participants well in advance. Focus groups usually meet for 45–90 minutes, but some can last longer. However, beware of the possibility of wandering attention spans. If you really think your session needs to last longer than 90 minutes, schedule a few breaks.

Confirm whether it will take place in person or online

You will also need to decide whether the group will meet in person or online. If you are hosting it in person, be sure to pick an appropriate location.

  • An uncomfortable or awkward location may affect the mood or level of participation of your group members.
  • Online sessions are convenient, as participants can join from home, but they can also lessen the connection between participants.

As a general rule, make sure you are in a noise-free environment that minimizes distractions and interruptions to your participants.

Consent and ethical considerations

It’s important to take into account ethical considerations and informed consent when conducting your research. Informed consent means that participants possess all the information they need to decide whether they want to participate in the research before it starts. This includes information about benefits, risks, funding, and institutional approval.

Participants should also sign a release form that states that they are comfortable with being audio- or video-recorded. While verbal consent may be sufficient, it is best to ask participants to sign a form.

A disadvantage of focus groups is that they are too small to provide true anonymity to participants. Make sure that your participants know this prior to participating.

There are a few things you can do to commit to keeping information private. You can secure confidentiality by removing all identifying information from your report or offer to pseudonymize the data later. Data pseudonymization entails replacing any identifying information about participants with pseudonymous or false identifiers.

Preparation prior to participation

If there is something you would like participants to read, study, or prepare beforehand, be sure to let them know well in advance. It’s also a good idea to call them the day before to ensure they will still be participating.

Consider conducting a tech check prior to the arrival of your participants, and note any environmental or external factors that could affect the mood of the group that day. Be sure that you are organized and ready, as a stressful atmosphere can be distracting and counterproductive.

Starting the focus group

Welcome individuals to the focus group by introducing the topic, yourself, and your co-moderator, and go over any ground rules or suggestions for a successful discussion. It’s important to make your participants feel at ease and forthcoming with their responses.

Consider starting out with an icebreaker, which will allow participants to relax and settle into the space a bit. Your icebreaker can be related to your study topic or not; it’s just an exercise to get participants talking.

Leading the discussion

Once you start asking your questions, try to keep response times equal between participants. Take note of the most and least talkative members of the group, as well as any participants with particularly strong or dominant personalities.

You can ask less talkative members questions directly to encourage them to participate or ask participants questions by name to even the playing field. Feel free to ask participants to elaborate on their answers or to give an example.

As a moderator, strive to remain neutral . Refrain from reacting to responses, and be aware of your body language (e.g., nodding, raising eyebrows) and the possibility for observer bias . Active listening skills, such as parroting back answers or asking for clarification, are good methods to encourage participation and signal that you’re listening.

Many focus groups offer a monetary incentive for participants. Depending on your research budget, this is a nice way to show appreciation for their time and commitment. To keep everyone feeling fresh, consider offering snacks or drinks as well.

After concluding your focus group, you and your co-moderator should debrief, recording initial impressions of the discussion as well as any highlights, issues, or immediate conclusions you’ve drawn.

The next step is to transcribe and clean your data . Assign each participant a number or pseudonym for organizational purposes. Transcribe the recordings and conduct content analysis to look for themes or categories of responses. The categories you choose can then form the basis for reporting your results.

Just like other research methods, focus groups come with advantages and disadvantages.

  • They are fairly straightforward to organize and results have strong face validity .
  • They are usually inexpensive, even if you compensate participant.
  • A focus group is much less time-consuming than a survey or experiment , and you get immediate results.
  • Focus group results are often more comprehensible and intuitive than raw data.

Disadvantages

  • It can be difficult to assemble a truly representative sample. Focus groups are generally not considered externally valid due to their small sample sizes.
  • Due to the small sample size, you cannot ensure the anonymity of respondents, which may influence their desire to speak freely.
  • Depth of analysis can be a concern, as it can be challenging to get honest opinions on controversial topics.
  • There is a lot of room for error in the data analysis and high potential for observer dependency in drawing conclusions. You have to be careful not to cherry-pick responses to fit a prior conclusion.

If you want to know more about statistics , methodology , or research bias , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

  • Student’s  t -distribution
  • Normal distribution
  • Null and Alternative Hypotheses
  • Chi square tests
  • Confidence interval
  • Quartiles & Quantiles
  • Cluster sampling
  • Stratified sampling
  • Data cleansing
  • Reproducibility vs Replicability
  • Peer review
  • Prospective cohort study

Research bias

  • Implicit bias
  • Cognitive bias
  • Placebo effect
  • Hawthorne effect
  • Hindsight bias
  • Affect heuristic
  • Social desirability bias

A focus group is a research method that brings together a small group of people to answer questions in a moderated setting. The group is chosen due to predefined demographic traits, and the questions are designed to shed light on a topic of interest. It is one of 4 types of interviews .

As a rule of thumb, questions related to thoughts, beliefs, and feelings work well in focus groups. Take your time formulating strong questions, paying special attention to phrasing. Be careful to avoid leading questions , which can bias your responses.

There are various approaches to qualitative data analysis , but they all share five steps in common:

  • Prepare and organize your data.
  • Review and explore your data.
  • Develop a data coding system.
  • Assign codes to the data.
  • Identify recurring themes.

The specifics of each step depend on the focus of the analysis. Some common approaches include textual analysis , thematic analysis , and discourse analysis .

Every dataset requires different techniques to clean dirty data , but you need to address these issues in a systematic way. You focus on finding and resolving data points that don’t agree or fit with the rest of your dataset.

These data might be missing values, outliers, duplicate values, incorrectly formatted, or irrelevant. You’ll start with screening and diagnosing your data. Then, you’ll often standardize and accept or remove data to make your dataset consistent and valid.

The four most common types of interviews are:

  • Structured interviews : The questions are predetermined in both topic and order. 
  • Focus group interviews : The questions are presented to a group instead of one individual.

It’s impossible to completely avoid observer bias in studies where data collection is done or recorded manually, but you can take steps to reduce this type of bias in your research .

Scope of research is determined at the beginning of your research process , prior to the data collection stage. Sometimes called “scope of study,” your scope delineates what will and will not be covered in your project. It helps you focus your work and your time, ensuring that you’ll be able to achieve your goals and outcomes.

Defining a scope can be very useful in any research project, from a research proposal to a thesis or dissertation . A scope is needed for all types of research: quantitative , qualitative , and mixed methods .

To define your scope of research, consider the following:

  • Budget constraints or any specifics of grant funding
  • Your proposed timeline and duration
  • Specifics about your population of study, your proposed sample size , and the research methodology you’ll pursue
  • Any inclusion and exclusion criteria
  • Any anticipated control , extraneous , or confounding variables that could bias your research if not accounted for properly.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

George, T. (2023, June 22). What is a Focus Group | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved September 9, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/focus-group/

Is this article helpful?

Tegan George

Tegan George

Other students also liked, what is qualitative research | methods & examples, explanatory research | definition, guide, & examples, data collection | definition, methods & examples, get unlimited documents corrected.

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

  • - Google Chrome

Intended for healthcare professionals

  • My email alerts
  • BMA member login
  • Username * Password * Forgot your log in details? Need to activate BMA Member Log In Log in via OpenAthens Log in via your institution

Home

Search form

  • Advanced search
  • Search responses
  • Search blogs
  • Qualitative Research:...

Qualitative Research: Introducing focus groups

  • Related content
  • Peer review
  • Jenny Kitzinger , research fellow a
  • a Glasgow University Media Group, Department of Sociology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8LF

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.

This is the fifth in a series of seven articles describing non-quantitative techniques and showing their value in health research

**FIGURE OMITTED**

Rationale and uses of focus groups

Focus groups are a form of group interview that capitalises on communication between research participants in order to generate data. Although group interviews are often used simply as a quick and convenient way to collect data from several people simultaneously, focus groups explicitly use group interaction as part of the method. This means that instead of the researcher asking each person to respond to a question in turn, people are encouraged to talk to one another: asking questions, exchanging anecdotes and commenting on each other's experiences and points of view. 1 The method is particularly useful for exploring people's knowledge and experiences and can be used to examine not only what people think but how they think and why they think that way.

Focus groups were originally used within communication studies to explore the effects of films and television programmes, 2 and are a popular method for assessing health education messages and examining public understandings of illness and of health behaviours. 3 4 5 6 7 They are widely used to examine people's experiences of disease and of health services. 8 9 and are an effective technique for exploring the attitudes and needs of staff. 10 11

The idea behind the focus group method is that group processes can help people to explore and …

Log in using your username and password

BMA Member Log In

If you have a subscription to The BMJ, log in:

  • Need to activate
  • Log in via institution
  • Log in via OpenAthens

Log in through your institution

Subscribe from £184 *.

Subscribe and get access to all BMJ articles, and much more.

* For online subscription

Access this article for 1 day for: £50 / $60/ €56 ( excludes VAT )

You can download a PDF version for your personal record.

Buy this article

qualitative research and focus groups

Logo for Open Educational Resources

Chapter 12. Focus Groups

Introduction.

Focus groups are a particular and special form of interviewing in which the interview asks focused questions of a group of persons, optimally between five and eight. This group can be close friends, family members, or complete strangers. They can have a lot in common or nothing in common. Unlike one-on-one interviews, which can probe deeply, focus group questions are narrowly tailored (“focused”) to a particular topic and issue and, with notable exceptions, operate at the shallow end of inquiry. For example, market researchers use focus groups to find out why groups of people choose one brand of product over another. Because focus groups are often used for commercial purposes, they sometimes have a bit of a stigma among researchers. This is unfortunate, as the focus group is a helpful addition to the qualitative researcher’s toolkit. Focus groups explicitly use group interaction to assist in the data collection. They are particularly useful as supplements to one-on-one interviews or in data triangulation. They are sometimes used to initiate areas of inquiry for later data collection methods. This chapter describes the main forms of focus groups, lays out some key differences among those forms, and provides guidance on how to manage focus group interviews.

qualitative research and focus groups

Focus Groups: What Are They and When to Use Them

As interviews, focus groups can be helpfully distinguished from one-on-one interviews. The purpose of conducting a focus group is not to expand the number of people one interviews: the focus group is a different entity entirely. The focus is on the group and its interactions and evaluations rather than on the individuals in that group. If you want to know how individuals understand their lives and their individual experiences, it is best to ask them individually. If you want to find out how a group forms a collective opinion about something (whether a product or an event or an experience), then conducting a focus group is preferable. The power of focus groups resides in their being both focused and oriented to the group . They are best used when you are interested in the shared meanings of a group or how people discuss a topic publicly or when you want to observe the social formation of evaluations. The interaction of the group members is an asset in this method of data collection. If your questions would not benefit from group interaction, this is a good indicator that you should probably use individual interviews (chapter 11). Avoid using focus groups when you are interested in personal information or strive to uncover deeply buried beliefs or personal narratives. In general, you want to avoid using focus groups when the subject matter is polarizing, as people are less likely to be honest in a group setting. There are a few exceptions, such as when you are conducting focus groups with people who are not strangers and/or you are attempting to probe deeply into group beliefs and evaluations. But caution is warranted in these cases. [1]

As with interviewing in general, there are many forms of focus groups. Focus groups are widely used by nonresearchers, so it is important to distinguish these uses from the research focus group. Businesses routinely employ marketing focus groups to test out products or campaigns. Jury consultants employ “mock” jury focus groups, testing out legal case strategies in advance of actual trials. Organizations of various kinds use focus group interviews for program evaluation (e.g., to gauge the effectiveness of a diversity training workshop). 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. To take the case of evaluating the effectiveness of a diversity training workshop, the same interviewer may be conducting focus group interviews both to provide specific actionable feedback for the workshop leaders (this is the application aspect) and to learn more about how people respond to diversity training (an interesting research question with theoretically generalizable results).

When forming a focus group, there are two different strategies for inclusion. Diversity focus groups include people with diverse perspectives and experiences. This helps the researcher identify commonalities across this diversity and/or note interactions across differences. What kind of diversity to capture depends on the research question, but care should be taken to ensure that those participating are not set up for attack from other participants. This is why many warn against diversity focus groups, especially around politically sensitive topics. The other strategy is to build a convergence focus group , which includes people with similar perspectives and experiences. These are particularly helpful for identifying shared patterns and group consensus. The important thing is to closely consider who will be invited to participate and what the composition of the group will be in advance. Some review of sampling techniques (see chapter 5) may be helpful here.

Moderating a focus group can be a challenge (more on this below). For this reason, confining your group to no more than eight participants is recommended. You probably want at least four persons to capture group interaction. Fewer than four participants can also make it more difficult for participants to remain (relatively) anonymous—there is less of a group in which to hide. There are exceptions to these recommendations. You might want to conduct a focus group with a naturally occurring group, as in the case of a family of three, a social club of ten, or a program of fifteen. When the persons know one another, the problems of too few for anonymity don’t apply, and although ten to fifteen can be unwieldy to manage, there are strategies to make this possible. If you really are interested in this group’s dynamic (not just a set of random strangers’ dynamic), then you will want to include all its members or as many as are willing and able to participate.

There are many benefits to conducting focus groups, the first of which is their interactivity. Participants can make comparisons, can elaborate on what has been voiced by another, and can even check one another, leading to real-time reevaluations. This last benefit is one reason they are sometimes employed specifically for consciousness raising or building group cohesion. This form of data collection has an activist application when done carefully and appropriately. It can be fun, especially for the participants. Additionally, what does not come up in a focus group, especially when expected by the researcher, can be very illuminating.

Many of these benefits do incur costs, however. The multiplicity of voices in a good focus group interview can be overwhelming both to moderate and later to transcribe. Because of the focused nature, deep probing is not possible (or desirable). You might only get superficial thinking or what people are willing to put out there publicly. If that is what you are interested in, good. If you want deeper insight, you probably will not get that here. Relatedly, extreme views are often suppressed, and marginal viewpoints are unspoken or, if spoken, derided. You will get the majority group consensus and very little of minority viewpoints. Because people will be engaged with one another, there is the possibility of cut-off sentences, making it even more likely to hear broad brush themes and not detailed specifics. There really is very little opportunity for specific follow-up questions to individuals. Reading over a transcript, you may be frustrated by avenues of inquiry that were foreclosed early.

Some people expect that conducting focus groups is an efficient form of data collection. After all, you get to hear from eight people instead of just one in the same amount of time! But this is a serious misunderstanding. What you hear in a focus group is one single group interview or discussion. It is not the same thing at all as conducting eight single one-hour interviews. Each focus group counts as “one.” Most likely, you will need to conduct several focus groups, and you can design these as comparisons to one another. For example, the American Sociological Association (ASA) Task Force on First-Generation and Working-Class Persons in Sociology began its study of the impact of class in sociology by conducting five separate focus groups with different groups of sociologists: graduate students, faculty (in general), community college faculty, faculty of color, and a racially diverse group of students and faculty. Even though the total number of participants was close to forty, the “number” of cases was five. It is highly recommended that when employing focus groups, you plan on composing more than one and at least three. This allows you to take note of and potentially discount findings from a group with idiosyncratic dynamics, such as where a particularly dominant personality silences all other voices. In other words, putting all your eggs into a single focus group basket is not a good idea.

How to Conduct a Focus Group Interview/Discussion

Advance preparations.

Once you have selected your focus groups and set a date and time, there are a few things you will want to plan out before meeting.

As with interviews, you begin by creating an interview (or discussion) guide. Where a good one-on-one interview guide should include ten to twelve main topics with possible prompts and follow-ups (see the example provided in chapter 11), the focus group guide should be more narrowly tailored to a single focus or topic area. For example, a focus might be “How students coped with online learning during the pandemic,” and a series of possible questions would be drafted that would help prod participants to think about and discuss this topic. These questions or discussion prompts can be creative and may include stimulus materials (watching a video or hearing a story) or posing hypotheticals. For example, Cech ( 2021 ) has a great hypothetical, asking what a fictional character should do: keep his boring job in computers or follow his passion and open a restaurant. You can ask a focus group this question and see what results—how the group comes to define a “good job,” what questions they ask about the hypothetical (How boring is his job really? Does he hate getting up in the morning, or is it more of an everyday tedium? What kind of financial support will he have if he quits? Does he even know how to run a restaurant?), and how they reach a consensus or create clear patterns of disagreement are all interesting findings that can be generated through this technique.

As with the above example (“What should Joe do?”), it is best to keep the questions you ask simple and easily understood by everyone. Thinking about the sequence of the questions/prompts is important, just as it is in conducting any interviews.

Avoid embarrassing questions. Always leave an out for the “I have a friend who X” response rather than pushing people to divulge personal information. Asking “How do you think students coped?” is better than “How did you cope?” Chances are, some participants will begin talking about themselves without you directly asking them to do so, but allowing impersonal responses here is good. The group itself will determine how deep and how personal it wants to go. This is not the time or place to push anyone out of their comfort zone!

Of course, people have different levels of comfort talking publicly about certain topics. You will have provided detailed information to your focus group participants beforehand and secured consent. But even so, the conversation may take a turn that makes someone uncomfortable. Be on the lookout for this, and remind everyone of their ability to opt out—to stay silent or to leave if necessary. Rather than call attention to anyone in this way, you also want to let everyone know they are free to walk around—to get up and get coffee (more on this below) or use the restroom or just step out of the room to take a call. Of course, you don’t really want anyone to do any of these things, and chances are everyone will stay seated during the hour, but you should leave this “out” for those who need it.

Have copies of consent forms and any supplemental questionnaire (e.g., demographic information) you are using prepared in advance. Ask a friend or colleague to assist you on the day of the focus group. They can be responsible for making sure the recording equipment is functioning and may even take some notes on body language while you are moderating the discussion. Order food (coffee or snacks) for the group. This is important! Having refreshments will be appreciated by your participants and really damps down the anxiety level. Bring name tags and pens. Find a quiet welcoming space to convene. Often this is a classroom where you move chairs into a circle, but public libraries often have meeting rooms that are ideal places for community members to meet. Be sure that the space allows for food.

Researcher Note

When I was designing my research plan for studying activist groups, I consulted one of the best qualitative researchers I knew, my late friend Raphael Ezekiel, author of The Racist Mind . He looked at my plan to hand people demographic surveys at the end of the meetings I planned to observe and said, “This methodology is missing one crucial thing.” “What?” I asked breathlessly, anticipating some technical insider tip. “Chocolate!” he answered. “They’ll be tired, ready to leave when you ask them to fill something out. Offer an incentive, and they will stick around.” It worked! As the meetings began to wind down, I would whip some bags of chocolate candies out of my bag. Everyone would stare, and I’d say they were my thank-you gift to anyone who filled out my survey. Once I learned to include some sugar-free candies for diabetics, my typical response rate was 100 percent. (And it gave me an additional class-culture data point by noticing who chose which brand; sure enough, Lindt balls went faster at majority professional-middle-class groups, and Hershey’s minibars went faster at majority working-class groups.)

—Betsy Leondar-Wright, author of Missing Class , coauthor of The Color of Wealth , associate professor of sociology at Lasell University, and coordinator of staffing at the Mission Project for Class Action

During the Focus Group

As people arrive, greet them warmly, and make sure you get a signed consent form (if not in advance). If you are using name tags, ask them to fill one out and wear it. Let them get food and find a seat and do a little chatting, as they might wish. Once seated, many focus group moderators begin with a relevant icebreaker. This could be simple introductions that have some meaning or connection to the focus. In the case of the ASA task force focus groups discussed above, we asked people to introduce themselves and where they were working/studying (“Hi, I’m Allison, and I am a professor at Oregon State University”). You will also want to introduce yourself and the study in simple terms. They’ve already read the consent form, but you would be surprised at how many people ignore the details there or don’t remember them. Briefly talking about the study and then letting people ask any follow-up questions lays a good foundation for a successful discussion, as it reminds everyone what the point of the event is.

Focus groups should convene for between forty-five and ninety minutes. Of course, you must tell the participants the time you have chosen in advance, and you must promptly end at the time allotted. Do not make anyone nervous by extending the time. Let them know at the outset that you will adhere to this timeline. This should reduce the nervous checking of phones and watches and wall clocks as the end time draws near.

Set ground rules and expectations for the group discussion. My preference is to begin with a general question and let whoever wants to answer it do so, but other moderators expect each person to answer most questions. Explain how much cross-talk you will permit (or encourage). Again, my preference is to allow the group to pick up the ball and run with it, so I will sometimes keep my head purposefully down so that they engage with one another rather than me, but I have seen other moderators take a much more engaged position. Just be clear at the outset about what your expectations are. You may or may not want to explain how the group should deal with those who would dominate the conversation. Sometimes, simply stating at the outset that all voices should be heard is enough to create a more egalitarian discourse. Other times, you will have to actively step in to manage (moderate) the exchange to allow more voices to be heard. Finally, let people know they are free to get up to get more coffee or leave the room as they need (if you are OK with this). You may ask people to refrain from using their phones during the duration of the discussion. That is up to you too.

Either before or after the introductions (your call), begin recording the discussion with their collective permission and knowledge . If you have brought a friend or colleague to assist you (as you should), have them attend to the recording. Explain the role of your colleague to the group (e.g., they will monitor the recording and will take short notes throughout to help you when you read the transcript later; they will be a silent observer).

Once the focus group gets going, it may be difficult to keep up. You will need to make a lot of quick decisions during the discussion about whether to intervene or let it go unguided. Only you really care about the research question or topic, so only you will really know when the discussion is truly off topic. However you handle this, keep your “participation” to a minimum. According to Lune and Berg ( 2018:95 ), the moderator’s voice should show up in the transcript no more than 10 percent of the time. By the way, you should also ask your research assistant to take special note of the “intensity” of the conversation, as this may be lost in a transcript. If there are people looking overly excited or tapping their feet with impatience or nodding their heads in unison, you want some record of this for future analysis.

I’m not sure why this stuck with me, but I thought it would be interesting to share. When I was reviewing my plan for conducting focus groups with one of my committee members, he suggested that I give the participants their gift cards first. The incentive for participating in the study was a gift card of their choice, and typical processes dictate that participants must complete the study in order to receive their gift card. However, my committee member (who is Native himself) suggested I give it at the beginning. As a qualitative researcher, you build trust with the people you engage with. You are asking them to share their stories with you, their intimate moments, their vulnerabilities, their time. Not to mention that Native people are familiar with being academia’s subjects of interest with little to no benefit to be returned to them. To show my appreciation, one of the things I could do was to give their gifts at the beginning, regardless of whether or not they completed participating.

—Susanna Y. Park, PhD, mixed-methods researcher in public health and author of “How Native Women Seek Support as Survivors of Intimate Partner Violence: A Mixed-Methods Study”

After the Focus Group

Your “data” will be either fieldnotes taken during the focus group or, more desirably, transcripts of the recorded exchange. If you do not have permission to record the focus group discussion, make sure you take very clear notes during the exchange and then spend a few hours afterward filling them in as much as possible, creating a rich memo to yourself about what you saw and heard and experienced, including any notes about body language and interactions. Ideally, however, you will have recorded the discussion. It is still a good idea to spend some time immediately after the conclusion of the discussion to write a memo to yourself with all the things that may not make it into the written record (e.g., body language and interactions). This is also a good time to journal about or create a memo with your initial researcher reactions to what you saw, noting anything of particular interest that you want to come back to later on (e.g., “It was interesting that no one thought Joe should quit his job, but in the other focus group, half of the group did. I wonder if this has something to do with the fact that all the participants were first-generation college students. I should pay attention to class background here.”).

Please thank each of your participants in a follow-up email or text. Let them know you appreciated their time and invite follow-up questions or comments.

One of the difficult things about focus group transcripts is keeping speakers distinct. Eventually, you are going to be using pseudonyms for any publication, but for now, you probably want to know who said what. You can assign speaker numbers (“Speaker 1,” “Speaker 2”) and connect those identifications with particular demographic information in a separate document. Remember to clearly separate actual identifications (as with consent forms) to prevent breaches of anonymity. If you cannot identify a speaker when transcribing, you can write, “Unidentified Speaker.” Once you have your transcript(s) and memos and fieldnotes, you can begin analyzing the data (chapters 18 and 19).

Advanced: Focus Groups on Sensitive Topics

Throughout this chapter, I have recommended against raising sensitive topics in focus group discussions. As an introvert myself, I find the idea of discussing personal topics in a group disturbing, and I tend to avoid conducting these kinds of focus groups. And yet I have actually participated in focus groups that do discuss personal information and consequently have been of great value to me as a participant (and researcher) because of this. There are even some researchers who believe this is the best use of focus groups ( de Oliveira 2011 ). For example, Jordan et al. ( 2007 ) argue that focus groups should be considered most useful for illuminating locally sanctioned ways of talking about sensitive issues. So although I do not recommend the beginning qualitative researcher dive into deep waters before they can swim, this section will provide some guidelines for conducting focus groups on sensitive topics. To my mind, these are a minimum set of guidelines to follow when dealing with sensitive topics.

First, be transparent about the place of sensitive topics in your focus group. If the whole point of your focus group is to discuss something sensitive, such as how women gain support after traumatic sexual assault events, make this abundantly clear in your consent form and recruiting materials. It is never appropriate to blindside participants with sensitive or threatening topics .

Second, create a confidentiality form (figure 12.2) for each participant to sign. These forms carry no legal weight, but they do create an expectation of confidentiality for group members.

In order to respect the privacy of all participants in [insert name of study here], all parties are asked to read and sign the statement below. If you have any reason not to sign, please discuss this with [insert your name], the researcher of this study, I, ________________________, agree to maintain the confidentiality of the information discussed by all participants and researchers during the focus group discussion.

Signature: _____________________________ Date: _____________________

Researcher’s Signature:___________________ Date:______________________

Figure 12.2 Confidentiality Agreement of Focus Group Participants

Third, provide abundant space for opting out of the discussion. Participants are, of course, always permitted to refrain from answering a question or to ask for the recording to be stopped. It is important that focus group members know they have these rights during the group discussion as well. And if you see a person who is looking uncomfortable or like they want to hide, you need to step in affirmatively and remind everyone of these rights.

Finally, if things go “off the rails,” permit yourself the ability to end the focus group. Debrief with each member as necessary.

Further Readings

Barbour, Rosaline. 2018. Doing Focus Groups . 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Written by a medical sociologist based in the UK, this is a good how-to guide for conducting focus groups.

Gibson, Faith. 2007. “Conducting Focus Groups with Children and Young People: Strategies for Success.” Journal of Research in Nursing 12(5):473–483. As the title suggests, this article discusses both methodological and practical concerns when conducting focus groups with children and young people and offers some tips and strategies for doing so effectively.

Hopkins, Peter E. 2007. “Thinking Critically and Creatively about Focus Groups.” Area 39(4):528–535. Written from the perspective of critical/human geography, Hopkins draws on examples from his own work conducting focus groups with Muslim men. Useful for thinking about positionality.

Jordan, Joanne, Una Lynch, Marianne Moutray, Marie-Therese O’Hagan, Jean Orr, Sandra Peake, and John Power. 2007. “Using Focus Groups to Research Sensitive Issues: Insights from Group Interviews on Nursing in the Northern Ireland ‘Troubles.’” International Journal of Qualitative Methods 6(4), 1–19. A great example of using focus groups productively around emotional or sensitive topics. The authors suggest that focus groups should be considered most useful for illuminating locally sanctioned ways of talking about sensitive issues.

Merton, Robert K., Marjorie Fiske, and Patricia L. Kendall. 1956. The Focused Interview: A Manual of Problems and Procedures . New York: Free Press. This is one of the first classic texts on conducting interviews, including an entire chapter devoted to the “group interview” (chapter 6).

Morgan, David L. 1986. “Focus Groups.” Annual Review of Sociology 22:129–152. An excellent sociological review of the use of focus groups, comparing and contrasting to both surveys and interviews, with some suggestions for improving their use and developing greater rigor when utilizing them.

de Oliveira, Dorca Lucia. 2011. “The Use of Focus Groups to Investigate Sensitive Topics: An Example Taken from Research on Adolescent Girls’ Perceptions about Sexual Risks.” Cien Saude Colet 16(7):3093–3102. Another example of discussing sensitive topics in focus groups. Here, the author explores using focus groups with teenage girls to discuss AIDS, risk, and sexuality as a matter of public health interest.

Peek, Lori, and Alice Fothergill. 2009. “Using Focus Groups: Lessons from Studying Daycare Centers, 9/11, and Hurricane Katrina.” Qualitative Research 9(1):31–59. An examination of the efficacy and value of focus groups by comparing three separate projects: a study of teachers, parents, and children at two urban daycare centers; a study of the responses of second-generation Muslim Americans to the events of September 11; and a collaborative project on the experiences of children and youth following Hurricane Katrina. Throughout, the authors stress the strength of focus groups with marginalized, stigmatized, or vulnerable individuals.

Wilson, Valerie. 1997. “Focus Groups: A Useful Qualitative Method for Educational Research?” British Educational Research Journal 23(2):209–224. A basic description of how focus groups work using an example from a study intended to inform initiatives in health education and promotion in Scotland.

  • Note that I have included a few examples of conducting focus groups with sensitive issues in the “ Further Readings ” section and have included an “ Advanced: Focus Groups on Sensitive Topics ” section on this area. ↵

A focus group interview is an interview with a small group of people on a specific topic.  “The power of focus groups resides in their being focused” (Patton 2002:388).  These are sometimes framed as “discussions” rather than interviews, with a discussion “moderator.”  Alternatively, the focus group is “a form of data collection whereby the researcher convenes a small group of people having similar attributes, experiences, or ‘focus’ and leads the group in a nondirective manner.  The objective is to surface the perspectives of the people in the group with as minimal influence by the researcher as possible” (Yin 2016:336).  See also diversity focus group and convergence focus group.

A form of focus group construction in which people with diverse perspectives and experiences are chosen for inclusion.  This helps the researcher identify commonalities across this diversity and/or note interactions across differences.  Contrast with a convergence focus group

A form of focus group construction in which people with similar perspectives and experiences are included.  These are particularly helpful for identifying shared patterns and group consensus.  Contrast with a diversity focus group .

Introduction to Qualitative Research Methods Copyright © 2023 by Allison Hurst is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Logo for Open Educational Resources Collective

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Chapter 14: Focus groups

Tess Tsindos

Learning Outcomes

Upon completion of this chapter, you should be able to:

  • Assess when to use focus groups in qualitative research.
  • Develop questions for a focus group guide.
  • Understand how to conduct a focus group.

What are focus groups?

Focus groups are convened to discuss an issue of mutual concern. The purpose of a focus group is to explore the experiences, understandings, opinions or motivations of research participants. 1 While individual interviews explore the experiences of (usually) one participant (see Chapter 13 ), focus groups are conducted with three or more people who share an experience or concern. The conversation between participants in a focus group is mediated and facilitated by the researcher. Focus groups can be used when little is known about the participants or a topic (an exploratory process), when testing new ideas (e.g. acceptability of a program or intervention) or when undertaking an evaluation of a service or product.

The focus of the discussion is on the interaction between participants in the group; some participants may have similar experiences or views, while others have different experiences. The group dynamic is important and therefore it is important that participants lead the discussion and are encouraged to talk through their similarities and differences, so that the researcher might gain a well-rounded perspective and account of the topic. A group might be homogeneous, get along well and share similar experiences. Or the group might be heterogeneous and have differing opinions and experiences. Participants might know each other because they have been recruited from the same program or community, or they could be total strangers. All these elements contribute to the focus of discussion, and to the group dynamic; that is, the interactivity of the focus group.

How many focus group members should there be?

Ideally, a focus group should include 6–10 participants 2 and the conversation should be moderated by the researcher, using a focus group discussion guide. However, the number of participants may vary according to the topic and the number of participants able to be recruited. The data collected from focus groups tends to differ from interview data because people respond and compare their own experiences with those of others in the group. Therefore, the number and composition of group members influence the data gathered.

Having too many people in a group means that discussion can become chaotic and it is unlikely that everyone in the group will have a say. Having too few people means that there may not be sufficient interaction to enable to capture a group perspective. Focus groups have been conducted with as few as two people: in a focus group conducted by one of the authors of this chapter, several participants had been invited, but only two attended. Since participants were difficult to recruit from the target population, it was not feasible to cancel the focus group. The topic was recovery after percutaneous coronary intervention (a cardiac procedure). The focus group discussion developed into an intimate conversation between two older men about their challenges in physical recovery and the psychological effects of not being able to fulfil a traditional male role. The small group size was serendipitous, in that the researcher may not have been able to collect such rich data had the group been larger. 3

The researcher (s)

It is common to have two researchers present in a focus group. One facilitates the group, while the other observes and records the session, and takes notes about who said what, body language and other observable information that contributes to the context of the data being collected. The observer should be as unobtrusive as possible and not participate in the group discussion. Similar to interviews, focus groups are audio-recorded so the conversation can be transcribed for analysis.  The researcher is encouraged to build rapport with focus group participants, which is aided by having a friendly and approachable manner. The focus group method enables the facilitator to probe ideas as they arise and to check their understanding of participants’ responses. This active facilitation enhances the robustness of the data collected. The quality of the data collected will depend greatly on how effective the researcher is at facilitating the group, and thus good interpersonal skills are essential. Conducting effective focus group discussions comes with practice and experience.

How long should a focus group be?

There are no strict rules about how long a focus group should be. Different groups will likely run for different amounts of time because this depends on the research question/s and the types of group members. For example, a group of people who know each other and have a common experience may need no longer than 45 minutes, whereas a group of strangers with different experiences may need up to 2 hours. Additionally, the number of people in the focus group will affect the amount of time needed. A focus group discussion with 6 participants may likely be shorter than a focus group with 12 participants.

Designing the focus group guide

Before the commencement of a focus group, the researchers need to develop a focus group discussion guide, which is similar to an interview guide. Both aim to explore the experiences, understandings, opinions and motivations of participants. If the study’s research methods include interviews and focus groups, the questions will be very similar. T he difference is that the focus group discussion guide do es not typically ask questions to elicit individual storytelling, but rather to ask questions to invite discussion of shared experiences , in which participants confirm or contrast each others ’ views . If focus groups are the sole data collection method, the researcher may consult existing literature, speak to experts, including people with lived experience about the focus of the research, and draw on their knowledge so that the topics and questions can be mapped to the research question/s.

The focus group guide should be developed well in advance of commencing data collection. This provides time for the facilitator and the observer to explore together the language and clarity of questions, the order and flow of the guide, and whether the instructions for participants are clear and comprehensive. To facilitate free-flowing responses, it is important to use open-ended questions that encourage participants to be expansive in their responses. Examples of open-ended question formats include those that start with ‘who’, ‘how’ ‘tell me more about’ and ‘where’.

Pilot interview/s enable the researchers to test the interview guide. However, they are often not conducted because it can be difficult to recruit enough relevant participants. Instead, focus group questions might be reviewed by other members of the research team for clarity and comprehensiveness. The study design will determine the number of questions asked and the extent of the focus group guide. The target population may also determine the extent of the focus group guide; for example, clinicians who are time-poor may need shorter focus groups while patient populations may be interested in exploring their experiences in detail and at length.

Following is a template that can be adapted for the introduction of a focus group. Table 14.1 offers example questions for a focus group discussion guide.

Focus group introduction

‘Hi everyone. My name is [insert name] and I’m from [insert organisation]. I am conducting [describe study]. Thank you for agreeing to be part of this focus group today. You were invited to participate in this focus group because [include reason]. Today we would like to discuss [outline topics]. We anticipate that the session will go for approximately [insert expected time]. Before we get started, I’d like to explain how we would like to structure the discussion. 1. We would like to hear from everyone present. This may mean that I will call on you by name to respond to a question. I may also indicate to you when it’s time to wrap up your thoughts so we can move on to another person or topic. 2. Feel free to respond directly to each other. I’m here to facilitate the discussion, but you are encouraged to respond to the other participants in this group. 3. We are recording the session today. This will ensure that we capture everything discussed. Your names will not be used in the reporting of this data and we will be using pseudonyms or codes instead when writing up results. 4. Please be respectful of what other participants share. Due to the nature of focus groups, we cannot ensure confidentiality, but we do ask that you do not repeat what is discussed in this group to people who were not present. You should feel free to not answer a question if you don’t feel comfortable answering. Do you have any questions before we begin?”

Table 14.1. Focus group guide: Example questions for a descriptive study

In your experience, how prevalent is plagiarism?

 

Over the time you have taught at university, do you think the rates of plagiarism have increased, decreased or remained the same – why do you think that is?

What do you think students understand plagiarism to be?

 

What do you think influences a student’s understanding of plagiarism? (e.g. cultural conceptions, high school curriculum)

What do you think are the factors that contribute to students plagiarising without intention to do so?

 

What barriers to plagiarism are you aware of?

How effective do you think these barriers are?

What process do you use to identify plagiarism?

What are the barriers to you investigating further?

How much time do you spend following up cases of suspected plagiarism?

How could you be supported to help identify and follow up on cases of suspected plagiarism?

 

How have students responded when you have discussed suspected plagiarism in their work?

 

In your opinion, how does plagiarism affect student wellbeing?

 

How does the process of identifying plagiarism affect your wellbeing?

 

An earlier variation of this table has appeared in the Supplementary material for the article Why do students plagiarise? Informing higher education teaching and learning policy and practice . 4

Setting up the f ocus group

In the past, most focus groups were conducted in person. Emerging technologies have enabled the conduct of focus groups online, using teleconferencing and videoconferencing platforms. While it is more challenging to conduct a focus group online – primarily because participants’ body language is often not seen – it can be a very useful method of collecting data. The benefits include low cost, greater access to participants in different locations and time efficiencies. 5 Participants who are less inclined to participate verbally are able to use ‘chat’ functions to contribute their comments. Whether the focus group is face-to-face or online, the facilitator will need to help participants feel as comfortable as possible and encourage discussion.

Focus group activities

Focus groups may incorporate activities in addition to, or to aid discussion; for example, sorting and ranking activities to prioritise topics for discussion in the focus group; or a River of Life 6 activity (see Chapter 18 ).

C onsiderations for the conduct of focus groups

C onfidentiality should be addressed explicitly; for example, using the Chatham House rule, which sets out expectations about repeating what is said in a meeting without revealing the identities of who said it or other participants. 7  It is advisable to provide each participant with an explanatory statement to read, which states that confidentiality is essential to the focus group discussions.

Expectations need to be communicated in advance. Many of the tips for interviews in Chapter 13 apply also to focus groups, but it is important to communicate the researchers’ and the group’s expectations upfront. Some, but not all, of the expectations of focus groups are included in Table 14.2. The facilitator should explain these expectations before the focus group starts. Table 14.3 provides examples of studies using focus groups for data collection.

Table 14.2. Dos and don’ts of conducting focus groups

Ideas are encouraged; all ideas are valid.

React to perspectives, experiences or ideas that
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.

After the f ocus g roup

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.

Table 14.3. Examples of focus groups

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, and

3. 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 groups

3 groups of 6
and 1 group of 5
6 focus groups

3–7 in each group (total of 28)
5 focus groups

7–9 in each group (total 41)
26 focus groups

6–12 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 making

2. Changes in meaning making

3. 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 legacy

3. Loss of meaning through experiences, social roles, relationships, uncertainty about the future

4. Searching for meaning

5. Meaninglessness: isolation, threats to identity, physical limitations, confrontation with death, fear of passing cancer to offspring, loss of freedom

1. Impact on relatives

2. Dependent of care

3. Social support

4. Communication health care provider to patient

5. Take self-initiative to receive medical care

6. Communication: health care providers to relatives, between medical staff, hospital to GP and to authorities, authorities to patient

7. Media attention

8. Practical problems
1. Risk factor' versus ‘disease’: preference for risk factor

2. The dilemma of diagnosis: awareness of downsides, belief in early diagnosis

3. Medications and prevention: underwhelmed by drugs, interest in other strategies

4. Overdiagnosis: complexities in communicating counter-intuitive concept

5. Overdiagnosis in osteoporosis: changing perceptions after new information

6. 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.

  • Gill P, Stewart K, Treasure E et al . Methods of data collection in qualitative research: interviews and focus groups. Br Dent J . 2008;204(6):291-295. doi:10.1038/bdj.2008.192
  • Gill, P, Baillie, J. Interviews and focus groups in qualitative research: an update for the digital age. Br Dent J . 2018;225:668-672. doi:10.1038/sj.bdj.2018.815
  • Soh S-E, Barker AL, Ayton DR et al. What matters most to patients following percutaneous coronary interventions? A new patient-reported outcome measure developed using Rasch analysis. PLoS ONE . 2019;14(9):e0222185. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222185
  • Ayton D, Hillman C, Hatzikiriakidis K, et al. Why do students plagiarise? Informing higher education teaching and learning policy and practice. Stud High Educ . Sep 2 2022;47(9):1921-1934. doi:10.1080/03075079.2021.1985103
  • Abrams K, Gaiser T. Online focus groups. In: Field N, Lee R, Blank G, eds. The Sage Handbook of Online Research Methods . Sage Publications, 2016;435–450.
  • Moussa Z. Rivers of life. Participatory Learning and Action. Community-based adaptation to climate change, 2009. The International Institute for Environment and Development. Accessed March 24, 2023. https://www.iied.org/g02828
  • The Chatham House rule. Chatham House, The Royal Institute of International Affairs, 2023. Accessed March 24, 2023. https://www.chathamhouse.org/about-us/chatham-house-rule#:~:text=The%20Rule%20reads%20as%20follows,other%20participant%2C%20may%20be%20revealed .
  • Sim J, Waterfield J. Focus group methodology: some ethical challenges. Qual Quant. 2019;53:3003-3022. doi/10.1007/s11135-019-00914-5
  • van der Spek N, Vos J, van Uden-Kraan CF et al. Meaning making in cancer survivors: a focus group study. P LoS ONE . 2013;8(9):e76089. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0076089
  • Visser E, Den Oudsten BL, Traa MJ et al . Patients’ experiences and wellbeing after injury: a focus group study. PLoS ONE . 2021;1 6(1):e0245198. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245198
  • Moynihan R, Sims R, Hersch J et al . Communicating about overdiagnosis: learning from community focus groups on osteoporosis. PLoS ONE . 2017;12(2):e0170142. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0170142
  • Sabet Sarvestani A, Bufumbo L, Geiger JD et al. . Traditional male circumcision in Uganda: a qualitative focus group discussion analysis. PLoS ONE . 2012;7(10):e45316. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0045316

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.

Share This Book

Qualitative study design: Focus groups

  • Qualitative study design
  • Phenomenology
  • Grounded theory
  • Ethnography
  • Narrative inquiry
  • Action research
  • Case Studies
  • Field research
  • Focus groups
  • Observation
  • Surveys & questionnaires
  • Study Designs Home

Focus Groups

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:

  • Four to ten participants meeting for up to two hours
  • A facilitator or facilitators to guide discussion using open-ended questions
  • An emphasis on the group talking among itself rather than to the facilitator
  • Discussion is recorded and then transcribed for analysis by researchers

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.

  • Quick way to collect data from several people 
  • Produces data unique to group setting (e.g. teasing, arguing and non-verbal behaviour) due to the interaction between participants. This is a unique feature of focus groups. 
  • Unlike written questionnaires, focus groups don’t rely on participant literacy to generate data 
  • Can encourage participation from marginalised groups 
  • Can facilitate discussion of stigmatised or counter-cultural topics due to feeling of mutual support among focus group participants 
  • Can generate more critical comments than individual interviews. This is valuable for research aimed at improving products or services. 
  • Can be used to validate findings from quantitative research methods by providing a deeper understanding that statistics cannot.

Limitations

  • Individual perspectives that dissent from the focus group’s majority may remain hidden due to overriding behavioural or cultural norms, or a desire to be seen as conforming. 
  • Confidentiality of individual responses is compromised due to the existence of the group 
  • Only applicable when the population of interest has shared social and cultural experience or share common areas of concern. 
  • Group discussion does not provide enough depth for researchers to understand experiences, especially in comparison to in-depth interviews. 
  • Data is representative of the range of views in a population, not the prevalence of such views. 
  • The facilitator has a strong effect on the focus groups behaviour and can therefore influence the extent to which issues or views are explored. 
  • Data analysis is usually very time consuming due to the quantity produced.

Example questions

  • What are the experiences, needs and wishes of mothers who received midwifery care at tertiary hospitals in Victoria, Australia?
  • How useful is the patient perspective for the creation of an information information booklet for patients with liver cancer?
  • What factors influence nursing students' development of end-of-life communication skills?

Example studies

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.  

  • << Previous: Methods
  • Next: Observation >>
  • Last Updated: Jul 3, 2024 11:46 AM
  • URL: https://deakin.libguides.com/qualitative-study-designs

U.S. flag

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.

  • Publications
  • Account settings
  • My Bibliography
  • Collections
  • Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

  • Create a new collection
  • Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

  • Search in PubMed
  • Search in NLM Catalog
  • Add to Search

Qualitative research. Introducing focus groups

Affiliation.

  • 1 Department of Sociology, University of Glasgow.
  • PMID: 7633241
  • PMCID: PMC2550365
  • DOI: 10.1136/bmj.311.7000.299

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

Similar articles

  • Focus groups. Powell RA, Single HM. Powell RA, et al. Int J Qual Health Care. 1996 Oct;8(5):499-504. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/8.5.499. Int J Qual Health Care. 1996. PMID: 9117204 Review.
  • Using focus groups in disability research. Kroll T, Barbour R, Harris J. Kroll T, et al. Qual Health Res. 2007 May;17(5):690-8. doi: 10.1177/1049732307301488. Qual Health Res. 2007. PMID: 17478650
  • The appropriateness and use of focus group methodology across international mental health communities. Schilder K, Tomov T, Mladenova M, Mayeya J, Jenkins R, Gulbinat W, Manderscheid R, Baingana F, Whiteford H, Khandelval S, Minoletti A, Mubbashar MH, Srinivasa Murthy R, Parameshvara Deva M, Baba A, Townsend C, Sakuta T. Schilder K, et al. Int Rev Psychiatry. 2004 Feb-May;16(1-2):24-30. doi: 10.1080/09540260310001635078. Int Rev Psychiatry. 2004. PMID: 15276935
  • Focus group interviews in health-care research. Clarke A. Clarke A. Prof Nurse. 1999 Mar;14(6):395-7. Prof Nurse. 1999. PMID: 10205536 Review.
  • User focus groups and Best Value in services for people with learning disabilities. Cambridge P, McCarthy M. Cambridge P, et al. Health Soc Care Community. 2001 Nov;9(6):476-89. doi: 10.1046/j.0966-0410.2001.00328.x. Health Soc Care Community. 2001. PMID: 11846827
  • A randomised study to evaluate the potential added value of shared meditation involving people with cancer, health professionals and third persons compared to meditation conducted with patients only: design of the Implic-2 protocol. Prevost V, Tran T, Leconte A, Lequesne J, Fernette M, Segura C, Chevigné S, Gouriot M, Clarisse B. Prevost V, et al. BMC Cancer. 2024 Sep 4;24(1):1097. doi: 10.1186/s12885-024-12521-1. BMC Cancer. 2024. PMID: 39232668 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
  • Insights gained from a cultural adaptation of preschool promoting alternative thinking strategies©: the importance of teachers' cultures as an implementation driver. Norman Å, Sedem M, Ferrer-Wreder L, Eninger L, Hau HG. Norman Å, et al. Front Psychol. 2024 Aug 7;15:1425936. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1425936. eCollection 2024. Front Psychol. 2024. PMID: 39171241 Free PMC article.
  • A research on copyright issues impacting artists emotional states in the framework of artificial intelligence. Kambur H, Dolunay A. Kambur H, et al. Front Psychol. 2024 Aug 7;15:1409646. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1409646. eCollection 2024. Front Psychol. 2024. PMID: 39171225 Free PMC article.
  • Who Does What in Hand Osteoarthritis Care? A Qualitative Study of Boundary Work Between Rheumatologists and Occupational Therapists in Norway. Zink S, Kjeken I, Feiring M. Zink S, et al. J Multidiscip Healthc. 2024 Aug 15;17:3995-4009. doi: 10.2147/JMDH.S467297. eCollection 2024. J Multidiscip Healthc. 2024. PMID: 39165255 Free PMC article.
  • Patient perceptions of success in obesity treatment: An IMI2 SOPHIA study. Farrell E, Nadglowski J, Hollmann E, le Roux CW, McGillicuddy D. Farrell E, et al. Obes Sci Pract. 2024 Aug 17;10(4):e70001. doi: 10.1002/osp4.70001. eCollection 2024 Aug. Obes Sci Pract. 2024. PMID: 39157779 Free PMC article.
  • Stud Fam Plann. 1990 Mar-Apr;21(2):92-103 - PubMed
  • Nurs Stand. 1991 May 8-14;5(33):32-6 - PubMed
  • Stud Fam Plann. 1992 May-Jun;23(3):199-210 - PubMed
  • J Fam Pract. 1993 Feb;36(2):185-91 - PubMed
  • BMJ. 1995 Jul 22;311(6999):251-3 - PubMed
  • Search in MeSH

Related information

  • Cited in Books

LinkOut - more resources

Full text sources.

  • Europe PubMed Central
  • Ovid Technologies, Inc.
  • PubMed Central
  • Citation Manager

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.

Duke University Libraries

Qualitative Research: Focus Groups

  • Getting Started

Focus Groups

  • Observation
  • Case Studies
  • Data Collection
  • Cleaning Text
  • Analysis Tools
  • Institutional Review

qualitative research and focus groups

Photo: http://bit.ly/2tqEBFw

What is a focus group?

  • 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
  • Allows testing of assumptions
  • Encourages discussion about a particular topic

Tips for Effective Moderating

  • Keep track of which questions have and have not been asked and answered
  • Know how to phrase questions that encourage participants to provide elaborate, detailed (rather than brief) responses
  • Ask questions that elicit participant’s own views and experiences as opposed to reflecting the convictions of the moderator
  • Ask one question at a time, verifying unclear responses,
  • Use follow-ups and probes
  • Remain neutral by asking open-ended questions and avoiding leading questions

Adapted from Qualitative Research Methods: A Data Collector's Field Guide

Suggested Readings

Cover Art

  • U.S. Dept. of Commerce. (2009). Introduction to conducting focus groups (Open Access)
  • << Previous: Interviews
  • Next: Observation >>
  • Last Updated: Mar 1, 2024 10:13 AM
  • URL: https://guides.library.duke.edu/qualitative-research

Duke University Libraries

Services for...

  • Faculty & Instructors
  • Graduate Students
  • Undergraduate Students
  • International Students
  • Patrons with Disabilities

Twitter

  • Harmful Language Statement
  • Re-use & Attribution / Privacy
  • Support the Libraries

Creative Commons License

U.S. flag

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.

  • Publications
  • Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

  • Advanced Search
  • Journal List
  • v.311(7000); 1995 Jul 29

Qualitative research. Introducing focus groups.

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 .

icon of scanned page 299

Images in this article

p301-a on p.301

Click on the image to see a larger version.

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  • Duke SS, Gordon-Sosby K, Reynolds KD, Gram IT. A study of breast cancer detection practices and beliefs in black women attending public health clinics. Health Educ Res. 1994 Sep; 9 (3):331–342. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Murray SA, Tapson J, Turnbull L, McCallum J, Little A. Listening to local voices: adapting rapid appraisal to assess health and social needs in general practice. BMJ. 1994 Mar 12; 308 (6930):698–700. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Gregory S, McKie L. The smear test: women's views. Nurs Stand. 1991 May 8; 5 (33):32–36. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Brown JB, Lent B, Sas G. Identifying and treating wife abuse. J Fam Pract. 1993 Feb; 36 (2):185–191. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Zimmerman M, Haffey J, Crane E, Szumowski D, Alvarez F, Bhiromrut P, Brache V, Lubis F, Salah M, Shaaban M, et al. Assessing the acceptability of NORPLANT implants in four countries: findings from focus group research. Stud Fam Plann. 1990 Mar-Apr; 21 (2):92–103. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Naish J, Brown J, Denton B. Intercultural consultations: investigation of factors that deter non-English speaking women from attending their general practitioners for cervical screening. BMJ. 1994 Oct 29; 309 (6962):1126–1128. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Barker GK, Rich S. Influences on adolescent sexuality in Nigeria and Kenya: findings from recent focus-group discussions. Stud Fam Plann. 1992 May-Jun; 23 (3):199–210. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • DiMatteo MR, Kahn KL, Berry SH. Narratives of birth and the postpartum: analysis of the focus group responses of new mothers. Birth. 1993 Dec; 20 (4):204–211. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Mays N, Pope C. Rigour and qualitative research. BMJ. 1995 Jul 8; 311 (6997):109–112. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Britten N. Qualitative interviews in medical research. BMJ. 1995 Jul 22; 311 (6999):251–253. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]

IMAGES

  1. Focus Groups

    qualitative research and focus groups

  2. PPT

    qualitative research and focus groups

  3. Focus Group: What It Is & How to Conduct It + Examples

    qualitative research and focus groups

  4. How Focus Groups Can Help Your Research: Qualitative Research Methods

    qualitative research and focus groups

  5. Focus Groups as Qualitative Research

    qualitative research and focus groups

  6. Qualitative Research

    qualitative research and focus groups

VIDEO

  1. Weaning Infants to Solid Foods among Disadvantaged Parents on the Island of Ireland

  2. Focus groups

  3. What is Focus Group Discussion As a type of Qualitative Data || Qualitative Data Analysis || English

  4. Qualitative and Quantitative Research Design

  5. Qualitative Data Analysis V1 #research #education

  6. What's a Market Researcher's favorite ice-cream flavor?🍦

COMMENTS

  1. What is a Focus Group

    What is a Focus Group | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples

  2. Qualitative Research: Introducing focus groups

    Qualitative Research: Introducing focus groups

  3. Zooming into Focus Groups: Strategies for Qualitative Research in the

    Zooming into Focus Groups: Strategies for Qualitative ...

  4. Chapter 12. Focus Groups

    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 ...

  5. Interviews and focus groups in qualitative research: an update for the

    Interviews and focus groups in qualitative research

  6. Qualitative Research via Focus Groups: Will Going Online Affect the

    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 ...

  7. PDF Focus Groups as Qualitative Research

    Focus Groups as Qualitative Research

  8. Methodological Aspects of Focus Groups in Health Research

    Methodological Aspects of Focus Groups in Health Research

  9. Focus Groups

    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.

  10. Two Approaches to Focus Group Data Collection for Qualitative Health

    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 ...

  11. Chapter 14: Focus groups

    Chapter 14: Focus groups - Qualitative Research

  12. A Qualitative Framework for Collecting and Analyzing Data in Focus

    A Qualitative Framework for Collecting and Analyzing Data ...

  13. Methods of data collection in qualitative research: interviews and

    Methods of data collection in qualitative research

  14. LibGuides: Qualitative study design: Focus groups

    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.

  15. UCSF Guides: Qualitative Research Guide: Focus Groups

    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.

  16. Interviews and focus groups in qualitative research: an update for the

    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 ...

  17. (PDF) Qualitative Research: Introducing Focus Groups

    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 ...

  18. An Overview of Qualitative Research and Focus Group Discussion

    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 ...

  19. Qualitative research. Introducing focus groups

    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 ...

  20. Qualitative Research: Focus Groups

    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

  21. PDF Focus Groups

    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

  22. Qualitative research. Introducing focus groups.

    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 ...

  23. Book Review: Focus Groups: Theory and Practice

    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.

  24. PDF Interviews and focus groups in qualitative research: an update ...

    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 ...