qualitative research uses survey as an instrument for data collection

Qualitative study design: Surveys & questionnaires

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

Surveys & questionnaires

Qualitative surveys use open-ended questions to produce long-form written/typed answers. Questions will aim to reveal opinions, experiences, narratives or accounts. Often a useful precursor to interviews or focus groups as they help identify initial themes or issues to then explore further in the research. Surveys can be used iteratively, being changed and modified over the course of the research to elicit new information. 

Structured Interviews may follow a similar form of open questioning.  

Qualitative surveys frequently include quantitative questions to establish elements such as age, nationality etc. 

Qualitative surveys aim to elicit a detailed response to an open-ended topic question in the participant’s own words.  Like quantitative surveys, there are three main methods for using qualitative surveys including face to face surveys, phone surveys, and online surveys. Each method of surveying has strengths and limitations.

Face to face surveys  

• Researcher asks participants one or more open-ended questions about a topic, typically while in view of the participant’s facial expressions and other behaviours while answering. Being able to view the respondent’s reactions enables the researcher to ask follow-up questions to elicit a more detailed response, and to follow up on any facial or behavioural cues that seem at odds with what the participants is explicitly saying.
• Face to face qualitative survey responses are likely to be audio recorded and transcribed into text to ensure all detail is captured; however, some surveys may include both quantitative and qualitative questions using a structured or semi-structured format of questioning, and in this case the researcher may simply write down key points from the participant’s response.

Telephone surveys

• Similar to the face to face method, but without researcher being able to see participant’s facial or behavioural responses to questions asked. This means the researcher may miss key cues that would help them ask further questions to clarify or extend participant responses to their questions, and instead relies on vocal cues.

Online surveys

• Open-ended questions are presented to participants in written format via email or within an online survey tool, often alongside quantitative survey questions on the same topic.
• Researchers may provide some contextualising information or key definitions to help ‘frame’ how participants view the qualitative survey questions, since they can’t directly ask the researcher about it in real time. 
• Participants are requested to responses to questions in text ‘in some detail’ to explain their perspective or experience to researchers; this can result in diversity of responses (brief to detailed).
• Researchers can not always probe or clarify participant responses to online qualitative survey questions which can result in data from these responses being cryptic or vague to the researcher.
• Online surveys can collect a greater number of responses in a set period of time compared to face to face and phone survey approaches, so while data may be less detailed, there is more of it overall to compensate.

Qualitative surveys can help a study early on, in finding out the issues/needs/experiences to be explored further in an interview or focus group. 

Surveys can be amended and re-run based on responses providing an evolving and responsive method of research. 

Online surveys will receive typed responses reducing translation by the researcher 

Online surveys can be delivered broadly across a wide population with asynchronous delivery/response. 

Limitations

Hand-written notes will need to be transcribed (time-consuming) for digital study and kept physically for reference. 

Distance (or online) communication can be open to misinterpretations that cannot be corrected at the time. 

Questions can be leading/misleading, eliciting answers that are not core to the research subject. Researchers must aim to write a neutral question which does not give away the researchers expectations. 

Even with transcribed/digital responses analysis can be long and detailed, though not as much as in an interview. 

Surveys may be left incomplete if performed online or taken by research assistants not well trained in giving the survey/structured interview. 

Narrow sampling may skew the results of the survey. 

Example questions

Here are some example survey questions which are open ended and require a long form written response:

• Tell us why you became a doctor? 
• What do you expect from this health service? 
• How do you explain the low levels of financial investment in mental health services? (WHO, 2007) 

Example studies

• Davey, L. , Clarke, V. and Jenkinson, E. (2019), Living with alopecia areata: an online qualitative survey study. British Journal of Dermatology, 180 1377-1389. Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary-wiley-com.ezproxy-f.deakin.edu.au/doi/10.1111%2Fbjd.17463    
• Richardson, J. (2004). What Patients Expect From Complementary Therapy: A Qualitative Study. American Journal of Public Health, 94(6), 1049–1053. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.deakin.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=s3h&AN=13270563&site=eds-live&scope=site  
• Saraceno, B., van Ommeren, M., Batniji, R., Cohen, A., Gureje, O., Mahoney, J., ... & Underhill, C. (2007). Barriers to improvement of mental health services in low-income and middle-income countries. The Lancet, 370(9593), 1164-1174. Retrieved from https://www-sciencedirect-com.ezproxy-f.deakin.edu.au/science/article/pii/S014067360761263X?via%3Dihub  

Below has more detail of the Lancet article including actual survey questions at: 

• World Health Organization. (2007.) Expert opinion on barriers and facilitating factors for the implementation of existing mental health knowledge in mental health services. Geneva: World Health Organization. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/44808
• Green, J. 1961-author., & Thorogood, N. (2018). Qualitative methods for health research. SAGE. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.deakin.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cat00097a&AN=deakin.b4151167&authtype=sso&custid=deakin&site=eds-live&scope=site   
• JANSEN, H. The Logic of Qualitative Survey Research and its Position in the Field of Social Research Methods. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung, 11(2), Retrieved from http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1450/2946  
• Neilsen Norman Group, (2019). 28 Tips for Creating Great Qualitative Surveys. Retrieved from https://www.nngroup.com/articles/qualitative-surveys/   
• << Previous: Documents
• Next: Interviews >>
• Last Updated: Apr 8, 2024 11:12 AM
• URL: https://deakin.libguides.com/qualitative-study-designs

Root out friction in every digital experience, super-charge conversion rates, and optimize digital self-service

Uncover insights from any interaction, deliver AI-powered agent coaching, and reduce cost to serve

Increase revenue and loyalty with real-time insights and recommendations delivered to teams on the ground

Know how your people feel and empower managers to improve employee engagement, productivity, and retention

Take action in the moments that matter most along the employee journey and drive bottom line growth

Whatever they’re are saying, wherever they’re saying it, know exactly what’s going on with your people

Get faster, richer insights with qual and quant tools that make powerful market research available to everyone

Run concept tests, pricing studies, prototyping + more with fast, powerful studies designed by UX research experts

Track your brand performance 24/7 and act quickly to respond to opportunities and challenges in your market

Explore the platform powering Experience Management

• Free Account
• For Digital
• For Customer Care
• For Human Resources
• For Researchers
• Financial Services
• All Industries

Popular Use Cases

• Customer Experience
• Employee Experience
• Net Promoter Score
• Voice of Customer
• Customer Success Hub
• Product Documentation
• Training & Certification
• XM Institute
• Popular Resources
• Customer Stories
• Artificial Intelligence

Market Research

• Partnerships
• Marketplace

The annual gathering of the experience leaders at the world’s iconic brands building breakthrough business results, live in Salt Lake City.

• English/AU & NZ
• Español/Europa
• Español/América Latina
• Português Brasileiro
• REQUEST DEMO
• Experience Management
• Qualitative Research

Try Qualtrics for free

Your ultimate guide to qualitative research (with methods and examples).

16 min read You may be already using qualitative research and want to check your understanding, or you may be starting from the beginning. Learn about qualitative research methods and how you can best use them for maximum effect.

What is qualitative research?

Qualitative research is a research method that collects non-numerical data. Typically, it goes beyond the information that quantitative research provides (which we will cover below) because it is used to gain an understanding of underlying reasons, opinions, and motivations.

Qualitative research methods focus on the thoughts, feelings, reasons, motivations, and values of a participant, to understand why people act in the way they do .

In this way, qualitative research can be described as naturalistic research, looking at naturally-occurring social events within natural settings. So, qualitative researchers would describe their part in social research as the ‘vehicle’ for collecting the qualitative research data.

Qualitative researchers discovered this by looking at primary and secondary sources where data is represented in non-numerical form. This can include collecting qualitative research data types like quotes, symbols, images, and written testimonials.

These data types tell qualitative researchers subjective information. While these aren’t facts in themselves, conclusions can be interpreted out of qualitative that can help to provide valuable context.

Because of this, qualitative research is typically viewed as explanatory in nature and is often used in social research, as this gives a window into the behavior and actions of people.

It can be a good research approach for health services research or clinical research projects.

Free eBook: The qualitative research design handbook

Quantitative vs qualitative research

In order to compare qualitative and quantitative research methods, let’s explore what quantitative research is first, before exploring how it differs from qualitative research.

Quantitative research

Quantitative research is the research method of collecting quantitative research data – data that can be converted into numbers or numerical data, which can be easily quantified, compared, and analyzed .

Quantitative research methods deal with primary and secondary sources where data is represented in numerical form. This can include closed-question poll results, statistics, and census information or demographic data.

Quantitative research data tends to be used when researchers are interested in understanding a particular moment in time and examining data sets over time to find trends and patterns.

The difference between quantitative and qualitative research methodology

While qualitative research is defined as data that supplies non-numerical information, quantitative research focuses on numerical data.

In general, if you’re interested in measuring something or testing a hypothesis, use quantitative research methods. If you want to explore ideas, thoughts, and meanings, use qualitative research methods.

While qualitative research helps you to properly define, promote and sell your products, don’t rely on qualitative research methods alone because qualitative findings can’t always be reliably repeated. Qualitative research is directional, not empirical.

The best statistical analysis research uses a combination of empirical data and human experience ( quantitative research and qualitative research ) to tell the story and gain better and deeper insights, quickly.

Where both qualitative and quantitative methods are not used, qualitative researchers will find that using one without the other leaves you with missing answers.

For example, if a retail company wants to understand whether a new product line of shoes will perform well in the target market:

• Qualitative research methods could be used with a sample of target customers, which would provide subjective reasons why they’d be likely to purchase or not purchase the shoes, while
• Quantitative research methods into the historical customer sales information on shoe-related products would provide insights into the sales performance, and likely future performance of the new product range.

Approaches to qualitative research

There are five approaches to qualitative research methods:

• Grounded theory: Grounded theory relates to where qualitative researchers come to a stronger hypothesis through induction, all throughout the process of collecting qualitative research data and forming connections. After an initial question to get started, qualitative researchers delve into information that is grouped into ideas or codes, which grow and develop into larger categories, as the qualitative research goes on. At the end of the qualitative research, the researcher may have a completely different hypothesis, based on evidence and inquiry, as well as the initial question.
• Ethnographic research : Ethnographic research is where researchers embed themselves into the environment of the participant or group in order to understand the culture and context of activities and behavior. This is dependent on the involvement of the researcher, and can be subject to researcher interpretation bias and participant observer bias . However, it remains a great way to allow researchers to experience a different ‘world’.
• Action research: With the action research process, both researchers and participants work together to make a change. This can be through taking action, researching and reflecting on the outcomes. Through collaboration, the collective comes to a result, though the way both groups interact and how they affect each other gives insights into their critical thinking skills.
• Phenomenological research: Researchers seek to understand the meaning of an event or behavior phenomenon by describing and interpreting participant’s life experiences. This qualitative research process understands that people create their own structured reality (‘the social construction of reality’), based on their past experiences. So, by viewing the way people intentionally live their lives, we’re able to see the experiential meaning behind why they live as they do.
• Narrative research: Narrative research, or narrative inquiry, is where researchers examine the way stories are told by participants, and how they explain their experiences, as a way of explaining the meaning behind their life choices and events. This qualitative research can arise from using journals, conversational stories, autobiographies or letters, as a few narrative research examples. The narrative is subjective to the participant, so we’re able to understand their views from what they’ve documented/spoken.

Qualitative research methods can use structured research instruments for data collection, like:

Surveys for individual views

A survey is a simple-to-create and easy-to-distribute qualitative research method, which helps gather information from large groups of participants quickly. Traditionally, paper-based surveys can now be made online, so costs can stay quite low.

Qualitative research questions tend to be open questions that ask for more information and provide a text box to allow for unconstrained comments.

Examples include:

• Asking participants to keep a written or a video diary for a period of time to document their feelings and thoughts
• In-Home-Usage tests: Buyers use your product for a period of time and report their experience

Surveys for group consensus (Delphi survey)

A Delphi survey may be used as a way to bring together participants and gain a consensus view over several rounds of questions. It differs from traditional surveys where results go to the researcher only. Instead, results go to participants as well, so they can reflect and consider all responses before another round of questions are submitted.

This can be useful to do as it can help researchers see what variance is among the group of participants and see the process of how consensus was reached.

• Asking participants to act as a fake jury for a trial and revealing parts of the case over several rounds to see how opinions change. At the end, the fake jury must make a unanimous decision about the defendant on trial.
• Asking participants to comment on the versions of a product being developed , as the changes are made and their feedback is taken onboard. At the end, participants must decide whether the product is ready to launch .

Semi-structured interviews

Interviews are a great way to connect with participants, though they require time from the research team to set up and conduct, especially if they’re done face-to-face.

Researchers may also have issues connecting with participants in different geographical regions. The researcher uses a set of predefined open-ended questions, though more ad-hoc questions can be asked depending on participant answers.

• Conducting a phone interview with participants to run through their feedback on a product . During the conversation, researchers can go ‘off-script’ and ask more probing questions for clarification or build on the insights.

Focus groups

Participants are brought together into a group, where a particular topic is discussed. It is researcher-led and usually occurs in-person in a mutually accessible location, to allow for easy communication between participants in focus groups.

In focus groups , the researcher uses a set of predefined open-ended questions, though more ad-hoc questions can be asked depending on participant answers.

• Asking participants to do UX tests, which are interface usability tests to show how easily users can complete certain tasks

Direct observation

This is a form of ethnographic research where researchers will observe participants’ behavior in a naturalistic environment. This can be great for understanding the actions in the culture and context of a participant’s setting.

This qualitative research method is prone to researcher bias as it is the researcher that must interpret the actions and reactions of participants. Their findings can be impacted by their own beliefs, values, and inferences.

• Embedding yourself in the location of your buyers to understand how a product would perform against the values and norms of that society

Qualitative data types and category types

Qualitative research methods often deliver information in the following qualitative research data types:

• Written testimonials

Through contextual analysis of the information, researchers can assign participants to category types:

• Social class
• Political alignment
• Most likely to purchase a product
• Their preferred training learning style

Advantages of qualitative research

• Useful for complex situations: Qualitative research on its own is great when dealing with complex issues, however, providing background context using quantitative facts can give a richer and wider understanding of a topic. In these cases, quantitative research may not be enough.
• A window into the ‘why’: Qualitative research can give you a window into the deeper meaning behind a participant’s answer. It can help you uncover the larger ‘why’ that can’t always be seen by analyzing numerical data.
• Can help improve customer experiences: In service industries where customers are crucial, like in private health services, gaining information about a customer’s experience through health research studies can indicate areas where services can be improved.

Disadvantages of qualitative research

• You need to ask the right question: Doing qualitative research may require you to consider what the right question is to uncover the underlying thinking behind a behavior. This may need probing questions to go further, which may suit a focus group or face-to-face interview setting better.
• Results are interpreted: As qualitative research data is written, spoken, and often nuanced, interpreting the data results can be difficult as they come in non-numerical formats. This might make it harder to know if you can accept or reject your hypothesis.
• More bias: There are lower levels of control to qualitative research methods, as they can be subject to biases like confirmation bias, researcher bias, and observation bias. This can have a knock-on effect on the validity and truthfulness of the qualitative research data results.

How to use qualitative research to your business’s advantage?

Qualitative methods help improve your products and marketing in many different ways:

• Understand the emotional connections to your brand
• Identify obstacles to purchase
• Uncover doubts and confusion about your messaging
• Find missing product features
• Improve the usability of your website, app, or chatbot experience
• Learn about how consumers talk about your product
• See how buyers compare your brand to others in the competitive set
• Learn how an organization’s employees evaluate and select vendors

6 steps to conducting good qualitative research

Businesses can benefit from qualitative research by using it to understand the meaning behind data types. There are several steps to this:

• Define your problem or interest area: What do you observe is happening and is it frequent? Identify the data type/s you’re observing.
• Create a hypothesis: Ask yourself what could be the causes for the situation with those qualitative research data types.
• Plan your qualitative research: Use structured qualitative research instruments like surveys, focus groups, or interviews to ask questions that test your hypothesis.
• Data Collection: Collect qualitative research data and understand what your data types are telling you. Once data is collected on different types over long time periods, you can analyze it and give insights into changing attitudes and language patterns.
• Data analysis: Does your information support your hypothesis? (You may need to redo the qualitative research with other variables to see if the results improve)
• Effectively present the qualitative research data: Communicate the results in a clear and concise way to help other people understand the findings.

Qualitative data analysis

Evaluating qualitative research can be tough when there are several analytics platforms to manage and lots of subjective data sources to compare.

Qualtrics provides a number of qualitative research analysis tools, like Text iQ , powered by Qualtrics iQ, provides powerful machine learning and native language processing to help you discover patterns and trends in text.

This also provides you with:

• Sentiment analysis — a technique to help identify the underlying sentiment (say positive, neutral, and/or negative) in qualitative research text responses
• Topic detection/categorisation — this technique is the grouping or bucketing of similar themes that can are relevant for the business & the industry (eg. ‘Food quality’, ‘Staff efficiency’ or ‘Product availability’)

How Qualtrics products can enhance & simplify the qualitative research process

Even in today’s data-obsessed marketplace, qualitative data is valuable – maybe even more so because it helps you establish an authentic human connection to your customers. If qualitative research doesn’t play a role to inform your product and marketing strategy, your decisions aren’t as effective as they could be.

The Qualtrics XM system gives you an all-in-one, integrated solution to help you all the way through conducting qualitative research. From survey creation and data collection to textual analysis and data reporting, it can help all your internal teams gain insights from your subjective and categorical data.

Qualitative methods are catered through templates or advanced survey designs. While you can manually collect data and conduct data analysis in a spreadsheet program, this solution helps you automate the process of qualitative research, saving you time and administration work.

Using computational techniques helps you to avoid human errors, and participant results come in are already incorporated into the analysis in real-time.

Our key tools, Text IQ™ and Driver IQ™ make analyzing subjective and categorical data easy and simple. Choose to highlight key findings based on topic, sentiment, or frequency. The choice is yours.

Some examples of your workspace in action, using drag and drop to create fast data visualizations quickly:

Related resources

Market intelligence 10 min read, marketing insights 11 min read, ethnographic research 11 min read, qualitative vs quantitative research 13 min read, qualitative research questions 11 min read, qualitative research design 12 min read, primary vs secondary research 14 min read, request demo.

Ready to learn more about Qualtrics?

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer
• QuestionPro

• Solutions Industries Gaming Automotive Sports and events Education Government Travel & Hospitality Financial Services Healthcare Cannabis Technology Use Case NPS+ Communities Audience Contactless surveys Mobile LivePolls Member Experience GDPR Positive People Science 360 Feedback Surveys
• Resources Blog eBooks Survey Templates Case Studies Training Help center

Home Market Research

Qualitative Data Collection: What it is + Methods to do it

Qualitative data collection is vital in qualitative research. It helps researchers understand individuals’ attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors in a specific context.

Several methods are used to collect qualitative data, including interviews, surveys, focus groups, and observations. Understanding the various methods used for gathering qualitative data is essential for successful qualitative research.

In this post, we will discuss qualitative data and its collection methods of it.

Content Index

What is Qualitative Data?

What is qualitative data collection, what is the need for qualitative data collection, effective qualitative data collection methods, qualitative data analysis, advantages of qualitative data collection.

Qualitative data is defined as data that approximates and characterizes. It can be observed and recorded.

This data type is non-numerical in nature. This type of data is collected through methods of observations, one-to-one interviews, conducting focus groups, and similar methods.

Qualitative data in statistics is also known as categorical data – data that can be arranged categorically based on the attributes and properties of a thing or a phenomenon.

It’s pretty easy to understand the difference between qualitative and quantitative data. Qualitative data does not include numbers in its definition of traits, whereas quantitative research data is all about numbers.

• The cake is orange, blue, and black in color (qualitative).
• Females have brown, black, blonde, and red hair (qualitative).

Qualitative data collection is gathering non-numerical information, such as words, images, and observations, to understand individuals’ attitudes, behaviors, beliefs, and motivations in a specific context. It is an approach used in qualitative research. It seeks to understand social phenomena through in-depth exploration and analysis of people’s perspectives, experiences, and narratives. In statistical analysis , distinguishing between categorical data and numerical data is essential, as categorical data involves distinct categories or labels, while numerical data consists of measurable quantities.

The data collected through qualitative methods are often subjective, open-ended, and unstructured and can provide a rich and nuanced understanding of complex social phenomena.

Qualitative research is a type of study carried out with a qualitative approach to understand the exploratory reasons and to assay how and why a specific program or phenomenon operates in the way it is working. A researcher can access numerous qualitative data collection methods that he/she feels are relevant.

LEARN ABOUT: Best Data Collection Tools

Qualitative data collection methods serve the primary purpose of collecting textual data for research and analysis , like the thematic analysis. The collected research data is used to examine:

• Knowledge around a specific issue or a program, experience of people.
• Meaning and relationships.
• Social norms and contextual or cultural practices demean people or impact a cause.

The qualitative data is textual or non-numerical. It covers mostly the images, videos, texts, and written or spoken words by the people. You can opt for any digital data collection methods , like structured or semi-structured surveys, or settle for the traditional approach comprising individual interviews, group discussions, etc.

Data at hand leads to a smooth process ensuring all the decisions made are for the business’s betterment. You will be able to make informed decisions only if you have relevant data.

Well! With quality data, you will improve the quality of decision-making. But you will also enhance the quality of the results expected from any endeavor.

Qualitative data collection methods are exploratory. Those are usually more focused on gaining insights and understanding the underlying reasons by digging deeper.

Although quantitative data cannot be quantified, measuring it or analyzing qualitative data might become an issue. Due to the lack of measurability, collection methods of qualitative data are primarily unstructured or structured in rare cases – that too to some extent.

Let’s explore the most common methods used for the collection of qualitative data:

Individual interview

It is one of the most trusted, widely used, and familiar qualitative data collection methods primarily because of its approach. An individual or face-to-face interview is a direct conversation between two people with a specific structure and purpose.

The interview questionnaire is designed in the manner to elicit the interviewee’s knowledge or perspective related to a topic, program, or issue.

At times, depending on the interviewer’s approach, the conversation can be unstructured or informal but focused on understanding the individual’s beliefs, values, understandings, feelings, experiences, and perspectives on an issue.

More often, the interviewer chooses to ask open-ended questions in individual interviews. If the interviewee selects answers from a set of given options, it becomes a structured, fixed response or a biased discussion.

The individual interview is an ideal qualitative data collection method. Particularly when the researchers want highly personalized information from the participants. The individual interview is a notable method if the interviewer decides to probe further and ask follow-up questions to gain more insights.

Qualitative surveys

To develop an informed hypothesis, many researchers use qualitative research surveys for data collection or to collect a piece of detailed information about a product or an issue. If you want to create questionnaires for collecting textual or qualitative data, then ask more open-ended questions .

LEARN ABOUT: Research Process Steps

To answer such qualitative research questions , the respondent has to write his/her opinion or perspective concerning a specific topic or issue. Unlike other collection methods, online surveys have a wider reach. People can provide you with quality data that is highly credible and valuable.

Paper surveys

Online surveys, focus group discussions.

Focus group discussions can also be considered a type of interview, but it is conducted in a group discussion setting. Usually, the focus group consists of 8 – 10 people (the size may vary depending on the researcher’s requirement). The researchers ensure appropriate space is given to the participants to discuss a topic or issue in a context. The participants are allowed to either agree or disagree with each other’s comments. 

With a focused group discussion, researchers know how a particular group of participants perceives the topic. Researchers analyze what participants think of an issue, the range of opinions expressed, and the ideas discussed. The data is collected by noting down the variations or inconsistencies (if any exist) in the participants, especially in terms of belief, experiences, and practice. 

The participants of focused group discussions are selected based on the topic or issues for which the researcher wants actionable insights. For example, if the research is about the recovery of college students from drug addiction. The participants have to be college students studying and recovering from drug addiction.

Other parameters such as age, qualification, financial background, social presence, and demographics are also considered, but not primarily, as the group needs diverse participants. Frequently, the qualitative data collected through focused group discussion is more descriptive and highly detailed.

Record keeping

This method uses reliable documents and other sources of information that already exist as the data source. This information can help with the new study. It’s a lot like going to the library. There, you can look through books and other sources to find information that can be used in your research.

Case studies

In this method, data is collected by looking at case studies in detail. This method’s flexibility is shown by the fact that it can be used to analyze both simple and complicated topics. This method’s strength is how well it draws conclusions from a mix of one or more qualitative data collection methods.

Observations

Observation is one of the traditional methods of qualitative data collection. It is used by researchers to gather descriptive analysis data by observing people and their behavior at events or in their natural settings. In this method, the researcher is completely immersed in watching people by taking a participatory stance to take down notes.

There are two main types of observation:

• Covert: In this method, the observer is concealed without letting anyone know that they are being observed. For example, a researcher studying the rituals of a wedding in nomadic tribes must join them as a guest and quietly see everything. 
• Overt: In this method, everyone is aware that they are being watched. For example, A researcher or an observer wants to study the wedding rituals of a nomadic tribe. To proceed with the research, the observer or researcher can reveal why he is attending the marriage and even use a video camera to shoot everything around him. 

Observation is a useful method of qualitative data collection, especially when you want to study the ongoing process, situation, or reactions on a specific issue related to the people being observed.

When you want to understand people’s behavior or their way of interaction in a particular community or demographic, you can rely on the observation data. Remember, if you fail to get quality data through surveys, qualitative interviews , or group discussions, rely on observation.

It is the best and most trusted collection method of qualitative data to generate qualitative data as it requires equal to no effort from the participants.

LEARN ABOUT: Behavioral Research

You invested time and money acquiring your data, so analyze it. It’s necessary to avoid being in the dark after all your hard work. Qualitative data analysis starts with knowing its two basic techniques, but there are no rules.

• Deductive Approach: The deductive data analysis uses a researcher-defined structure to analyze qualitative data. This method is quick and easy when a researcher knows what the sample population will say.
• Inductive Approach: The inductive technique has no structure or framework. When a researcher knows little about the event, an inductive approach is applied.

Whether you want to analyze qualitative data from a one-on-one interview or a survey, these simple steps will ensure a comprehensive qualitative data analysis.

Step 1: Arrange your Data

After collecting all the data, it is mostly unstructured and sometimes unclear. Arranging your data is the first stage in qualitative data analysis. So, researchers must transcribe data before analyzing it.

Step 2: Organize all your Data

After transforming and arranging your data, the next step is to organize it. One of the best ways to organize the data is to think back to your research goals and then organize the data based on the research questions you asked.

Step 3: Set a Code to the Data Collected

Setting up appropriate codes for the collected data gets you one step closer. Coding is one of the most effective methods for compressing a massive amount of data. It allows you to derive theories from relevant research findings.

Step 4: Validate your Data

Qualitative data analysis success requires data validation. Data validation should be done throughout the research process, not just once. There are two sides to validating data:

• The accuracy of your research design or methods.
• Reliability—how well the approaches deliver accurate data.

Step 5: Concluding the Analysis Process

Finally, conclude your data in a presentable report. The report should describe your research methods, their pros and cons, and research limitations. Your report should include findings, inferences, and future research.

QuestionPro is a comprehensive online survey software that offers a variety of qualitative data analysis tools to help businesses and researchers in making sense of their data. Users can use many different qualitative analysis methods to learn more about their data.

Users of QuestionPro can see their data in different charts and graphs, which makes it easier to spot patterns and trends. It can help researchers and businesses learn more about their target audience, which can lead to better decisions and better results.

LEARN ABOUT: Steps in Qualitative Research

Qualitative data collection has several advantages, including:

• In-depth understanding: It provides in-depth information about attitudes and behaviors, leading to a deeper understanding of the research.
• Flexibility: The methods allow researchers to modify questions or change direction if new information emerges.
• Contextualization: Qualitative research data is in context, which helps to provide a deep understanding of the experiences and perspectives of individuals.
• Rich data: It often produces rich, detailed, and nuanced information that cannot capture through numerical data.
• Engagement: The methods, such as interviews and focus groups, involve active meetings with participants, leading to a deeper understanding.
• Multiple perspectives: This can provide various views and a rich array of voices, adding depth and complexity.
• Realistic setting: It often occurs in realistic settings, providing more authentic experiences and behaviors.

LEARN ABOUT: 12 Best Tools for Researchers

Qualitative research is one of the best methods for identifying the behavior and patterns governing social conditions, issues, or topics. It spans a step ahead of quantitative data as it fails to explain the reasons and rationale behind a phenomenon, but qualitative data quickly does. 

Qualitative research is one of the best tools to identify behaviors and patterns governing social conditions. It goes a step beyond quantitative data by providing the reasons and rationale behind a phenomenon that cannot be explored quantitatively.

With QuestionPro, you can use it for qualitative data collection through various methods. Using Our robust suite correctly, you can enhance the quality and integrity of the collected data.

FREE TRIAL         LEARN MORE

MORE LIKE THIS

Data Information vs Insight: Essential differences

May 14, 2024

Pricing Analytics Software: Optimize Your Pricing Strategy

May 13, 2024

Relationship Marketing: What It Is, Examples & Top 7 Benefits

May 8, 2024

The Best Email Survey Tool to Boost Your Feedback Game

May 7, 2024

Other categories

• Academic Research
• Artificial Intelligence
• Assessments
• Brand Awareness
• Case Studies
• Communities
• Consumer Insights
• Customer effort score
• Customer Engagement
• Customer Experience
• Customer Loyalty
• Customer Research
• Customer Satisfaction
• Employee Benefits
• Employee Engagement
• Employee Retention
• Friday Five
• General Data Protection Regulation
• Insights Hub
• Life@QuestionPro
• Market Research
• Mobile diaries
• Mobile Surveys
• New Features
• Online Communities
• Question Types
• Questionnaire
• QuestionPro Products
• Release Notes
• Research Tools and Apps
• Revenue at Risk
• Survey Templates
• Training Tips
• Uncategorized
• Video Learning Series
• What’s Coming Up
• Workforce Intelligence

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Published: 05 October 2018

Interviews and focus groups in qualitative research: an update for the digital age

• P. Gill 1 &
• J. Baillie 2  

British Dental Journal volume  225 ,  pages 668–672 ( 2018 ) Cite this article

27k Accesses

48 Citations

20 Altmetric

Metrics details

Highlights that qualitative research is used increasingly in dentistry. Interviews and focus groups remain the most common qualitative methods of data collection.

Suggests the advent of digital technologies has transformed how qualitative research can now be undertaken.

Suggests interviews and focus groups can offer significant, meaningful insight into participants' experiences, beliefs and perspectives, which can help to inform developments in dental practice.

Qualitative research is used increasingly in dentistry, due to its potential to provide meaningful, in-depth insights into participants' experiences, perspectives, beliefs and behaviours. These insights can subsequently help to inform developments in dental practice and further related research. 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 focus groups in detail, outlines how they can be used in practice, how digital technologies can further inform the data collection process, and what these methods can offer dentistry.

You have full access to this article via your institution.

Similar content being viewed by others

Determinants of behaviour and their efficacy as targets of behavioural change interventions

Interviews in the social sciences

An overview of clinical decision support systems: benefits, risks, and strategies for success

Introduction.

Traditionally, research in dentistry has primarily been quantitative in nature. 1 However, in recent years, there has been a growing interest in qualitative research within the profession, due to its potential to further inform developments in practice, policy, education and training. Consequently, in 2008, the British Dental Journal (BDJ) published a four paper qualitative research series, 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 to help increase awareness and understanding of this particular methodological approach.

Since the papers were originally published, two scoping reviews have demonstrated the ongoing proliferation in the use of qualitative research within the field of oral healthcare. 1 , 6 To date, the original four paper series continue to be well cited and two of the main papers remain widely accessed among the BDJ readership. 2 , 3 The potential value of well-conducted qualitative research to evidence-based practice is now also widely recognised by service providers, policy makers, funding bodies and those who commission, support and use healthcare research.

Besides increasing standalone use, qualitative methods are now also routinely incorporated into larger mixed method study designs, such as clinical trials, as they can offer additional, meaningful insights into complex problems that simply could not be provided by quantitative methods alone. Qualitative methods can also be used to further facilitate in-depth understanding of important aspects of clinical trial processes, such as recruitment. For example, Ellis et al . investigated why edentulous older patients, dissatisfied with conventional dentures, decline implant treatment, despite its established efficacy, and frequently refuse to participate in related randomised clinical trials, even when financial constraints are removed. 7 Through the use of focus groups in Canada and the UK, the authors found that fears of pain and potential complications, along with perceived embarrassment, exacerbated by age, are common reasons why older patients typically refuse dental implants. 7

The last decade has also seen further developments in qualitative research, due to the ongoing evolution of digital technologies. These developments have transformed how researchers can access and share information, communicate and collaborate, recruit and engage participants, collect and analyse data and disseminate and translate research findings. 8 Where appropriate, such technologies are therefore capable of extending and enhancing how qualitative research is undertaken. 9 For example, it is now possible to collect qualitative data via instant messaging, email or online/video chat, using appropriate online platforms.

These innovative approaches to research are therefore cost-effective, convenient, reduce geographical constraints and are often useful for accessing 'hard to reach' participants (for example, those who are immobile or socially isolated). 8 , 9 However, digital technologies are still relatively new and constantly evolving and therefore present a variety of pragmatic and methodological challenges. Furthermore, given their very nature, their use in many qualitative studies and/or with certain participant groups may be inappropriate and should therefore always be carefully considered. While it is beyond the scope of this paper to provide a detailed explication regarding the use of digital technologies in qualitative research, insight is provided into how such technologies can be used to facilitate the data collection process in interviews and focus groups.

In light of such developments, it is perhaps therefore timely to update the main paper 3 of the original BDJ series. As with the previous publications, this paper has been purposely written in an accessible style, to enhance readability, particularly for those who are new to qualitative research. While the focus remains on the most common qualitative methods of data collection – interviews and focus groups – appropriate revisions have been made to provide a novel perspective, and should therefore be helpful to those who would like to know more about qualitative research. This paper specifically focuses on undertaking qualitative research with adult participants only.

Overview of qualitative research

Qualitative research is an approach that focuses on people and their experiences, behaviours and opinions. 10 , 11 The qualitative researcher seeks to answer questions of 'how' and 'why', providing detailed insight and understanding, 11 which quantitative methods cannot reach. 12 Within qualitative research, there are distinct methodologies influencing how the researcher approaches the research question, data collection and data analysis. 13 For example, phenomenological studies focus on the lived experience of individuals, explored through their description of the phenomenon. Ethnographic studies explore the culture of a group and typically involve the use of multiple methods to uncover the issues. 14

While methodology is the 'thinking tool', the methods are the 'doing tools'; 13 the ways in which data are collected and analysed. There are multiple qualitative data collection methods, including interviews, focus groups, observations, documentary analysis, participant diaries, photography and videography. Two of the most commonly used qualitative methods are interviews and focus groups, which are explored in this article. The data generated through these methods can be analysed in one of many ways, according to the methodological approach chosen. A common approach is thematic data analysis, involving the identification of themes and subthemes across the data set. Further information on approaches to qualitative data analysis has been discussed elsewhere. 1

Qualitative research is an evolving and adaptable approach, used by different disciplines for different purposes. Traditionally, qualitative data, specifically interviews, focus groups and observations, have been collected face-to-face with participants. In more recent years, digital technologies have contributed to the ongoing evolution of qualitative research. Digital technologies offer researchers different ways of recruiting participants and collecting data, and offer participants opportunities to be involved in research that is not necessarily face-to-face.

Research interviews are a fundamental qualitative research method 15 and are utilised across methodological approaches. Interviews enable the researcher to learn in depth about the perspectives, experiences, beliefs and motivations of the participant. 3 , 16 Examples include, exploring patients' perspectives of fear/anxiety triggers in dental treatment, 17 patients' experiences of oral health and diabetes, 18 and dental students' motivations for their choice of career. 19

Interviews may be structured, semi-structured or unstructured, 3 according to the purpose of the study, with less structured interviews facilitating a more in depth and flexible interviewing approach. 20 Structured interviews are similar to verbal questionnaires and are used if the researcher requires clarification on a topic; however they produce less in-depth data about a participant's experience. 3 Unstructured interviews may be used when little is known about a topic and involves the researcher asking an opening question; 3 the participant then leads the discussion. 20 Semi-structured interviews are commonly used in healthcare research, enabling the researcher to ask predetermined questions, 20 while ensuring the participant discusses issues they feel are important.

Interviews can be undertaken face-to-face or using digital methods when the researcher and participant are in different locations. Audio-recording the interview, with the consent of the participant, is essential for all interviews regardless of the medium as it enables accurate transcription; the process of turning the audio file into a word-for-word transcript. This transcript is the data, which the researcher then analyses according to the chosen approach.

Types of interview

Qualitative studies often utilise one-to-one, face-to-face interviews with research participants. This involves arranging a mutually convenient time and place to meet the participant, signing a consent form and audio-recording the interview. However, digital technologies have expanded the potential for interviews in research, enabling individuals to participate in qualitative research regardless of location.

Telephone interviews can be a useful alternative to face-to-face interviews and are commonly used in qualitative research. They enable participants from different geographical areas to participate and may be less onerous for participants than meeting a researcher in person. 15 A qualitative study explored patients' perspectives of dental implants and utilised telephone interviews due to the quality of the data that could be yielded. 21 The researcher needs to consider how they will audio record the interview, which can be facilitated by purchasing a recorder that connects directly to the telephone. One potential disadvantage of telephone interviews is the inability of the interviewer and researcher to see each other. This is resolved using software for audio and video calls online – such as Skype – to conduct interviews with participants in qualitative studies. Advantages of this approach include being able to see the participant if video calls are used, enabling observation of non-verbal communication, and the software can be free to use. However, participants are required to have a device and internet connection, as well as being computer literate, potentially limiting who can participate in the study. One qualitative study explored the role of dental hygienists in reducing oral health disparities in Canada. 22 The researcher conducted interviews using Skype, which enabled dental hygienists from across Canada to be interviewed within the research budget, accommodating the participants' schedules. 22

A less commonly used approach to qualitative interviews is the use of social virtual worlds. A qualitative study accessed a social virtual world – Second Life – to explore the health literacy skills of individuals who use social virtual worlds to access health information. 23 The researcher created an avatar and interview room, and undertook interviews with participants using voice and text methods. 23 This approach to recruitment and data collection enables individuals from diverse geographical locations to participate, while remaining anonymous if they wish. Furthermore, for interviews conducted using text methods, transcription of the interview is not required as the researcher can save the written conversation with the participant, with the participant's consent. However, the researcher and participant need to be familiar with how the social virtual world works to engage in an interview this way.

Conducting an interview

Ensuring informed consent before any interview is a fundamental aspect of the research process. Participants in research must be afforded autonomy and respect; consent should be informed and voluntary. 24 Individuals should have the opportunity to read an information sheet about the study, ask questions, understand how their data will be stored and used, and know that they are free to withdraw at any point without reprisal. The qualitative researcher should take written consent before undertaking the interview. In a face-to-face interview, this is straightforward: the researcher and participant both sign copies of the consent form, keeping one each. However, this approach is less straightforward when the researcher and participant do not meet in person. A recent protocol paper outlined an approach for taking consent for telephone interviews, which involved: audio recording the participant agreeing to each point on the consent form; the researcher signing the consent form and keeping a copy; and posting a copy to the participant. 25 This process could be replicated in other interview studies using digital methods.

There are advantages and disadvantages of using face-to-face and digital methods for research interviews. Ultimately, for both approaches, the quality of the interview is determined by the researcher. 16 Appropriate training and preparation are thus required. Healthcare professionals can use their interpersonal communication skills when undertaking a research interview, particularly questioning, listening and conversing. 3 However, the purpose of an interview is to gain information about the study topic, 26 rather than offering help and advice. 3 The researcher therefore needs to listen attentively to participants, enabling them to describe their experience without interruption. 3 The use of active listening skills also help to facilitate the interview. 14 Spradley outlined elements and strategies for research interviews, 27 which are a useful guide for qualitative researchers:

Greeting and explaining the project/interview

Asking descriptive (broad), structural (explore response to descriptive) and contrast (difference between) questions

Asymmetry between the researcher and participant talking

Expressing interest and cultural ignorance

Repeating, restating and incorporating the participant's words when asking questions

Creating hypothetical situations

Asking friendly questions

Knowing when to leave.

For semi-structured interviews, a topic guide (also called an interview schedule) is used to guide the content of the interview – an example of a topic guide is outlined in Box 1 . The topic guide, usually based on the research questions, existing literature and, for healthcare professionals, their clinical experience, is developed by the research team. The topic guide should include open ended questions that elicit in-depth information, and offer participants the opportunity to talk about issues important to them. This is vital in qualitative research where the researcher is interested in exploring the experiences and perspectives of participants. It can be useful for qualitative researchers to pilot the topic guide with the first participants, 10 to ensure the questions are relevant and understandable, and amending the questions if required.

Regardless of the medium of interview, the researcher must consider the setting of the interview. For face-to-face interviews, this could be in the participant's home, in an office or another mutually convenient location. A quiet location is preferable to promote confidentiality, enable the researcher and participant to concentrate on the conversation, and to facilitate accurate audio-recording of the interview. For interviews using digital methods the same principles apply: a quiet, private space where the researcher and participant feel comfortable and confident to participate in an interview.

Box 1: Example of a topic guide

Study focus: Parents' experiences of brushing their child's (aged 0–5) teeth

1. Can you tell me about your experience of cleaning your child's teeth?

How old was your child when you started cleaning their teeth?

Why did you start cleaning their teeth at that point?

How often do you brush their teeth?

What do you use to brush their teeth and why?

2. Could you explain how you find cleaning your child's teeth?

Do you find anything difficult?

What makes cleaning their teeth easier for you?

3. How has your experience of cleaning your child's teeth changed over time?

Has it become easier or harder?

Have you changed how often and how you clean their teeth? If so, why?

4. Could you describe how your child finds having their teeth cleaned?

What do they enjoy about having their teeth cleaned?

Is there anything they find upsetting about having their teeth cleaned?

5. Where do you look for information/advice about cleaning your child's teeth?

What did your health visitor tell you about cleaning your child's teeth? (If anything)

What has the dentist told you about caring for your child's teeth? (If visited)

Have any family members given you advice about how to clean your child's teeth? If so, what did they tell you? Did you follow their advice?

6. Is there anything else you would like to discuss about this?

Focus groups

A focus group is a moderated group discussion on a pre-defined topic, for research purposes. 28 , 29 While not aligned to a particular qualitative methodology (for example, grounded theory or phenomenology) as such, focus groups are used increasingly in healthcare research, as they are useful for exploring collective perspectives, attitudes, behaviours and experiences. Consequently, they can yield rich, in-depth data and illuminate agreement and inconsistencies 28 within and, where appropriate, between groups. Examples include public perceptions of dental implants and subsequent impact on help-seeking and decision making, 30 and general dental practitioners' views on patient safety in dentistry. 31

Focus groups can be used alone or in conjunction with other methods, such as interviews or observations, and can therefore help to confirm, extend or enrich understanding and provide alternative insights. 28 The social interaction between participants often results in lively discussion and can therefore facilitate the collection of rich, meaningful data. However, they are complex to organise and manage, due to the number of participants, and may also be inappropriate for exploring particularly sensitive issues that many participants may feel uncomfortable about discussing in a group environment.

Focus groups are primarily undertaken face-to-face but can now also be undertaken online, using appropriate technologies such as email, bulletin boards, online research communities, chat rooms, discussion forums, social media and video conferencing. 32 Using such technologies, data collection can also be synchronous (for example, online discussions in 'real time') or, unlike traditional face-to-face focus groups, asynchronous (for example, online/email discussions in 'non-real time'). While many of the fundamental principles of focus group research are the same, regardless of how they are conducted, a number of subtle nuances are associated with the online medium. 32 Some of which are discussed further in the following sections.

Focus group considerations

Some key considerations associated with face-to-face focus groups are: how many participants are required; should participants within each group know each other (or not) and how many focus groups are needed within a single study? These issues are much debated and there is no definitive answer. However, the number of focus groups required will largely depend on the topic area, the depth and breadth of data needed, the desired level of participation required 29 and the necessity (or not) for data saturation.

The optimum group size is around six to eight participants (excluding researchers) but can work effectively with between three and 14 participants. 3 If the group is too small, it may limit discussion, but if it is too large, it may become disorganised and difficult to manage. It is, however, prudent to over-recruit for a focus group by approximately two to three participants, to allow for potential non-attenders. For many researchers, particularly novice researchers, group size may also be informed by pragmatic considerations, such as the type of study, resources available and moderator experience. 28 Similar size and mix considerations exist for online focus groups. Typically, synchronous online focus groups will have around three to eight participants but, as the discussion does not happen simultaneously, asynchronous groups may have as many as 10–30 participants. 33

The topic area and potential group interaction should guide group composition considerations. Pre-existing groups, where participants know each other (for example, work colleagues) may be easier to recruit, have shared experiences and may enjoy a familiarity, which facilitates discussion and/or the ability to challenge each other courteously. 3 However, if there is a potential power imbalance within the group or if existing group norms and hierarchies may adversely affect the ability of participants to speak freely, then 'stranger groups' (that is, where participants do not already know each other) may be more appropriate. 34 , 35

Focus group management

Face-to-face focus groups should normally be conducted by two researchers; a moderator and an observer. 28 The moderator facilitates group discussion, while the observer typically monitors group dynamics, behaviours, non-verbal cues, seating arrangements and speaking order, which is essential for transcription and analysis. The same principles of informed consent, as discussed in the interview section, also apply to focus groups, regardless of medium. However, the consent process for online discussions will probably be managed somewhat differently. For example, while an appropriate participant information leaflet (and consent form) would still be required, the process is likely to be managed electronically (for example, via email) and would need to specifically address issues relating to technology (for example, anonymity and use, storage and access to online data). 32

The venue in which a face to face focus group is conducted should be of a suitable size, private, quiet, free from distractions and in a collectively convenient location. It should also be conducted at a time appropriate for participants, 28 as this is likely to promote attendance. As with interviews, the same ethical considerations apply (as discussed earlier). However, online focus groups may present additional ethical challenges associated with issues such as informed consent, appropriate access and secure data storage. Further guidance can be found elsewhere. 8 , 32

Before the focus group commences, the researchers should establish rapport with participants, as this will help to put them at ease and result in a more meaningful discussion. Consequently, researchers should introduce themselves, provide further clarity about the study and how the process will work in practice and outline the 'ground rules'. Ground rules are designed to assist, not hinder, group discussion and typically include: 3 , 28 , 29

Discussions within the group are confidential to the group

Only one person can speak at a time

All participants should have sufficient opportunity to contribute

There should be no unnecessary interruptions while someone is speaking

Everyone can be expected to be listened to and their views respected

Challenging contrary opinions is appropriate, but ridiculing is not.

Moderating a focus group requires considered management and good interpersonal skills to help guide the discussion and, where appropriate, keep it sufficiently focused. Avoid, therefore, participating, leading, expressing personal opinions or correcting participants' knowledge 3 , 28 as this may bias the process. A relaxed, interested demeanour will also help participants to feel comfortable and promote candid discourse. Moderators should also prevent the discussion being dominated by any one person, ensure differences of opinions are discussed fairly and, if required, encourage reticent participants to contribute. 3 Asking open questions, reflecting on significant issues, inviting further debate, probing responses accordingly, and seeking further clarification, as and where appropriate, will help to obtain sufficient depth and insight into the topic area.

Moderating online focus groups requires comparable skills, particularly if the discussion is synchronous, as the discussion may be dominated by those who can type proficiently. 36 It is therefore important that sufficient time and respect is accorded to those who may not be able to type as quickly. Asynchronous discussions are usually less problematic in this respect, as interactions are less instant. However, moderating an asynchronous discussion presents additional challenges, particularly if participants are geographically dispersed, as they may be online at different times. Consequently, the moderator will not always be present and the discussion may therefore need to occur over several days, which can be difficult to manage and facilitate and invariably requires considerable flexibility. 32 It is also worth recognising that establishing rapport with participants via online medium is often more challenging than via face-to-face and may therefore require additional time, skills, effort and consideration.

As with research interviews, focus groups should be guided by an appropriate interview schedule, as discussed earlier in the paper. For example, the schedule will usually be informed by the review of the literature and study aims, and will merely provide a topic guide to help inform subsequent discussions. To provide a verbatim account of the discussion, focus groups must be recorded, using an audio-recorder with a good quality multi-directional microphone. While videotaping is possible, some participants may find it obtrusive, 3 which may adversely affect group dynamics. The use (or not) of a video recorder, should therefore be carefully considered.

At the end of the focus group, a few minutes should be spent rounding up and reflecting on the discussion. 28 Depending on the topic area, it is possible that some participants may have revealed deeply personal issues and may therefore require further help and support, such as a constructive debrief or possibly even referral on to a relevant third party. It is also possible that some participants may feel that the discussion did not adequately reflect their views and, consequently, may no longer wish to be associated with the study. 28 Such occurrences are likely to be uncommon, but should they arise, it is important to further discuss any concerns and, if appropriate, offer them the opportunity to withdraw (including any data relating to them) from the study. Immediately after the discussion, researchers should compile notes regarding thoughts and ideas about the focus group, which can assist with data analysis and, if appropriate, any further data collection.

Qualitative research is increasingly being utilised within dental research to explore the experiences, perspectives, motivations and beliefs of participants. The contributions of qualitative research to evidence-based practice are increasingly being recognised, both as standalone research and as part of larger mixed-method studies, including clinical trials. Interviews and focus groups remain commonly used data collection methods in qualitative research, and with the advent of digital technologies, their utilisation continues to evolve. However, digital methods of qualitative data collection present additional methodological, ethical and practical considerations, but also potentially offer considerable flexibility to participants and researchers. Consequently, regardless of format, qualitative methods have significant potential to inform important areas of dental practice, policy and further related research.

Gussy M, Dickson-Swift V, Adams J . A scoping review of qualitative research in peer-reviewed dental publications. Int J Dent Hygiene 2013; 11 : 174–179.

Article   Google Scholar  

Burnard P, Gill P, Stewart K, Treasure E, Chadwick B . Analysing and presenting qualitative data. Br Dent J 2008; 204 : 429–432.

Gill P, Stewart K, Treasure E, Chadwick B . Methods of data collection in qualitative research: interviews and focus groups. Br Dent J 2008; 204 : 291–295.

Gill P, Stewart K, Treasure E, Chadwick B . Conducting qualitative interviews with school children in dental research. Br Dent J 2008; 204 : 371–374.

Stewart K, Gill P, Chadwick B, Treasure E . Qualitative research in dentistry. Br Dent J 2008; 204 : 235–239.

Masood M, Thaliath E, Bower E, Newton J . An appraisal of the quality of published qualitative dental research. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2011; 39 : 193–203.

Ellis J, Levine A, Bedos C et al. Refusal of implant supported mandibular overdentures by elderly patients. Gerodontology 2011; 28 : 62–68.

Macfarlane S, Bucknall T . Digital Technologies in Research. In Gerrish K, Lathlean J (editors) The Research Process in Nursing . 7th edition. pp. 71–86. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell; 2015.

Google Scholar  

Lee R, Fielding N, Blank G . Online Research Methods in the Social Sciences: An Editorial Introduction. In Fielding N, Lee R, Blank G (editors) The Sage Handbook of Online Research Methods . pp. 3–16. London: Sage Publications; 2016.

Creswell J . Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five designs . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1998.

Guest G, Namey E, Mitchell M . Qualitative research: Defining and designing In Guest G, Namey E, Mitchell M (editors) Collecting Qualitative Data: A Field Manual For Applied Research . pp. 1–40. London: Sage Publications, 2013.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Pope C, Mays N . Qualitative research: Reaching the parts other methods cannot reach: an introduction to qualitative methods in health and health services research. BMJ 1995; 311 : 42–45.

Giddings L, Grant B . A Trojan Horse for positivism? A critique of mixed methods research. Adv Nurs Sci 2007; 30 : 52–60.

Hammersley M, Atkinson P . Ethnography: Principles in Practice . London: Routledge, 1995.

Oltmann S . Qualitative interviews: A methodological discussion of the interviewer and respondent contexts Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research. 2016; 17 : Art. 15.

Patton M . Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2002.

Wang M, Vinall-Collier K, Csikar J, Douglas G . A qualitative study of patients' views of techniques to reduce dental anxiety. J Dent 2017; 66 : 45–51.

Lindenmeyer A, Bowyer V, Roscoe J, Dale J, Sutcliffe P . Oral health awareness and care preferences in patients with diabetes: a qualitative study. Fam Pract 2013; 30 : 113–118.

Gallagher J, Clarke W, Wilson N . Understanding the motivation: a qualitative study of dental students' choice of professional career. Eur J Dent Educ 2008; 12 : 89–98.

Tod A . Interviewing. In Gerrish K, Lacey A (editors) The Research Process in Nursing . Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2006.

Grey E, Harcourt D, O'Sullivan D, Buchanan H, Kipatrick N . A qualitative study of patients' motivations and expectations for dental implants. Br Dent J 2013; 214 : 10.1038/sj.bdj.2012.1178.

Farmer J, Peressini S, Lawrence H . Exploring the role of the dental hygienist in reducing oral health disparities in Canada: A qualitative study. Int J Dent Hygiene 2017; 10.1111/idh.12276.

McElhinney E, Cheater F, Kidd L . Undertaking qualitative health research in social virtual worlds. J Adv Nurs 2013; 70 : 1267–1275.

Health Research Authority. UK Policy Framework for Health and Social Care Research. Available at https://www.hra.nhs.uk/planning-and-improving-research/policies-standards-legislation/uk-policy-framework-health-social-care-research/ (accessed September 2017).

Baillie J, Gill P, Courtenay P . Knowledge, understanding and experiences of peritonitis among patients, and their families, undertaking peritoneal dialysis: A mixed methods study protocol. J Adv Nurs 2017; 10.1111/jan.13400.

Kvale S . Interviews . Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage, 1996.

Spradley J . The Ethnographic Interview . New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1979.

Goodman C, Evans C . Focus Groups. In Gerrish K, Lathlean J (editors) The Research Process in Nursing . pp. 401–412. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell, 2015.

Shaha M, Wenzell J, Hill E . Planning and conducting focus group research with nurses. Nurse Res 2011; 18 : 77–87.

Wang G, Gao X, Edward C . Public perception of dental implants: a qualitative study. J Dent 2015; 43 : 798–805.

Bailey E . Contemporary views of dental practitioners' on patient safety. Br Dent J 2015; 219 : 535–540.

Abrams K, Gaiser T . Online Focus Groups. In Field N, Lee R, Blank G (editors) The Sage Handbook of Online Research Methods . pp. 435–450. London: Sage Publications, 2016.

Poynter R . The Handbook of Online and Social Media Research . West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons, 2010.

Kevern J, Webb C . Focus groups as a tool for critical social research in nurse education. Nurse Educ Today 2001; 21 : 323–333.

Kitzinger J, Barbour R . Introduction: The Challenge and Promise of Focus Groups. In Barbour R S K J (editor) Developing Focus Group Research . pp. 1–20. London: Sage Publications, 1999.

Krueger R, Casey M . Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE; 2009.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Senior Lecturer (Adult Nursing), School of Healthcare Sciences, Cardiff University,

Lecturer (Adult Nursing) and RCBC Wales Postdoctoral Research Fellow, School of Healthcare Sciences, Cardiff University,

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. Gill .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Gill, P., Baillie, J. Interviews and focus groups in qualitative research: an update for the digital age. Br Dent J 225 , 668–672 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2018.815

Download citation

Accepted : 02 July 2018

Published : 05 October 2018

Issue Date : 12 October 2018

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2018.815

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Translating brand reputation into equity from the stakeholder’s theory: an approach to value creation based on consumer’s perception & interactions.

• Olukorede Adewole

International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility (2024)

Perceptions and beliefs of community gatekeepers about genomic risk information in African cleft research

• Abimbola M. Oladayo
• Oluwakemi Odukoya
• Azeez Butali

BMC Public Health (2024)

Assessment of women’s needs, wishes and preferences regarding interprofessional guidance on nutrition in pregnancy – a qualitative study

• Merle Ebinghaus
• Caroline Johanna Agricola
• Birgit-Christiane Zyriax

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth (2024)

‘Baby mamas’ in Urban Ghana: an exploratory qualitative study on the factors influencing serial fathering among men in Accra, Ghana

• Rosemond Akpene Hiadzi
• Jemima Akweley Agyeman
• Godwin Banafo Akrong

Reproductive Health (2023)

Revolutionising dental technologies: a qualitative study on dental technicians’ perceptions of Artificial intelligence integration

• Galvin Sim Siang Lin
• Yook Shiang Ng
• Kah Hoay Chua

BMC Oral Health (2023)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

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
• Browse Titles

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024 Jan-.

StatPearls [Internet].

Qualitative study.

Steven Tenny ; Janelle M. Brannan ; Grace D. Brannan .

Affiliations

Last Update: September 18, 2022 .

• Introduction

Qualitative research is a type of research that explores and provides deeper insights into real-world problems. [1] Instead of collecting numerical data points or intervening or introducing treatments just like in quantitative research, qualitative research helps generate hypothenar to further investigate and understand quantitative data. Qualitative research gathers participants' experiences, perceptions, and behavior. It answers the hows and whys instead of how many or how much. It could be structured as a standalone study, purely relying on qualitative data, or part of mixed-methods research that combines qualitative and quantitative data. This review introduces the readers to some basic concepts, definitions, terminology, and applications of qualitative research.

Qualitative research, at its core, asks open-ended questions whose answers are not easily put into numbers, such as "how" and "why." [2] Due to the open-ended nature of the research questions, qualitative research design is often not linear like quantitative design. [2] One of the strengths of qualitative research is its ability to explain processes and patterns of human behavior that can be difficult to quantify. [3] Phenomena such as experiences, attitudes, and behaviors can be complex to capture accurately and quantitatively. In contrast, a qualitative approach allows participants themselves to explain how, why, or what they were thinking, feeling, and experiencing at a particular time or during an event of interest. Quantifying qualitative data certainly is possible, but at its core, qualitative data is looking for themes and patterns that can be difficult to quantify, and it is essential to ensure that the context and narrative of qualitative work are not lost by trying to quantify something that is not meant to be quantified.

However, while qualitative research is sometimes placed in opposition to quantitative research, where they are necessarily opposites and therefore "compete" against each other and the philosophical paradigms associated with each other, qualitative and quantitative work are neither necessarily opposites, nor are they incompatible. [4] While qualitative and quantitative approaches are different, they are not necessarily opposites and certainly not mutually exclusive. For instance, qualitative research can help expand and deepen understanding of data or results obtained from quantitative analysis. For example, say a quantitative analysis has determined a correlation between length of stay and level of patient satisfaction, but why does this correlation exist? This dual-focus scenario shows one way in which qualitative and quantitative research could be integrated.

Qualitative Research Approaches

Ethnography

Ethnography as a research design originates in social and cultural anthropology and involves the researcher being directly immersed in the participant’s environment. [2] Through this immersion, the ethnographer can use a variety of data collection techniques to produce a comprehensive account of the social phenomena that occurred during the research period. [2] That is to say, the researcher’s aim with ethnography is to immerse themselves into the research population and come out of it with accounts of actions, behaviors, events, etc, through the eyes of someone involved in the population. Direct involvement of the researcher with the target population is one benefit of ethnographic research because it can then be possible to find data that is otherwise very difficult to extract and record.

Grounded theory

Grounded Theory is the "generation of a theoretical model through the experience of observing a study population and developing a comparative analysis of their speech and behavior." [5] Unlike quantitative research, which is deductive and tests or verifies an existing theory, grounded theory research is inductive and, therefore, lends itself to research aimed at social interactions or experiences. [3] [2] In essence, Grounded Theory’s goal is to explain how and why an event occurs or how and why people might behave a certain way. Through observing the population, a researcher using the Grounded Theory approach can then develop a theory to explain the phenomena of interest.

Phenomenology

Phenomenology is the "study of the meaning of phenomena or the study of the particular.” [5] At first glance, it might seem that Grounded Theory and Phenomenology are pretty similar, but the differences can be seen upon careful examination. At its core, phenomenology looks to investigate experiences from the individual's perspective. [2] Phenomenology is essentially looking into the "lived experiences" of the participants and aims to examine how and why participants behaved a certain way from their perspective. Herein lies one of the main differences between Grounded Theory and Phenomenology. Grounded Theory aims to develop a theory for social phenomena through an examination of various data sources. In contrast, Phenomenology focuses on describing and explaining an event or phenomenon from the perspective of those who have experienced it.

Narrative research

One of qualitative research’s strengths lies in its ability to tell a story, often from the perspective of those directly involved in it. Reporting on qualitative research involves including details and descriptions of the setting involved and quotes from participants. This detail is called a "thick" or "rich" description and is a strength of qualitative research. Narrative research is rife with the possibilities of "thick" description as this approach weaves together a sequence of events, usually from just one or two individuals, hoping to create a cohesive story or narrative. [2] While it might seem like a waste of time to focus on such a specific, individual level, understanding one or two people’s narratives for an event or phenomenon can help to inform researchers about the influences that helped shape that narrative. The tension or conflict of differing narratives can be "opportunities for innovation." [2]

Research Paradigm

Research paradigms are the assumptions, norms, and standards underpinning different research approaches. Essentially, research paradigms are the "worldviews" that inform research. [4] It is valuable for qualitative and quantitative researchers to understand what paradigm they are working within because understanding the theoretical basis of research paradigms allows researchers to understand the strengths and weaknesses of the approach being used and adjust accordingly. Different paradigms have different ontologies and epistemologies. Ontology is defined as the "assumptions about the nature of reality,” whereas epistemology is defined as the "assumptions about the nature of knowledge" that inform researchers' work. [2] It is essential to understand the ontological and epistemological foundations of the research paradigm researchers are working within to allow for a complete understanding of the approach being used and the assumptions that underpin the approach as a whole. Further, researchers must understand their own ontological and epistemological assumptions about the world in general because their assumptions about the world will necessarily impact how they interact with research. A discussion of the research paradigm is not complete without describing positivist, postpositivist, and constructivist philosophies.

Positivist versus postpositivist

To further understand qualitative research, we must discuss positivist and postpositivist frameworks. Positivism is a philosophy that the scientific method can and should be applied to social and natural sciences. [4] Essentially, positivist thinking insists that the social sciences should use natural science methods in their research. It stems from positivist ontology, that there is an objective reality that exists that is wholly independent of our perception of the world as individuals. Quantitative research is rooted in positivist philosophy, which can be seen in the value it places on concepts such as causality, generalizability, and replicability.

Conversely, postpositivists argue that social reality can never be one hundred percent explained, but could be approximated. [4] Indeed, qualitative researchers have been insisting that there are “fundamental limits to the extent to which the methods and procedures of the natural sciences could be applied to the social world,” and therefore, postpositivist philosophy is often associated with qualitative research. [4] An example of positivist versus postpositivist values in research might be that positivist philosophies value hypothesis-testing, whereas postpositivist philosophies value the ability to formulate a substantive theory.

Constructivist

Constructivism is a subcategory of postpositivism. Most researchers invested in postpositivist research are also constructivist, meaning they think there is no objective external reality that exists but instead that reality is constructed. Constructivism is a theoretical lens that emphasizes the dynamic nature of our world. "Constructivism contends that individuals' views are directly influenced by their experiences, and it is these individual experiences and views that shape their perspective of reality.” [6]  constructivist thought focuses on how "reality" is not a fixed certainty and how experiences, interactions, and backgrounds give people a unique view of the world. Constructivism contends, unlike positivist views, that there is not necessarily an "objective"reality we all experience. This is the ‘relativist’ ontological view that reality and our world are dynamic and socially constructed. Therefore, qualitative scientific knowledge can be inductive as well as deductive.” [4]

So why is it important to understand the differences in assumptions that different philosophies and approaches to research have? Fundamentally, the assumptions underpinning the research tools a researcher selects provide an overall base for the assumptions the rest of the research will have. It can even change the role of the researchers. [2] For example, is the researcher an "objective" observer, such as in positivist quantitative work? Or is the researcher an active participant in the research, as in postpositivist qualitative work? Understanding the philosophical base of the study undertaken allows researchers to fully understand the implications of their work and their role within the research and reflect on their positionality and bias as it pertains to the research they are conducting.

Data Sampling 

The better the sample represents the intended study population, the more likely the researcher is to encompass the varying factors. The following are examples of participant sampling and selection: [7]

• Purposive sampling- selection based on the researcher’s rationale for being the most informative.
• Criterion sampling selection based on pre-identified factors.
• Convenience sampling- selection based on availability.
• Snowball sampling- the selection is by referral from other participants or people who know potential participants.
• Extreme case sampling- targeted selection of rare cases.
• Typical case sampling selection based on regular or average participants. 

Data Collection and Analysis

Qualitative research uses several techniques, including interviews, focus groups, and observation. [1] [2] [3] Interviews may be unstructured, with open-ended questions on a topic, and the interviewer adapts to the responses. Structured interviews have a predetermined number of questions that every participant is asked. It is usually one-on-one and appropriate for sensitive topics or topics needing an in-depth exploration. Focus groups are often held with 8-12 target participants and are used when group dynamics and collective views on a topic are desired. Researchers can be participant-observers to share the experiences of the subject or non-participants or detached observers.

While quantitative research design prescribes a controlled environment for data collection, qualitative data collection may be in a central location or the participants' environment, depending on the study goals and design. Qualitative research could amount to a large amount of data. Data is transcribed, which may then be coded manually or using computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software or CAQDAS such as ATLAS.ti or NVivo. [8] [9] [10]

After the coding process, qualitative research results could be in various formats. It could be a synthesis and interpretation presented with excerpts from the data. [11] Results could also be in the form of themes and theory or model development.

Dissemination

The healthcare team can use two reporting standards to standardize and facilitate the dissemination of qualitative research outcomes. The Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research or COREQ is a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. [12] The Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR) is a checklist covering a more comprehensive range of qualitative research. [13]

Applications

Many times, a research question will start with qualitative research. The qualitative research will help generate the research hypothesis, which can be tested with quantitative methods. After the data is collected and analyzed with quantitative methods, a set of qualitative methods can be used to dive deeper into the data to better understand what the numbers truly mean and their implications. The qualitative techniques can then help clarify the quantitative data and also help refine the hypothesis for future research. Furthermore, with qualitative research, researchers can explore poorly studied subjects with quantitative methods. These include opinions, individual actions, and social science research.

An excellent qualitative study design starts with a goal or objective. This should be clearly defined or stated. The target population needs to be specified. A method for obtaining information from the study population must be carefully detailed to ensure no omissions of part of the target population. A proper collection method should be selected that will help obtain the desired information without overly limiting the collected data because, often, the information sought is not well categorized or obtained. Finally, the design should ensure adequate methods for analyzing the data. An example may help better clarify some of the various aspects of qualitative research.

A researcher wants to decrease the number of teenagers who smoke in their community. The researcher could begin by asking current teen smokers why they started smoking through structured or unstructured interviews (qualitative research). The researcher can also get together a group of current teenage smokers and conduct a focus group to help brainstorm factors that may have prevented them from starting to smoke (qualitative research).

In this example, the researcher has used qualitative research methods (interviews and focus groups) to generate a list of ideas of why teens start to smoke and factors that may have prevented them from starting to smoke. Next, the researcher compiles this data. The research found that, hypothetically, peer pressure, health issues, cost, being considered "cool," and rebellious behavior all might increase or decrease the likelihood of teens starting to smoke.

The researcher creates a survey asking teen participants to rank how important each of the above factors is in either starting smoking (for current smokers) or not smoking (for current nonsmokers). This survey provides specific numbers (ranked importance of each factor) and is thus a quantitative research tool.

The researcher can use the survey results to focus efforts on the one or two highest-ranked factors. Let us say the researcher found that health was the primary factor that keeps teens from starting to smoke, and peer pressure was the primary factor that contributed to teens starting smoking. The researcher can go back to qualitative research methods to dive deeper into these for more information. The researcher wants to focus on keeping teens from starting to smoke, so they focus on the peer pressure aspect.

The researcher can conduct interviews and focus groups (qualitative research) about what types and forms of peer pressure are commonly encountered, where the peer pressure comes from, and where smoking starts. The researcher hypothetically finds that peer pressure often occurs after school at the local teen hangouts, mostly in the local park. The researcher also hypothetically finds that peer pressure comes from older, current smokers who provide the cigarettes.

The researcher could further explore this observation made at the local teen hangouts (qualitative research) and take notes regarding who is smoking, who is not, and what observable factors are at play for peer pressure to smoke. The researcher finds a local park where many local teenagers hang out and sees that the smokers tend to hang out in a shady, overgrown area of the park. The researcher notes that smoking teenagers buy their cigarettes from a local convenience store adjacent to the park, where the clerk does not check identification before selling cigarettes. These observations fall under qualitative research.

If the researcher returns to the park and counts how many individuals smoke in each region, this numerical data would be quantitative research. Based on the researcher's efforts thus far, they conclude that local teen smoking and teenagers who start to smoke may decrease if there are fewer overgrown areas of the park and the local convenience store does not sell cigarettes to underage individuals.

The researcher could try to have the parks department reassess the shady areas to make them less conducive to smokers or identify how to limit the sales of cigarettes to underage individuals by the convenience store. The researcher would then cycle back to qualitative methods of asking at-risk populations their perceptions of the changes and what factors are still at play, and quantitative research that includes teen smoking rates in the community and the incidence of new teen smokers, among others. [14] [15]

Qualitative research functions as a standalone research design or combined with quantitative research to enhance our understanding of the world. Qualitative research uses techniques including structured and unstructured interviews, focus groups, and participant observation not only to help generate hypotheses that can be more rigorously tested with quantitative research but also to help researchers delve deeper into the quantitative research numbers, understand what they mean, and understand what the implications are. Qualitative research allows researchers to understand what is going on, especially when things are not easily categorized. [16]

• Issues of Concern

As discussed in the sections above, quantitative and qualitative work differ in many ways, including the evaluation criteria. There are four well-established criteria for evaluating quantitative data: internal validity, external validity, reliability, and objectivity. Credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability are the correlating concepts in qualitative research. [4] [11] The corresponding quantitative and qualitative concepts can be seen below, with the quantitative concept on the left and the qualitative concept on the right:

• Internal validity: Credibility
• External validity: Transferability
• Reliability: Dependability
• Objectivity: Confirmability

In conducting qualitative research, ensuring these concepts are satisfied and well thought out can mitigate potential issues from arising. For example, just as a researcher will ensure that their quantitative study is internally valid, qualitative researchers should ensure that their work has credibility. 

Indicators such as triangulation and peer examination can help evaluate the credibility of qualitative work.

• Triangulation: Triangulation involves using multiple data collection methods to increase the likelihood of getting a reliable and accurate result. In our above magic example, the result would be more reliable if we interviewed the magician, backstage hand, and the person who "vanished." In qualitative research, triangulation can include telephone surveys, in-person surveys, focus groups, and interviews and surveying an adequate cross-section of the target demographic.
• Peer examination: A peer can review results to ensure the data is consistent with the findings.

A "thick" or "rich" description can be used to evaluate the transferability of qualitative research, whereas an indicator such as an audit trail might help evaluate the dependability and confirmability.

• Thick or rich description:  This is a detailed and thorough description of details, the setting, and quotes from participants in the research. [5] Thick descriptions will include a detailed explanation of how the study was conducted. Thick descriptions are detailed enough to allow readers to draw conclusions and interpret the data, which can help with transferability and replicability.
• Audit trail: An audit trail provides a documented set of steps of how the participants were selected and the data was collected. The original information records should also be kept (eg, surveys, notes, recordings).

One issue of concern that qualitative researchers should consider is observation bias. Here are a few examples:

• Hawthorne effect: The effect is the change in participant behavior when they know they are being observed. Suppose a researcher wanted to identify factors that contribute to employee theft and tell the employees they will watch them to see what factors affect employee theft. In that case, one would suspect employee behavior would change when they know they are being protected.
• Observer-expectancy effect: Some participants change their behavior or responses to satisfy the researcher's desired effect. This happens unconsciously for the participant, so it is essential to eliminate or limit the transmission of the researcher's views.
• Artificial scenario effect: Some qualitative research occurs in contrived scenarios with preset goals. In such situations, the information may not be accurate because of the artificial nature of the scenario. The preset goals may limit the qualitative information obtained.
• Clinical Significance

Qualitative or quantitative research helps healthcare providers understand patients and the impact and challenges of the care they deliver. Qualitative research provides an opportunity to generate and refine hypotheses and delve deeper into the data generated by quantitative research. Qualitative research is not an island apart from quantitative research but an integral part of research methods to understand the world around us. [17]

• Enhancing Healthcare Team Outcomes

Qualitative research is essential for all healthcare team members as all are affected by qualitative research. Qualitative research may help develop a theory or a model for health research that can be further explored by quantitative research. Much of the qualitative research data acquisition is completed by numerous team members, including social workers, scientists, nurses, etc. Within each area of the medical field, there is copious ongoing qualitative research, including physician-patient interactions, nursing-patient interactions, patient-environment interactions, healthcare team function, patient information delivery, etc. 

• Review Questions
• Access free multiple choice questions on this topic.
• Comment on this article.

Disclosure: Steven Tenny declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.

Disclosure: Janelle Brannan declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.

Disclosure: Grace Brannan declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.

This book is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ), which permits others to distribute the work, provided that the article is not altered or used commercially. You are not required to obtain permission to distribute this article, provided that you credit the author and journal.

• Cite this Page Tenny S, Brannan JM, Brannan GD. Qualitative Study. [Updated 2022 Sep 18]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024 Jan-.

In this Page

Bulk download.

• Bulk download StatPearls data from FTP

Related information

• PMC PubMed Central citations
• PubMed Links to PubMed

Similar articles in PubMed

• Suicidal Ideation. [StatPearls. 2024] Suicidal Ideation. Harmer B, Lee S, Rizvi A, Saadabadi A. StatPearls. 2024 Jan
• Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas. [Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022] Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas. Crider K, Williams J, Qi YP, Gutman J, Yeung L, Mai C, Finkelstain J, Mehta S, Pons-Duran C, Menéndez C, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1; 2(2022). Epub 2022 Feb 1.
• Macromolecular crowding: chemistry and physics meet biology (Ascona, Switzerland, 10-14 June 2012). [Phys Biol. 2013] Macromolecular crowding: chemistry and physics meet biology (Ascona, Switzerland, 10-14 June 2012). Foffi G, Pastore A, Piazza F, Temussi PA. Phys Biol. 2013 Aug; 10(4):040301. Epub 2013 Aug 2.
• Review Evidence Brief: The Effectiveness Of Mandatory Computer-Based Trainings On Government Ethics, Workplace Harassment, Or Privacy And Information Security-Related Topics [ 2014] Review Evidence Brief: The Effectiveness Of Mandatory Computer-Based Trainings On Government Ethics, Workplace Harassment, Or Privacy And Information Security-Related Topics Peterson K, McCleery E. 2014 May
• Review Public sector reforms and their impact on the level of corruption: A systematic review. [Campbell Syst Rev. 2021] Review Public sector reforms and their impact on the level of corruption: A systematic review. Mugellini G, Della Bella S, Colagrossi M, Isenring GL, Killias M. Campbell Syst Rev. 2021 Jun; 17(2):e1173. Epub 2021 May 24.

Recent Activity

• Qualitative Study - StatPearls Qualitative Study - StatPearls

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

Connect with NLM

National Library of Medicine 8600 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD 20894

Web Policies FOIA HHS Vulnerability Disclosure

Help Accessibility Careers

• Privacy Policy

Home » Survey Instruments – List and Their Uses

Survey Instruments – List and Their Uses

Table of Contents

Survey Instruments

Definition:

Survey instruments are tools used to collect data from a sample of individuals or a population. They typically consist of a series of questions designed to gather information on a particular topic or issue.

List of Survey Instruments

Types of Survey Instruments are as follows:

• Questionnaire : A questionnaire is a survey instrument consisting of a series of questions designed to gather information from a large number of respondents.
• Interview Schedule : An interview schedule is a survey instrument that is used to collect data from a small number of individuals through a face-to-face conversation or online communication.
• Focus Group Discussion Guide: A focus group discussion guide is a survey instrument used to facilitate a group discussion on a particular topic to collect opinions, attitudes, and perceptions of participants.
• Observation Checklist : An observation checklist is a survey instrument that is used to observe and record behaviors, events, or processes in a systematic and organized manner.
• Rating Scale: A rating scale is a survey instrument that is used to measure the extent to which an individual agrees or disagrees with a particular statement, or rates the quality of a product, service, or experience.
• Likert Scale: A Likert scale is a survey instrument that is used to measure attitudes, opinions, or perceptions of individuals towards a particular topic or statement.
• Semantic Differential Scale : A semantic differential scale is a survey instrument that is used to measure the connotative meaning of a particular concept, product, or service.
• Checklist: A checklist is a survey instrument that is used to systematically gather information on a specific topic or subject.
• Diaries and Logs: Diaries and logs are survey instruments that are used to record behaviors, activities, and experiences of participants over a period of time.
• Case Study: A case study is a survey instrument that is used to investigate a particular phenomenon, process, or event in-depth by analyzing the data from multiple sources.
• Ethnographic Field Notes : Ethnographic field notes are survey instruments used by ethnographers to record their observations and reflections during fieldwork, often in the form of detailed descriptions of people, places, and events.
• Psychometric Tests : Psychometric tests are survey instruments used to measure cognitive abilities, aptitudes, and personality traits.
• Exit Interviews : Exit interviews are survey instruments used to gather feedback from departing employees about their experiences working for a company, organization, or institution.
• Needs Assessment Surveys: Needs assessment surveys are survey instruments used to identify the needs, priorities, and preferences of a target population to inform program development and resource allocation.
• Community Needs Assessments : Community needs assessments are survey instruments used to gather information about the needs and priorities of a particular community, including its demographics, resources, and challenges.
• Performance Appraisal Forms: Performance appraisal forms are survey instruments used to evaluate the performance of employees against specific job-related criteria.
• Customer Needs Assessment Surveys: Customer needs assessment surveys are survey instruments used to identify the needs and preferences of customers to inform product development and marketing strategies.
• Learning Style Inventories : Learning style inventories are survey instruments used to identify an individual’s preferred learning style, such as visual, auditory, or kinesthetic.
• Team Performance Assessments: Team performance assessments are survey instruments used to evaluate the effectiveness of teams in achieving their goals and objectives.
• Organizational Climate Surveys: Organizational climate surveys are survey instruments used to gather information about the perceptions, attitudes, and values of employees towards their workplace.
• Employee Engagement Surveys: Employee engagement surveys are survey instruments used to measure the level of engagement, satisfaction, and commitment of employees towards their job and the organization.
• Self-Report Measures: Self-report measures are survey instruments used to gather information directly from participants about their own thoughts, feelings, and behaviors.
• Personality Inventories: Personality inventories are survey instruments used to measure individual differences in personality traits such as extroversion, conscientiousness, and openness to experience.
• Achievement Tests : Achievement tests are survey instruments used to measure the knowledge or skills acquired by individuals in a specific subject area or academic discipline.
• Attitude Scales: Attitude scales are survey instruments used to measure the degree to which an individual holds a particular attitude or belief towards a specific object, person, or idea.
• Customer Satisfaction Surveys: Customer satisfaction surveys are survey instruments used to gather feedback from customers about their experience with a product or service.
• Market Research Surveys: Market research surveys are survey instruments used to collect data on consumer behavior, market trends, and preferences to inform business decisions.
• Health Assessments: Health assessments are survey instruments used to gather information about an individual’s physical and mental health status, including medical history, symptoms, and lifestyle factors.
• Environmental Surveys: Environmental surveys are survey instruments used to gather information about environmental conditions and the impact of human activities on the natural world.
• Program Evaluation Surveys : Program evaluation surveys are survey instruments used to assess the effectiveness of programs and interventions in achieving their intended outcomes.
• Culture Assessments: Culture assessments are survey instruments used to gather information about the culture of an organization, including its values, beliefs, and practices.
• Customer Feedback Forms: Customer feedback forms are survey instruments used to gather feedback from customers about their experience with a product, service, or company.
• User Acceptance Testing (UAT) Forms: User acceptance testing (UAT) forms are survey instruments used to gather feedback from users about the functionality and usability of a software application or system.
• Stakeholder Surveys: Stakeholder surveys are survey instruments used to gather feedback from stakeholders, such as customers, employees, investors, and partners, about their perceptions and expectations of an organization or project.
• Social Network Analysis (SNA) Surveys: Social network analysis (SNA) surveys are survey instruments used to map and analyze social networks and relationships within a group or community.
• Leadership Assessments: Leadership assessments are survey instruments used to evaluate the leadership skills, styles, and behaviors of individuals in a leadership role.
• Exit Polls : Exit polls are survey instruments used to gather data on voting patterns and preferences in an election or referendum.
• Customer Loyalty Surveys : Customer loyalty surveys are survey instruments used to measure the level of loyalty and advocacy of customers towards a brand or company.
• Online Feedback Forms : Online feedback forms are survey instruments used to gather feedback from website visitors, customers, or users about their experience with a website, application, or digital product.
• Needs Analysis Surveys: Needs analysis surveys are survey instruments used to identify the training and development needs of employees or students to inform curriculum design and professional development programs.
• Career Assessments: Career assessments are survey instruments used to evaluate an individual’s interests, values, and skills to inform career decision-making and planning.
• Customer Perception Surveys: Customer perception surveys are survey instruments used to gather information about how customers perceive a product, service, or brand.
• Employee Satisfaction Surveys: Employee satisfaction surveys are survey instruments used to measure the level of job satisfaction, engagement, and motivation of employees.
• Conflict Resolution Assessments: Conflict resolution assessments are survey instruments used to identify the causes and sources of conflict in a group or organization and to inform conflict resolution strategies.
• Cultural Competence Assessments: Cultural competence assessments are survey instruments used to evaluate an individual’s ability to work effectively with people from diverse cultural backgrounds.
• Job Analysis Surveys: Job analysis surveys are survey instruments used to gather information about the tasks, responsibilities, and requirements of a particular job or position.
• Employee Turnover Surveys : Employee turnover surveys are survey instruments used to gather information about the reasons why employees leave a company or organization.
• Quality of Life Assessments: Quality of life assessments are survey instruments used to gather information about an individual’s physical, emotional, and social well-being.
• User Satisfaction Surveys: User satisfaction surveys are survey instruments used to gather feedback from users about their satisfaction with a product, service, or application.
• Data Collection Forms: Data collection forms are survey instruments used to gather information about a specific research question or topic, often used in quantitative research.
• Program Evaluation Forms: Program evaluation forms are survey instruments used to assess the effectiveness, efficiency, and impact of a program or intervention.
• Cultural Awareness Surveys: Cultural awareness surveys are survey instruments used to assess an individual’s knowledge and understanding of different cultures and customs.
• Employee Perception Surveys: Employee perception surveys are survey instruments used to gather information about how employees perceive their work environment, management, and colleagues.
• Leadership 360 Assessments: Leadership 360 assessments are survey instruments used to evaluate the leadership skills, styles, and behaviors of individuals from multiple perspectives, including self-assessment, peer feedback, and supervisor evaluation.
• Health Needs Assessments: Health needs assessments are survey instruments used to gather information about the health needs and priorities of a population to inform public health policies and programs.
• Social Capital Surveys: Social capital surveys are survey instruments used to measure the social networks and relationships within a community and their impact on social and economic outcomes.
• Psychosocial Assessments: Psychosocial assessments are survey instruments used to evaluate an individual’s psychological, social, and emotional well-being.
• Training Evaluation Forms: Training evaluation forms are survey instruments used to assess the effectiveness and impact of a training program on knowledge, skills, and behavior.
• Patient Satisfaction Surveys: Patient satisfaction surveys are survey instruments used to gather feedback from patients about their experience with healthcare services and providers.
• Program Needs Assessments : Program needs assessments are survey instruments used to identify the needs, goals, and expectations of stakeholders for a program or intervention.
• Community Needs Assessments: Community needs assessments are survey instruments used to gather information about the needs, challenges, and assets of a community to inform community development programs and policies.
• Environmental Assessments : Environmental assessments are survey instruments used to evaluate the environmental impact of a project, program, or policy.
• Stakeholder Analysis Surveys: Stakeholder analysis surveys are survey instruments used to identify and prioritize the needs, interests, and influence of stakeholders in a project or initiative.
• Performance Appraisal Forms: Performance appraisal forms are survey instruments used to evaluate the performance and contribution of employees to inform promotions, rewards, and career development plans.
• Consumer Behavior Surveys : Consumer behavior surveys are survey instruments used to gather information about the attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors of consumers towards products, brands, and services.
• Audience Feedback Forms : Audience feedback forms are survey instruments used to gather feedback from audience members about their experience with a performance, event, or media content.
• Market Research Surveys: Market research surveys are survey instruments used to gather information about market trends, customer preferences, and competition to inform business strategy and decision-making.
• Health Risk Assessments: Health risk assessments are survey instruments used to identify an individual’s health risks and to provide personalized recommendations for preventive care and lifestyle changes.
• Employee Engagement Surveys : Employee engagement surveys are survey instruments used to measure the level of employee engagement, commitment, and motivation in a company or organization.
• Social Impact Assessments: Social impact assessments are survey instruments used to evaluate the social, economic, and environmental impact of a project or policy on stakeholders and the community.
• Needs Assessment Forms : Needs assessment forms are survey instruments used to identify the needs, expectations, and priorities of stakeholders for a particular program, service, or project.
• Organizational Climate Surveys: Organizational climate surveys are survey instruments used to measure the overall culture, values, and climate of an organization, including the level of trust, communication, and support.
• Risk Assessment Forms: Risk assessment forms are survey instruments used to identify and evaluate potential risks associated with a project, program, or activity.
• Customer Service Surveys: Customer service surveys are survey instruments used to gather feedback from customers about the quality of customer service provided by a company or organization.
• Performance Evaluation Forms : Performance evaluation forms are survey instruments used to evaluate the performance and contribution of employees to inform promotions, rewards, and career development plans.
• Community Impact Assessments : Community impact assessments are survey instruments used to evaluate the social, economic, and environmental impact of a project or policy on the community.
• Health Status Surveys : Health status surveys are survey instruments used to gather information about an individual’s health status, including physical, mental, and emotional well-being.
• Organizational Effectiveness Surveys: Organizational effectiveness surveys are survey instruments used to measure the overall effectiveness and performance of an organization, including the alignment of goals, strategies, and outcomes.
• Program Implementation Surveys: Program implementation surveys are survey instruments used to evaluate the implementation process of a program or intervention, including the quality, fidelity, and sustainability.
• Social Support Surveys : Social support surveys are survey instruments used to measure the level of social support and connectedness within a community or group and their impact on health and well-being.

Survey Instruments in Research Methods

The following are some commonly used survey instruments in research methods:

• Questionnaires : A questionnaire is a set of standardized questions designed to collect information about a specific topic. Questionnaires can be administered in different ways, including in person, over the phone, or online.
• Interviews : Interviews involve asking participants a series of questions in a face-to-face or phone conversation. Interviews can be structured, semi-structured, or unstructured depending on the research question and the researcher’s goals.
• Surveys : Surveys are used to collect data from a large number of participants through self-report. Surveys can be administered through various mediums, including paper-based, phone-based, and online surveys.
• Focus Groups : A focus group is a qualitative research method where a group of individuals is brought together to discuss a particular topic. The goal is to gather in-depth information about participants’ perceptions, attitudes, and beliefs.
• Case Studies: A case study is an in-depth analysis of an individual, group, or organization. The researcher collects data through various methods, including interviews, observation, and document analysis.
• Observations : Observations involve watching participants in their natural setting and recording their behavior. Observations can be structured or unstructured, and the data collected can be qualitative or quantitative.

Survey Instruments in Qualitative Research

In qualitative research , survey instruments are used to gather data from participants through structured or semi-structured questionnaires. These instruments are used to gather information on a wide range of topics, including attitudes, beliefs, perceptions, experiences, and behaviors.

Here are some commonly used survey instruments in qualitative research:

• Focus groups
• Questionnaires
• Observation
• Document analysis

Survey Instruments in Quantitative Research

Survey instruments are commonly used in quantitative research to collect data from a large number of respondents. The following are some commonly used survey instruments:

• Self-Administered Surveys:
• Telephone Surveys
• Online Surveys
• Focus Groups
• Observations

Importance of Survey Instruments

Here are some reasons why survey instruments are important:

• Provide valuable insights : Survey instruments help researchers gather accurate data and provide valuable insights into various phenomena. Researchers can use the data collected through surveys to analyze trends, patterns, and relationships between variables, leading to a better understanding of the topic at hand.
• Measure changes over time: By using survey instruments, researchers can measure changes in attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors over time. This allows them to identify trends and patterns, which can inform policy decisions and interventions.
• Inform decision-making: Survey instruments can provide decision-makers with information on the opinions, preferences, and needs of a particular group. This information can be used to make informed decisions and to tailor programs and policies to meet the specific needs of a population.
• Cost-effective: Compared to other research methods, such as focus groups or in-depth interviews, survey instruments are relatively cost-effective. They can be administered to a large number of participants at once, and data can be collected and analyzed quickly and efficiently.
• Standardization : Survey instruments can be standardized to ensure that all participants are asked the same questions in the same way. This helps to ensure that the data collected is consistent and reliable.

Applications of Survey Instruments

The data collected through surveys can be used for various purposes, including:

• Market research : Surveys can be used to collect data on consumer preferences, habits, and opinions, which can help businesses make informed decisions about their products or services.
• Social research: Surveys can be used to collect data on social issues such as public opinion, political preferences, and attitudes towards social policies.
• Health research: Surveys can be used to collect data on health-related issues such as disease prevalence, risk factors, and health behaviors.
• Education research : Surveys can be used to collect data on education-related issues such as student satisfaction, teacher performance, and educational outcomes.
• Customer satisfaction: Surveys can be used to collect data on customer satisfaction, which can help businesses improve their products and services.
• Employee satisfaction : Surveys can be used to collect data on employee satisfaction, which can help employers improve their workplace policies and practices.
• Program evaluation : Surveys can be used to collect data on program outcomes and effectiveness, which can help organizations improve their programs.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Data Collection – Methods Types and Examples

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Institutional Review Board – Application Sample...

Evaluating Research – Process, Examples and...

Chapter 11. Interviewing

Introduction.

Interviewing people is at the heart of qualitative research. It is not merely a way to collect data but an intrinsically rewarding activity—an interaction between two people that holds the potential for greater understanding and interpersonal development. Unlike many of our daily interactions with others that are fairly shallow and mundane, sitting down with a person for an hour or two and really listening to what they have to say is a profound and deep enterprise, one that can provide not only “data” for you, the interviewer, but also self-understanding and a feeling of being heard for the interviewee. I always approach interviewing with a deep appreciation for the opportunity it gives me to understand how other people experience the world. That said, there is not one kind of interview but many, and some of these are shallower than others. This chapter will provide you with an overview of interview techniques but with a special focus on the in-depth semistructured interview guide approach, which is the approach most widely used in social science research.

An interview can be variously defined as “a conversation with a purpose” ( Lune and Berg 2018 ) and an attempt to understand the world from the point of view of the person being interviewed: “to unfold the meaning of peoples’ experiences, to uncover their lived world prior to scientific explanations” ( Kvale 2007 ). It is a form of active listening in which the interviewer steers the conversation to subjects and topics of interest to their research but also manages to leave enough space for those interviewed to say surprising things. Achieving that balance is a tricky thing, which is why most practitioners believe interviewing is both an art and a science. In my experience as a teacher, there are some students who are “natural” interviewers (often they are introverts), but anyone can learn to conduct interviews, and everyone, even those of us who have been doing this for years, can improve their interviewing skills. This might be a good time to highlight the fact that the interview is a product between interviewer and interviewee and that this product is only as good as the rapport established between the two participants. Active listening is the key to establishing this necessary rapport.

Patton ( 2002 ) makes the argument that we use interviews because there are certain things that are not observable. In particular, “we cannot observe feelings, thoughts, and intentions. We cannot observe behaviors that took place at some previous point in time. We cannot observe situations that preclude the presence of an observer. We cannot observe how people have organized the world and the meanings they attach to what goes on in the world. We have to ask people questions about those things” ( 341 ).

Types of Interviews

There are several distinct types of interviews. Imagine a continuum (figure 11.1). On one side are unstructured conversations—the kind you have with your friends. No one is in control of those conversations, and what you talk about is often random—whatever pops into your head. There is no secret, underlying purpose to your talking—if anything, the purpose is to talk to and engage with each other, and the words you use and the things you talk about are a little beside the point. An unstructured interview is a little like this informal conversation, except that one of the parties to the conversation (you, the researcher) does have an underlying purpose, and that is to understand the other person. You are not friends speaking for no purpose, but it might feel just as unstructured to the “interviewee” in this scenario. That is one side of the continuum. On the other side are fully structured and standardized survey-type questions asked face-to-face. Here it is very clear who is asking the questions and who is answering them. This doesn’t feel like a conversation at all! A lot of people new to interviewing have this ( erroneously !) in mind when they think about interviews as data collection. Somewhere in the middle of these two extreme cases is the “ semistructured” interview , in which the researcher uses an “interview guide” to gently move the conversation to certain topics and issues. This is the primary form of interviewing for qualitative social scientists and will be what I refer to as interviewing for the rest of this chapter, unless otherwise specified.

Informal (unstructured conversations). This is the most “open-ended” approach to interviewing. It is particularly useful in conjunction with observational methods (see chapters 13 and 14). There are no predetermined questions. Each interview will be different. Imagine you are researching the Oregon Country Fair, an annual event in Veneta, Oregon, that includes live music, artisan craft booths, face painting, and a lot of people walking through forest paths. It’s unlikely that you will be able to get a person to sit down with you and talk intensely about a set of questions for an hour and a half. But you might be able to sidle up to several people and engage with them about their experiences at the fair. You might have a general interest in what attracts people to these events, so you could start a conversation by asking strangers why they are here or why they come back every year. That’s it. Then you have a conversation that may lead you anywhere. Maybe one person tells a long story about how their parents brought them here when they were a kid. A second person talks about how this is better than Burning Man. A third person shares their favorite traveling band. And yet another enthuses about the public library in the woods. During your conversations, you also talk about a lot of other things—the weather, the utilikilts for sale, the fact that a favorite food booth has disappeared. It’s all good. You may not be able to record these conversations. Instead, you might jot down notes on the spot and then, when you have the time, write down as much as you can remember about the conversations in long fieldnotes. Later, you will have to sit down with these fieldnotes and try to make sense of all the information (see chapters 18 and 19).

Interview guide ( semistructured interview ). This is the primary type employed by social science qualitative researchers. The researcher creates an “interview guide” in advance, which she uses in every interview. In theory, every person interviewed is asked the same questions. In practice, every person interviewed is asked mostly the same topics but not always the same questions, as the whole point of a “guide” is that it guides the direction of the conversation but does not command it. The guide is typically between five and ten questions or question areas, sometimes with suggested follow-ups or prompts . For example, one question might be “What was it like growing up in Eastern Oregon?” with prompts such as “Did you live in a rural area? What kind of high school did you attend?” to help the conversation develop. These interviews generally take place in a quiet place (not a busy walkway during a festival) and are recorded. The recordings are transcribed, and those transcriptions then become the “data” that is analyzed (see chapters 18 and 19). The conventional length of one of these types of interviews is between one hour and two hours, optimally ninety minutes. Less than one hour doesn’t allow for much development of questions and thoughts, and two hours (or more) is a lot of time to ask someone to sit still and answer questions. If you have a lot of ground to cover, and the person is willing, I highly recommend two separate interview sessions, with the second session being slightly shorter than the first (e.g., ninety minutes the first day, sixty minutes the second). There are lots of good reasons for this, but the most compelling one is that this allows you to listen to the first day’s recording and catch anything interesting you might have missed in the moment and so develop follow-up questions that can probe further. This also allows the person being interviewed to have some time to think about the issues raised in the interview and go a little deeper with their answers.

Standardized questionnaire with open responses ( structured interview ). This is the type of interview a lot of people have in mind when they hear “interview”: a researcher comes to your door with a clipboard and proceeds to ask you a series of questions. These questions are all the same whoever answers the door; they are “standardized.” Both the wording and the exact order are important, as people’s responses may vary depending on how and when a question is asked. These are qualitative only in that the questions allow for “open-ended responses”: people can say whatever they want rather than select from a predetermined menu of responses. For example, a survey I collaborated on included this open-ended response question: “How does class affect one’s career success in sociology?” Some of the answers were simply one word long (e.g., “debt”), and others were long statements with stories and personal anecdotes. It is possible to be surprised by the responses. Although it’s a stretch to call this kind of questioning a conversation, it does allow the person answering the question some degree of freedom in how they answer.

Survey questionnaire with closed responses (not an interview!). Standardized survey questions with specific answer options (e.g., closed responses) are not really interviews at all, and they do not generate qualitative data. For example, if we included five options for the question “How does class affect one’s career success in sociology?”—(1) debt, (2) social networks, (3) alienation, (4) family doesn’t understand, (5) type of grad program—we leave no room for surprises at all. Instead, we would most likely look at patterns around these responses, thinking quantitatively rather than qualitatively (e.g., using regression analysis techniques, we might find that working-class sociologists were twice as likely to bring up alienation). It can sometimes be confusing for new students because the very same survey can include both closed-ended and open-ended questions. The key is to think about how these will be analyzed and to what level surprises are possible. If your plan is to turn all responses into a number and make predictions about correlations and relationships, you are no longer conducting qualitative research. This is true even if you are conducting this survey face-to-face with a real live human. Closed-response questions are not conversations of any kind, purposeful or not.

In summary, the semistructured interview guide approach is the predominant form of interviewing for social science qualitative researchers because it allows a high degree of freedom of responses from those interviewed (thus allowing for novel discoveries) while still maintaining some connection to a research question area or topic of interest. The rest of the chapter assumes the employment of this form.

Creating an Interview Guide

Your interview guide is the instrument used to bridge your research question(s) and what the people you are interviewing want to tell you. Unlike a standardized questionnaire, the questions actually asked do not need to be exactly what you have written down in your guide. The guide is meant to create space for those you are interviewing to talk about the phenomenon of interest, but sometimes you are not even sure what that phenomenon is until you start asking questions. A priority in creating an interview guide is to ensure it offers space. One of the worst mistakes is to create questions that are so specific that the person answering them will not stray. Relatedly, questions that sound “academic” will shut down a lot of respondents. A good interview guide invites respondents to talk about what is important to them, not feel like they are performing or being evaluated by you.

Good interview questions should not sound like your “research question” at all. For example, let’s say your research question is “How do patriarchal assumptions influence men’s understanding of climate change and responses to climate change?” It would be worse than unhelpful to ask a respondent, “How do your assumptions about the role of men affect your understanding of climate change?” You need to unpack this into manageable nuggets that pull your respondent into the area of interest without leading him anywhere. You could start by asking him what he thinks about climate change in general. Or, even better, whether he has any concerns about heatwaves or increased tornadoes or polar icecaps melting. Once he starts talking about that, you can ask follow-up questions that bring in issues around gendered roles, perhaps asking if he is married (to a woman) and whether his wife shares his thoughts and, if not, how they negotiate that difference. The fact is, you won’t really know the right questions to ask until he starts talking.

There are several distinct types of questions that can be used in your interview guide, either as main questions or as follow-up probes. If you remember that the point is to leave space for the respondent, you will craft a much more effective interview guide! You will also want to think about the place of time in both the questions themselves (past, present, future orientations) and the sequencing of the questions.

Researcher Note

Suggestion : As you read the next three sections (types of questions, temporality, question sequence), have in mind a particular research question, and try to draft questions and sequence them in a way that opens space for a discussion that helps you answer your research question.

Type of Questions

Experience and behavior questions ask about what a respondent does regularly (their behavior) or has done (their experience). These are relatively easy questions for people to answer because they appear more “factual” and less subjective. This makes them good opening questions. For the study on climate change above, you might ask, “Have you ever experienced an unusual weather event? What happened?” Or “You said you work outside? What is a typical summer workday like for you? How do you protect yourself from the heat?”

Opinion and values questions , in contrast, ask questions that get inside the minds of those you are interviewing. “Do you think climate change is real? Who or what is responsible for it?” are two such questions. Note that you don’t have to literally ask, “What is your opinion of X?” but you can find a way to ask the specific question relevant to the conversation you are having. These questions are a bit trickier to ask because the answers you get may depend in part on how your respondent perceives you and whether they want to please you or not. We’ve talked a fair amount about being reflective. Here is another place where this comes into play. You need to be aware of the effect your presence might have on the answers you are receiving and adjust accordingly. If you are a woman who is perceived as liberal asking a man who identifies as conservative about climate change, there is a lot of subtext that can be going on in the interview. There is no one right way to resolve this, but you must at least be aware of it.

Feeling questions are questions that ask respondents to draw on their emotional responses. It’s pretty common for academic researchers to forget that we have bodies and emotions, but people’s understandings of the world often operate at this affective level, sometimes unconsciously or barely consciously. It is a good idea to include questions that leave space for respondents to remember, imagine, or relive emotional responses to particular phenomena. “What was it like when you heard your cousin’s house burned down in that wildfire?” doesn’t explicitly use any emotion words, but it allows your respondent to remember what was probably a pretty emotional day. And if they respond emotionally neutral, that is pretty interesting data too. Note that asking someone “How do you feel about X” is not always going to evoke an emotional response, as they might simply turn around and respond with “I think that…” It is better to craft a question that actually pushes the respondent into the affective category. This might be a specific follow-up to an experience and behavior question —for example, “You just told me about your daily routine during the summer heat. Do you worry it is going to get worse?” or “Have you ever been afraid it will be too hot to get your work accomplished?”

Knowledge questions ask respondents what they actually know about something factual. We have to be careful when we ask these types of questions so that respondents do not feel like we are evaluating them (which would shut them down), but, for example, it is helpful to know when you are having a conversation about climate change that your respondent does in fact know that unusual weather events have increased and that these have been attributed to climate change! Asking these questions can set the stage for deeper questions and can ensure that the conversation makes the same kind of sense to both participants. For example, a conversation about political polarization can be put back on track once you realize that the respondent doesn’t really have a clear understanding that there are two parties in the US. Instead of asking a series of questions about Republicans and Democrats, you might shift your questions to talk more generally about political disagreements (e.g., “people against abortion”). And sometimes what you do want to know is the level of knowledge about a particular program or event (e.g., “Are you aware you can discharge your student loans through the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program?”).

Sensory questions call on all senses of the respondent to capture deeper responses. These are particularly helpful in sparking memory. “Think back to your childhood in Eastern Oregon. Describe the smells, the sounds…” Or you could use these questions to help a person access the full experience of a setting they customarily inhabit: “When you walk through the doors to your office building, what do you see? Hear? Smell?” As with feeling questions , these questions often supplement experience and behavior questions . They are another way of allowing your respondent to report fully and deeply rather than remain on the surface.

Creative questions employ illustrative examples, suggested scenarios, or simulations to get respondents to think more deeply about an issue, topic, or experience. There are many options here. In The Trouble with Passion , Erin Cech ( 2021 ) provides a scenario in which “Joe” is trying to decide whether to stay at his decent but boring computer job or follow his passion by opening a restaurant. She asks respondents, “What should Joe do?” Their answers illuminate the attraction of “passion” in job selection. In my own work, I have used a news story about an upwardly mobile young man who no longer has time to see his mother and sisters to probe respondents’ feelings about the costs of social mobility. Jessi Streib and Betsy Leondar-Wright have used single-page cartoon “scenes” to elicit evaluations of potential racial discrimination, sexual harassment, and classism. Barbara Sutton ( 2010 ) has employed lists of words (“strong,” “mother,” “victim”) on notecards she fans out and asks her female respondents to select and discuss.

Background/Demographic Questions

You most definitely will want to know more about the person you are interviewing in terms of conventional demographic information, such as age, race, gender identity, occupation, and educational attainment. These are not questions that normally open up inquiry. [1] For this reason, my practice has been to include a separate “demographic questionnaire” sheet that I ask each respondent to fill out at the conclusion of the interview. Only include those aspects that are relevant to your study. For example, if you are not exploring religion or religious affiliation, do not include questions about a person’s religion on the demographic sheet. See the example provided at the end of this chapter.

Temporality

Any type of question can have a past, present, or future orientation. For example, if you are asking a behavior question about workplace routine, you might ask the respondent to talk about past work, present work, and ideal (future) work. Similarly, if you want to understand how people cope with natural disasters, you might ask your respondent how they felt then during the wildfire and now in retrospect and whether and to what extent they have concerns for future wildfire disasters. It’s a relatively simple suggestion—don’t forget to ask about past, present, and future—but it can have a big impact on the quality of the responses you receive.

Question Sequence

Having a list of good questions or good question areas is not enough to make a good interview guide. You will want to pay attention to the order in which you ask your questions. Even though any one respondent can derail this order (perhaps by jumping to answer a question you haven’t yet asked), a good advance plan is always helpful. When thinking about sequence, remember that your goal is to get your respondent to open up to you and to say things that might surprise you. To establish rapport, it is best to start with nonthreatening questions. Asking about the present is often the safest place to begin, followed by the past (they have to know you a little bit to get there), and lastly, the future (talking about hopes and fears requires the most rapport). To allow for surprises, it is best to move from very general questions to more particular questions only later in the interview. This ensures that respondents have the freedom to bring up the topics that are relevant to them rather than feel like they are constrained to answer you narrowly. For example, refrain from asking about particular emotions until these have come up previously—don’t lead with them. Often, your more particular questions will emerge only during the course of the interview, tailored to what is emerging in conversation.

Once you have a set of questions, read through them aloud and imagine you are being asked the same questions. Does the set of questions have a natural flow? Would you be willing to answer the very first question to a total stranger? Does your sequence establish facts and experiences before moving on to opinions and values? Did you include prefatory statements, where necessary; transitions; and other announcements? These can be as simple as “Hey, we talked a lot about your experiences as a barista while in college.… Now I am turning to something completely different: how you managed friendships in college.” That is an abrupt transition, but it has been softened by your acknowledgment of that.

Probes and Flexibility

Once you have the interview guide, you will also want to leave room for probes and follow-up questions. As in the sample probe included here, you can write out the obvious probes and follow-up questions in advance. You might not need them, as your respondent might anticipate them and include full responses to the original question. Or you might need to tailor them to how your respondent answered the question. Some common probes and follow-up questions include asking for more details (When did that happen? Who else was there?), asking for elaboration (Could you say more about that?), asking for clarification (Does that mean what I think it means or something else? I understand what you mean, but someone else reading the transcript might not), and asking for contrast or comparison (How did this experience compare with last year’s event?). “Probing is a skill that comes from knowing what to look for in the interview, listening carefully to what is being said and what is not said, and being sensitive to the feedback needs of the person being interviewed” ( Patton 2002:374 ). It takes work! And energy. I and many other interviewers I know report feeling emotionally and even physically drained after conducting an interview. You are tasked with active listening and rearranging your interview guide as needed on the fly. If you only ask the questions written down in your interview guide with no deviations, you are doing it wrong. [2]

The Final Question

Every interview guide should include a very open-ended final question that allows for the respondent to say whatever it is they have been dying to tell you but you’ve forgotten to ask. About half the time they are tired too and will tell you they have nothing else to say. But incredibly, some of the most honest and complete responses take place here, at the end of a long interview. You have to realize that the person being interviewed is often discovering things about themselves as they talk to you and that this process of discovery can lead to new insights for them. Making space at the end is therefore crucial. Be sure you convey that you actually do want them to tell you more, that the offer of “anything else?” is not read as an empty convention where the polite response is no. Here is where you can pull from that active listening and tailor the final question to the particular person. For example, “I’ve asked you a lot of questions about what it was like to live through that wildfire. I’m wondering if there is anything I’ve forgotten to ask, especially because I haven’t had that experience myself” is a much more inviting final question than “Great. Anything you want to add?” It’s also helpful to convey to the person that you have the time to listen to their full answer, even if the allotted time is at the end. After all, there are no more questions to ask, so the respondent knows exactly how much time is left. Do them the courtesy of listening to them!

Conducting the Interview

Once you have your interview guide, you are on your way to conducting your first interview. I always practice my interview guide with a friend or family member. I do this even when the questions don’t make perfect sense for them, as it still helps me realize which questions make no sense, are poorly worded (too academic), or don’t follow sequentially. I also practice the routine I will use for interviewing, which goes something like this:

• Introduce myself and reintroduce the study
• Provide consent form and ask them to sign and retain/return copy
• Ask if they have any questions about the study before we begin
• Ask if I can begin recording
• Ask questions (from interview guide)
• Turn off the recording device
• Ask if they are willing to fill out my demographic questionnaire
• Collect questionnaire and, without looking at the answers, place in same folder as signed consent form
• Thank them and depart

A note on remote interviewing: Interviews have traditionally been conducted face-to-face in a private or quiet public setting. You don’t want a lot of background noise, as this will make transcriptions difficult. During the recent global pandemic, many interviewers, myself included, learned the benefits of interviewing remotely. Although face-to-face is still preferable for many reasons, Zoom interviewing is not a bad alternative, and it does allow more interviews across great distances. Zoom also includes automatic transcription, which significantly cuts down on the time it normally takes to convert our conversations into “data” to be analyzed. These automatic transcriptions are not perfect, however, and you will still need to listen to the recording and clarify and clean up the transcription. Nor do automatic transcriptions include notations of body language or change of tone, which you may want to include. When interviewing remotely, you will want to collect the consent form before you meet: ask them to read, sign, and return it as an email attachment. I think it is better to ask for the demographic questionnaire after the interview, but because some respondents may never return it then, it is probably best to ask for this at the same time as the consent form, in advance of the interview.

What should you bring to the interview? I would recommend bringing two copies of the consent form (one for you and one for the respondent), a demographic questionnaire, a manila folder in which to place the signed consent form and filled-out demographic questionnaire, a printed copy of your interview guide (I print with three-inch right margins so I can jot down notes on the page next to relevant questions), a pen, a recording device, and water.

After the interview, you will want to secure the signed consent form in a locked filing cabinet (if in print) or a password-protected folder on your computer. Using Excel or a similar program that allows tables/spreadsheets, create an identifying number for your interview that links to the consent form without using the name of your respondent. For example, let’s say that I conduct interviews with US politicians, and the first person I meet with is George W. Bush. I will assign the transcription the number “INT#001” and add it to the signed consent form. [3] The signed consent form goes into a locked filing cabinet, and I never use the name “George W. Bush” again. I take the information from the demographic sheet, open my Excel spreadsheet, and add the relevant information in separate columns for the row INT#001: White, male, Republican. When I interview Bill Clinton as my second interview, I include a second row: INT#002: White, male, Democrat. And so on. The only link to the actual name of the respondent and this information is the fact that the consent form (unavailable to anyone but me) has stamped on it the interview number.

Many students get very nervous before their first interview. Actually, many of us are always nervous before the interview! But do not worry—this is normal, and it does pass. Chances are, you will be pleasantly surprised at how comfortable it begins to feel. These “purposeful conversations” are often a delight for both participants. This is not to say that sometimes things go wrong. I often have my students practice several “bad scenarios” (e.g., a respondent that you cannot get to open up; a respondent who is too talkative and dominates the conversation, steering it away from the topics you are interested in; emotions that completely take over; or shocking disclosures you are ill-prepared to handle), but most of the time, things go quite well. Be prepared for the unexpected, but know that the reason interviews are so popular as a technique of data collection is that they are usually richly rewarding for both participants.

One thing that I stress to my methods students and remind myself about is that interviews are still conversations between people. If there’s something you might feel uncomfortable asking someone about in a “normal” conversation, you will likely also feel a bit of discomfort asking it in an interview. Maybe more importantly, your respondent may feel uncomfortable. Social research—especially about inequality—can be uncomfortable. And it’s easy to slip into an abstract, intellectualized, or removed perspective as an interviewer. This is one reason trying out interview questions is important. Another is that sometimes the question sounds good in your head but doesn’t work as well out loud in practice. I learned this the hard way when a respondent asked me how I would answer the question I had just posed, and I realized that not only did I not really know how I would answer it, but I also wasn’t quite as sure I knew what I was asking as I had thought.

—Elizabeth M. Lee, Associate Professor of Sociology at Saint Joseph’s University, author of Class and Campus Life , and co-author of Geographies of Campus Inequality

How Many Interviews?

Your research design has included a targeted number of interviews and a recruitment plan (see chapter 5). Follow your plan, but remember that “ saturation ” is your goal. You interview as many people as you can until you reach a point at which you are no longer surprised by what they tell you. This means not that no one after your first twenty interviews will have surprising, interesting stories to tell you but rather that the picture you are forming about the phenomenon of interest to you from a research perspective has come into focus, and none of the interviews are substantially refocusing that picture. That is when you should stop collecting interviews. Note that to know when you have reached this, you will need to read your transcripts as you go. More about this in chapters 18 and 19.

Your Final Product: The Ideal Interview Transcript

A good interview transcript will demonstrate a subtly controlled conversation by the skillful interviewer. In general, you want to see replies that are about one paragraph long, not short sentences and not running on for several pages. Although it is sometimes necessary to follow respondents down tangents, it is also often necessary to pull them back to the questions that form the basis of your research study. This is not really a free conversation, although it may feel like that to the person you are interviewing.

Final Tips from an Interview Master

Annette Lareau is arguably one of the masters of the trade. In Listening to People , she provides several guidelines for good interviews and then offers a detailed example of an interview gone wrong and how it could be addressed (please see the “Further Readings” at the end of this chapter). Here is an abbreviated version of her set of guidelines: (1) interview respondents who are experts on the subjects of most interest to you (as a corollary, don’t ask people about things they don’t know); (2) listen carefully and talk as little as possible; (3) keep in mind what you want to know and why you want to know it; (4) be a proactive interviewer (subtly guide the conversation); (5) assure respondents that there aren’t any right or wrong answers; (6) use the respondent’s own words to probe further (this both allows you to accurately identify what you heard and pushes the respondent to explain further); (7) reuse effective probes (don’t reinvent the wheel as you go—if repeating the words back works, do it again and again); (8) focus on learning the subjective meanings that events or experiences have for a respondent; (9) don’t be afraid to ask a question that draws on your own knowledge (unlike trial lawyers who are trained never to ask a question for which they don’t already know the answer, sometimes it’s worth it to ask risky questions based on your hypotheses or just plain hunches); (10) keep thinking while you are listening (so difficult…and important); (11) return to a theme raised by a respondent if you want further information; (12) be mindful of power inequalities (and never ever coerce a respondent to continue the interview if they want out); (13) take control with overly talkative respondents; (14) expect overly succinct responses, and develop strategies for probing further; (15) balance digging deep and moving on; (16) develop a plan to deflect questions (e.g., let them know you are happy to answer any questions at the end of the interview, but you don’t want to take time away from them now); and at the end, (17) check to see whether you have asked all your questions. You don’t always have to ask everyone the same set of questions, but if there is a big area you have forgotten to cover, now is the time to recover ( Lareau 2021:93–103 ).

Sample: Demographic Questionnaire

ASA Taskforce on First-Generation and Working-Class Persons in Sociology – Class Effects on Career Success

Supplementary Demographic Questionnaire

Thank you for your participation in this interview project. We would like to collect a few pieces of key demographic information from you to supplement our analyses. Your answers to these questions will be kept confidential and stored by ID number. All of your responses here are entirely voluntary!

What best captures your race/ethnicity? (please check any/all that apply)

• White (Non Hispanic/Latina/o/x)
• Black or African American
• Hispanic, Latino/a/x of Spanish
• Asian or Asian American
• American Indian or Alaska Native
• Middle Eastern or North African
• Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
• Other : (Please write in: ________________)

What is your current position?

• Grad Student
• Full Professor

Please check any and all of the following that apply to you:

• I identify as a working-class academic
• I was the first in my family to graduate from college
• I grew up poor

What best reflects your gender?

• Transgender female/Transgender woman
• Transgender male/Transgender man
• Gender queer/ Gender nonconforming

Anything else you would like us to know about you?

Example: Interview Guide

In this example, follow-up prompts are italicized.  Note the sequence of questions.  That second question often elicits an entire life history , answering several later questions in advance.

Introduction Script/Question

Thank you for participating in our survey of ASA members who identify as first-generation or working-class.  As you may have heard, ASA has sponsored a taskforce on first-generation and working-class persons in sociology and we are interested in hearing from those who so identify.  Your participation in this interview will help advance our knowledge in this area.

• The first thing we would like to as you is why you have volunteered to be part of this study? What does it mean to you be first-gen or working class?  Why were you willing to be interviewed?
• How did you decide to become a sociologist?
• Can you tell me a little bit about where you grew up? ( prompts: what did your parent(s) do for a living?  What kind of high school did you attend?)
• Has this identity been salient to your experience? (how? How much?)
• How welcoming was your grad program? Your first academic employer?
• Why did you decide to pursue sociology at the graduate level?
• Did you experience culture shock in college? In graduate school?
• Has your FGWC status shaped how you’ve thought about where you went to school? debt? etc?
• Were you mentored? How did this work (not work)?  How might it?
• What did you consider when deciding where to go to grad school? Where to apply for your first position?
• What, to you, is a mark of career success? Have you achieved that success?  What has helped or hindered your pursuit of success?
• Do you think sociology, as a field, cares about prestige?
• Let’s talk a little bit about intersectionality. How does being first-gen/working class work alongside other identities that are important to you?
• What do your friends and family think about your career? Have you had any difficulty relating to family members or past friends since becoming highly educated?
• Do you have any debt from college/grad school? Are you concerned about this?  Could you explain more about how you paid for college/grad school?  (here, include assistance from family, fellowships, scholarships, etc.)
• (You’ve mentioned issues or obstacles you had because of your background.) What could have helped?  Or, who or what did? Can you think of fortuitous moments in your career?
• Do you have any regrets about the path you took?
• Is there anything else you would like to add? Anything that the Taskforce should take note of, that we did not ask you about here?

Further Readings

Britten, Nicky. 1995. “Qualitative Interviews in Medical Research.” BMJ: British Medical Journal 31(6999):251–253. A good basic overview of interviewing particularly useful for students of public health and medical research generally.

Corbin, Juliet, and Janice M. Morse. 2003. “The Unstructured Interactive Interview: Issues of Reciprocity and Risks When Dealing with Sensitive Topics.” Qualitative Inquiry 9(3):335–354. Weighs the potential benefits and harms of conducting interviews on topics that may cause emotional distress. Argues that the researcher’s skills and code of ethics should ensure that the interviewing process provides more of a benefit to both participant and researcher than a harm to the former.

Gerson, Kathleen, and Sarah Damaske. 2020. The Science and Art of Interviewing . New York: Oxford University Press. A useful guidebook/textbook for both undergraduates and graduate students, written by sociologists.

Kvale, Steiner. 2007. Doing Interviews . London: SAGE. An easy-to-follow guide to conducting and analyzing interviews by psychologists.

Lamont, Michèle, and Ann Swidler. 2014. “Methodological Pluralism and the Possibilities and Limits of Interviewing.” Qualitative Sociology 37(2):153–171. Written as a response to various debates surrounding the relative value of interview-based studies and ethnographic studies defending the particular strengths of interviewing. This is a must-read article for anyone seriously engaging in qualitative research!

Pugh, Allison J. 2013. “What Good Are Interviews for Thinking about Culture? Demystifying Interpretive Analysis.” American Journal of Cultural Sociology 1(1):42–68. Another defense of interviewing written against those who champion ethnographic methods as superior, particularly in the area of studying culture. A classic.

Rapley, Timothy John. 2001. “The ‘Artfulness’ of Open-Ended Interviewing: Some considerations in analyzing interviews.” Qualitative Research 1(3):303–323. Argues for the importance of “local context” of data production (the relationship built between interviewer and interviewee, for example) in properly analyzing interview data.

Weiss, Robert S. 1995. Learning from Strangers: The Art and Method of Qualitative Interview Studies . New York: Simon and Schuster. A classic and well-regarded textbook on interviewing. Because Weiss has extensive experience conducting surveys, he contrasts the qualitative interview with the survey questionnaire well; particularly useful for those trained in the latter.

• I say “normally” because how people understand their various identities can itself be an expansive topic of inquiry. Here, I am merely talking about collecting otherwise unexamined demographic data, similar to how we ask people to check boxes on surveys. ↵
• Again, this applies to “semistructured in-depth interviewing.” When conducting standardized questionnaires, you will want to ask each question exactly as written, without deviations! ↵
• I always include “INT” in the number because I sometimes have other kinds of data with their own numbering: FG#001 would mean the first focus group, for example. I also always include three-digit spaces, as this allows for up to 999 interviews (or, more realistically, allows for me to interview up to one hundred persons without having to reset my numbering system). ↵

A method of data collection in which the researcher asks the participant questions; the answers to these questions are often recorded and transcribed verbatim. There are many different kinds of interviews - see also semistructured interview , structured interview , and unstructured interview .

A document listing key questions and question areas for use during an interview.  It is used most often for semi-structured interviews.  A good interview guide may have no more than ten primary questions for two hours of interviewing, but these ten questions will be supplemented by probes and relevant follow-ups throughout the interview.  Most IRBs require the inclusion of the interview guide in applications for review.  See also interview and  semi-structured interview .

A data-collection method that relies on casual, conversational, and informal interviewing.  Despite its apparent conversational nature, the researcher usually has a set of particular questions or question areas in mind but allows the interview to unfold spontaneously.  This is a common data-collection technique among ethnographers.  Compare to the semi-structured or in-depth interview .

A form of interview that follows a standard guide of questions asked, although the order of the questions may change to match the particular needs of each individual interview subject, and probing “follow-up” questions are often added during the course of the interview.  The semi-structured interview is the primary form of interviewing used by qualitative researchers in the social sciences.  It is sometimes referred to as an “in-depth” interview.  See also interview and  interview guide .

The cluster of data-collection tools and techniques that involve observing interactions between people, the behaviors, and practices of individuals (sometimes in contrast to what they say about how they act and behave), and cultures in context.  Observational methods are the key tools employed by ethnographers and Grounded Theory .

Follow-up questions used in a semi-structured interview  to elicit further elaboration.  Suggested prompts can be included in the interview guide  to be used/deployed depending on how the initial question was answered or if the topic of the prompt does not emerge spontaneously.

A form of interview that follows a strict set of questions, asked in a particular order, for all interview subjects.  The questions are also the kind that elicits short answers, and the data is more “informative” than probing.  This is often used in mixed-methods studies, accompanying a survey instrument.  Because there is no room for nuance or the exploration of meaning in structured interviews, qualitative researchers tend to employ semi-structured interviews instead.  See also interview.

The point at which you can conclude data collection because every person you are interviewing, the interaction you are observing, or content you are analyzing merely confirms what you have already noted.  Achieving saturation is often used as the justification for the final sample size.

An interview variant in which a person’s life story is elicited in a narrative form.  Turning points and key themes are established by the researcher and used as data points for further analysis.

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.

• Open access
• Published: 17 May 2024

Development and psychometric properties of an instrument to measure perception of aphrodisiac use among undergraduates in a southwestern Nigerian university

• Olawumi Cecilia Fatade 1 ,
• Gabriel Ifeoluwa Makinde 1 &
• Ayodeji Matthew Adebayo 1  

BMC Public Health volume  24 , Article number:  1331 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

A tool to measure perception of aphrodisiac use by undergraduates students of University of Ibadan, Oyo State, Nigeria was developed and validated. The study was hinged on several theories that could explain potential to use aphrodisiac among the youths. An exploratory mixed methods design was used to develop a scale to measure perception of aphrodisiac use by undergraduate students of University of Ibadan. Qualitative data collection was performed among thirty equally represented male and female students and five key informant interview participants while 919 participants completed the quantitative phase (surveys). Integration of matched qualitative themes from FGD/KII to survey domains was achieved through the ‘building approach’. Qualitative themes assessing perceptions of aphrodisiac use by university undergraduate students were used to develop original survey items as well as new survey items peculiar to research subjects. Exploratory factor analysis was deployed on polychoric correlation matrix of the items using R-statistical packages. Further model fit analysis was conducted using confirmatory factor analysis on the items suggested by EFA as well as composite reliability and construct validity tests for the constructs. Mean Z-scores of factors were computed against socio-demographics and symptoms of aphrodisiac use among respondents that have ever used it. Most respondents (84.3%) were under 25 years, mostly male (58.4%) and singles (96.3%), with 41.3% earning ≤20,000 naira monthly. The enhanced content validity of the items from mixed method analysis yielded two major domains. Two succession of factor analyses and a structural equation modeling suggested that a first-order model is good fit for experimental data (TLI = 0.931; CFI = 0.948; SRMR = 0.047; RMSEA = 0.083). The four-factor solution to the model included: prolonged sexual performance, use without erectile dysfunction or medical advice, treatment of erectile dysfunction and recreational purposes with an internal and composite reliability that ranged from 0.62–0.92 and 0.63–0.92. The validation with socio-demographics and consequences of aphrodisiac use indicated that: Male respondents, those older than 20years, the married, those from poorly educated parent and sufferers of all related consequences had statistically significant differences with poor perception of aphrodisiac use’ domains. This validated instrument is good for assessment of perception of aphrodisiac use among students in tertiary institution albeit with caution. A version of the scale that is broadened with highly refined items and tested for high internal validity is suggested.

Peer Review reports

Aphrodisiacs are substances that increase sexual desire [ 1 ]. They can also be defined as any foods or drugs that arouse sexual instinct, induce venereal desire, and increase pleasure and performance [ 2 ]. There are certain animal and plants-based drugs, foods and drinks substances including certain human behaviours which have reputation for making sex more attainable and pleasurable [ 3 ]. However, few of these were subjected to pharmacological processes which include clinical trials protocols for approval or recognized in significant research [ 4 , 5 ].

The main indication for use of aphrodisiac drugs is erectile dysfunction [ 6 ] however, the qualities and benefits of sexual pleasures of enhanced libido and erection have prompted their indiscriminate and excessive use [ 7 ]. A study reported that most of the users are between 15 and 30 years old (Makwana et al., 2013). There is a rising demand and use of aphrodisiacs among young people without any medical indications [ 8 , 9 , 10 ]. Young people have high desire to explore and increase sexual performance and anecdotal evidence has shown that males are more vulnerable to using recreational aphrodisiacs [ 11 ].

Improper use of aphrodisiac drugs can bring potentially often preventable cause of health hazards that range from disease conditions to death more so evidences are mounting about commonness of adverse reactions to medicines in recent times. Abuse of aphrodisiacs for recreational purpose by young adults with or without knowledge of its debilitating health implications are often done through self-medication (SM) [ 7 ]. Self-medication, which is the selection and use of medicines by individuals to treat self-recognized illnesses or symptoms without consultation of health care professional, was reported in a study among Ghanian men [ 12 ]. Majority were reported to be using sex-enhancing medications without any medical reason [ 12 ]. This act was further substantiated with the fact that about 75% Ghanaians men hold the conviction that intravaginal ejaculatory latency of 7–25 min is adequate as against the 3–7 min sex therapist recommended [ 12 ].

For young adults, the dependency on aphrodisiac for elongating sexual pleasures may have started out of curiosity and experimentation however, it ultimately advance to addiction and other serious risky behaviours such as substance use and engagement in multiple sexual relationships [ 13 ]. According to a survey of US college students, lifetime and past year prevalence of nonmedical prescription benzodiazepine use was 8% and 5%, respectively. Risky factors found among the students included higher rates of substance use and bisexual activities [ 14 ]. In Nigeria, the use of drugs for non-medical purposes by youth is not uncommon, however the rate at which these leaders of tomorrow embrace these drugs for various reasons has been described as alarming [ 15 ].

Young people who persistently abuse aphrodisiacs and other substances are liable to experience array of problems, including academic difficulties, health-related problems (including mental health and sexual and reproductive), poor peer relationships, and involvement with the juvenile justice system [ 16 , 17 ]. These health challenges are definitely with huge burden of concern to an already saturated public health system in Sub-Saharan Africa [18] [ 7 ].

There is a dearth of studies on perception of aphrodisiac use among men. However, a qualitative study among Ghanian men gave indication that combined involvement of a complex interactions between social, psychological and biological factors influence use of aphrodisiac [ 19 ]. The findings on social factor necessitating aphrodisiac use were based on men’s perception that sexual ability is a function of status and prestige in the society [ 19 ]. The psychological and biological reasons for the use of aphrodisiacs were to punish women who materially and financially exploit men and for proving masculinity in bed activities during advancing ages and disease conditions [ 19 ]. The disadvantage of this study was that quantitative measurements to test the external generalizability of the study findings on socio-demographic and symptomatic characteristics was not conducted.

Studies that endeavor to understand perceptive rationale for use of aphrodisiac among young adults are rare in Nigeria. This is because of lack of culturally/locally grounded tools to measure the constructs.

Thus, this study was aimed at determining the psychometric properties of an instrument developed to assess the perception to use of aphrodisiacs among tertiary education students in University of Ibadan. Findings derived from this study can assure of precision and trust in the outcome of evaluation should such a tool be applied in future similar studies.

Methodology

Study design.

The study employed an exploratory mixed methods design, where the qualitative phase of data collection and analysis preceded the quantitative phase of data collection and analysis [ 20 ]. The design was applied to develop an instrument to measure perception of aphrodisiac use among undergraduate youths in a Nigerian university.

Description of the study area

The study was carried out in the University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Oyo State, Nigeria. The University of Ibadan, situated in Ibadan North Local Government Area is the oldest Nigerian university established in 1948 as an external College of University of London. It’s thirteen faculties currently holds about 35,000 students. The university’s undergraduate halls of residence accommodate over 8,000 female and male students.

Study population

For the qualitative survey, pharmacists and drug peddlers within Ibadan North LGA constituted key informants interview participants while undergraduates in the University of Ibadan comprised the respondents of the Focus Group Discussion in the qualitative aspect of the data collection. The quantitative component of the study consisted of male and female undergraduate students who were aged between16 years and above enrolled into courses at the University of Ibadan. Eligibility criteria for participation was being a male or female undergraduate student of the University of Ibadan and being aged 16 years and above while those who were not students of the university and those below sixteen years of age were excluded from the study.

Qualitative data collection and analysis

Focus group discussion and key informant interview (composition and conduct).

Four sessions (two each in male and female residential halls) of tape recorded FGD were conducted with the permission of the thirty participants whose identities were concealed by denoting them with letter R. Each discussion lasted for 40–50 min. An open-ended interview protocol was used to guide the discussion. The FGD sessions were facilitated by a trained facilitator while two research assistants participated as note taker and observer. More FGD sessions were not conducted because data saturation was reached.

The KII sessions were conducted in English language and each participant’s consent was obtained verbally. Five KII sessions were conducted in Ibadan North LGA. The KII consisted of five key informants; three pharmacists and two drug peddlers. The key infomants were purposively selected. The anonymity of participants in the KII sessions was also protected in the report. An open-ended interview protocol was used to guide the discussion by a trained facilitator.

The audio-recorded FGD sessions were transcribed and analyzed by an independent expert in qualitative methods. Deductive content analysis was conducted on the transcripts to identify and categorize the resulting themes into perception of aphrodisiac use domains. Analysis proceeded until data saturation when no new dimensions were identified in the data.

Mixed method data integration (building approach)

In this exploratory sequential mixed methods design, we used the building approach for our method-level data integration, where the themes on perception of use of aphrodisiac and participant’s quotes from the initial qualitative phase were used to adapt existing survey items of survey (quantitative phase) and development of new survey items and. The existing survey items developed from literature review and FGD were re-written to allow for cultural adaptation for the intended population. Fifteen survey items, including new and adapted items were compiled using this approach. These items were assessed for face and content validity by experts in community medicine including sub-specialties like reproductive and family health, and clinical epidemiology. Other items on the questionnaire are socio-demographic characteristics and psychological and health items perceived to be linked to use of aphrodisiac. From this list, those that prompt poor perception of aphrodisiac use were rightly assigned likert score that ranged from 1 to 5 on a strongly agree to strongly disagree scale. While items that favour good perception were reversely coded. This was aimed at ensuring scores from each domains of aphrodisiac perception use and total scores reflected final categorization of good and poor perception.

Reporting of mixed methods data integration (merging approach)

Finally, a joint presentation of integrated data (merging approach) occurred at the reporting level to create a joint display of qualitative and quantitative data. The initial process required is matching the qualitative themes to their corresponding perception of aphrodisiac use survey item domains because of the mainly deductive approach used to conduct the content analysis of the focus group transcripts. Under each relevant theme, sample quotes that had been used to create the specific culturally adapted items were added to the joint display, along with their corresponding items, showing the integration of the qualitative phase with the quantitative phase. After a preliminary quantitative analysis, mean item scores and item-total correlations were added to the final joint display to evaluate congruence between the two phases.

Sample determination and sampling technique for quantitative aspect

The minimum sample size of 410 male and female students of University of Ibadan was estimated using Leslie Kish sample size formula for determining single proportion for descriptive studies. Multistage sampling technique involving the use of simple random technique by balloting was deplored for data collection at each required stage of recruitment protocol. At stage one, a total of four halls comprising of two male halls out six and two out of three females’ halls of residence were selected. Five blocks were selected from the halls of interest making a total of 20 blocks in the second phase of the multistage sampling process. At least 20 rooms were selected from each of the selected blocks at the third stage of recruitment processes. Finally, at least one respondent was recruited from each selected room that comprised the blocks of interest.

Data analysis

Factor reduction analysis.

Polychoric correlation, used in analyzing ordinal and nominal likert scale, was used to elicit the matrix needed for factor analysis of the original fifteen items [ 21 ]. The assumption behind polychoric correlation coefficient is that pairs of ordinal scores are generated by latent bivariate normally distributed random variables. Measuring the association between ordinal variables entails the estimation of the product moment correlation between the corresponding normally distributed variables. The polychoric correlation matrix was estimated using the two-stage procedure described in Lee et al. [ 22 ] and implemented in R statistical packages [ 21 ]. Note that since the matrix was estimated in a pairwise fashion, it was possible to be non-positive definite. Furthermore, an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was then performed on the estimated polychoric correlation in R.

Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed from the latent variables obtained from EFA. Here the latent items of the scales must prove their relatedness with their respective unobserved constructs according to acceptable goodness of fit measures. The measurement parameters are: Comparative Fit Index (CFI); Tucker Lewis Index (TLI); Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) and Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA). CFI analyses the change in fit between the hypothesized model and the multidimensional model [ 23 , 24 ] which ranges between 0 and 1. TLI indicates the total co-variation in the model and ranges between 0 and 1. The values of TLI and CFI greater than 0.90 imply a good fit to the data [ 23 , 24 ]. RMSEA is based on analysis of residuals and its expected value for a good model data fit is one with less than 0.08 [ 23 , 24 ]. The value of (RMSEA) shows sensitivity to degree of freedom and complexity of the proposed model (Kline et al., 2011; Wang, 2012) [ 23 , 24 ]. SRMR is an index of the average of standardized residuals between the observed and the hypothesized covariance. It indicates a good fit when it produces a value less than 0.05 [ 23 ].

Internal reliability

Internal consistency reliability measures the extent to which all items within a scale are indeed capturing the same construct. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients greater than 0.80 indicate high levels of internal consistency, while values that range between 0.70 and 0.61 suggest acceptable internal consistencies [ 25 ]. This was tested in SPSS statistical packages IBM version 20.0.

Further reliability methods of composite reliability and construct validity of convergent/divergent analyses were conducted on the determined constructs to strengthen their validity. The composite reliability was analysed using an online calculator [ 26 ] while convergent/divergent were performed with SPSS statistical packages IBM version 20.0.

External validity

For external generalizability validation of the items, data on socio-demographic characteristics, medical and psychological impact of use of aphrodisiac by respondents were listed in the questionnaire.

Information of a proforma on sociodemographic characteristics of university students was adapted and incorporated into the data collection instruments.

Psychological symptoms of sex addiction, loss of sex performance self-esteem and sexual perversion deduced from focus group discussion and KII were developed for respondents to self-report their certainty that the symptoms they experienced were caused by their dependency on aphrodisiac substances through a yes or no response.

Characteristics of physical symptoms of priapism and fatigue adapted from focus group discussion and KII were developed by asking respondents to self-report their confidence that their use of aphrodisiac substances for sexual performance was responsible for the occurrence of the symptoms in a yes or no response.

Pretest report

Forty-two questionnaires were pre-tested among undergraduates at Lead City University, Ibadan, which were not part of the study population but were similar to the main study subjects by characteristics and socio-demography. The pre-test excluded respondents who were not present on campus as at the time of collecting data. The outcome of the pretest was used to revise ambiguous questions and adding of information found useful for improving the quality of the questionnaire.

Respondents’ socio-demographic characteristics

Majority (84.3%) of the respondents were less than 25 years of age, 58.4% were males, 96.3% singles and 41.3% earned less than or equal 20,000 naira as average monthly income. The largest percentage of the subjects where from Yoruba ethnic background (73.6%) and more than one-half of either of the respondents’ parents had tertiary education (father = 59.8%; mother = 54.2%) Table 1 .

Qualitative result

Three questions that themed on perceived indication for use of aphrodisiac by the youth, perceived benefits of using aphrodisiacs and perceived side effects of using aphrodisiacs were discussed among FGD interviewees and KII.

What are your perceived indication for use of aphrodisiac by the youth?

Respondents’ perceived use of aphrodisiac substances include derivation of prolonged sexual pleasure.

Aphrodisiacs are basically used for sexual pleasure as narrated by one of the participants: ‘You know to gain libido and readiness for sexual action sometimes, students even improvised and go to extent of inventing a concoction of soaked cassava flakes (Garri) and paracetamol. For example, someone told me that one can take ‘Garri’ and put Paracetamol inside it would serve the same purpose of making you sexually active and ready for sexual action. ’ < R6_FGD_Male Undergrad_UI_ Hall 2>. Another said ‘I think it is that mixing that people use the most: like, they mix with drinks and all of that’. < R4_FGD_Male Undergrad_UI_ Hall 2>.

Opinions on indication for aphrodisiac use were split among KII participants. One of them supported use of aphrodisiac for attainment of sexual pleasure.

Yes there are indications for use by youths as well. Usually it is not on medical basis, it is just on leisure basis to improve sexually performance basically. Young or unmarried people uses basically for sexual pleasure to improve performance to impress their partners’ . < KII 2_Pharmacist_UCH_IBNLGA>.

Another group believed there are indications for aphrodisiacs use by young adults.

‘ ‘ There are indications for uses. Actually medically, they are some youths that really need it so it is medically indicated and recommended’ < KII 3_Pharmacist_UI_IBNLGA>. Youths diagnosed with erectile dysfunction or who cannot perform sexually well should be free to use them while only one argued against the use among the subjects. ‘ Yes, why not. I can advise youth to buy and use it because if a young man has a small manhood, we do give them the man power drug. For those with ‘Atosi-Inu‘(internal reproductive system infection), we do give them gonorrhea drugs’ . < KII 4_Drug Peddlar_IBNELGA>.

Some others said there are no indications for the use of aphrodisiacs by youths no matter how it is argued; hence, it is an abuse:

‘ Usually not. There is no indication for aphrodisiac use among the youths. Let’s talk about the youth thing. You know sometimes they want to enhance performance without sex but we don’t have them as many as the middle aged maybe because vigor is still very much in youth… ’ < KII 1_Pharmacist_Moko_IBNLGA>.

What are the perceived benefits of using aphrodisiac?

Participants agreed to varieties of benefits associated with the use of aphrodisiac products interestingly prior to being prompted or probed. Some of the benefits they perceived are obtainable include enhancement and boosting of self-esteem during sexual intercourse, improved sexual performance through sustained and prolonged erection, vaginal tightening, sexual gratification and self-satisfaction.

What are the perceived side effects/implications of use of aphrodisiacs?

Series of implications were highlighted to be associated with the use of aphrodisiacs. To our discussants, the side effects include:

Psychological: participants listed psychological conditions of addiction to aphrodisiac substances, sexual perversion that could lead to pedophilia, low self-esteem, mental illness etc. ‘Because they can get addicted to the usage and the addiction might lead to them having uncontrolled and contnous sexual urge leading them to have sex with anybody available including vulnerable persons like little children   < R5_FDG_Female Undergrad_UI_ Hall 4>, < R6_FDG_Female Undergrad_UI_ Hall 4>. ‘Madness is associated with aphrodisiac’< R1_FGD_Female Undergrad_UI_ Hall 3> - .

Medical: low blood pressure, headaches, unwanted erections, contaminations, disease infections, weakness etc-

‘ Most of the side effects are low blood pressure, headaches, enhanced unwanted erections. Then on long term basis, erectile dysfunction. During sexual activity, there can be penile fracture. There has been reported cases of penile fracture’ < KII 2_Pharmacist_UCH_IBNLGA>. ‘ I would like to say that because it is locally made, it might not be safe, like it might be polluted in any form so that’s also part of this. There are more side effects in local ones compared with medical ones’ < R5_FDG Female Undergrad_UI_ Hall 4>. It could cause fatigue due to abnormally prolonged sexual activity. < R3_FGD_Male Undergrad_UI_ Hall 1>. It could cause alter natural sexual desire due excitatory disruptions caused by the aphrodisiac substances’.

< R4_FGD_Female Undergrad_UI_ Hall 4>.

On the contrary, other FGD discussants did not accept these assertions: affirming none availability of harms in the use of aphrodisiacs. To them, these substances are more profiting , doing good than harm ’. Therefore, it is not as bad as people perceived they were . As such, there are no associated harm. As they opined:

The one I just mentioned are made of herbs, they are naturally made so their side effect is not negative or may not be as much orthodoxly produced ones. Its function is latent . < R6_FGD Male Undergrad_UI_ Hall 2>, < R1_FDG_Female Undergrad_UI_ Hall 4>.

Some KII participants also supported this assertion thus:

‘No side effect because we used only herbs to prepare it…. but for others like man power, orthodox, there are many side effects. I advise men not to be using man power (orthodox medicine) because it has a long term effect on the heart and hormones of men. Also women that have sexual intercourse with men that uses man power, it affects the womb of women because it is a dangerous chemical ’ < KII 5_Drug Peddlar_IBNELGA>, < KII 1_Pharmacist_Moko_IBNLGA>.

Financial/Economical problems

‘ it would render you broke, it would stop your money, it would affect you financially’ . < R8_FGD_Male Undergrad_UI_ Hall 1>.

Mixed method results

The joint display showing the perception of aphrodisiac use domains, qualitative themes and sample quotes, corresponding new culturally adapted items, mean item scores, and item-total correlations are presented in Table  2 . Themes from the FGD which included ‘perceived indication for use of aphrodisiac’, ‘perceived benefits of using aphrodisiac’ and ‘perceived side effects/implications of use of aphrodisiacs’ were assessed against the constructs from the structural equation modelling of the scale. Two constructs of perception on use of aphrodisiac for prolonged sexual performance and recreational purpose matched the deductive theme on perceived benefits of aphrodisiac use. The theme on indication for aphrodisiac use matched two constructs of perception of aphrodisiac use erectile dysfunction or use by medical advice and use for treatment of erectile dysfunction.

Quantitative results

Mean scores on 5-point Likert scale items ranged from 2.06 to 3.44. Table  2 . Mean scores on the new survey items and the percentage of respondents agreeing with the culturally adapted perception of aphrodisiac use survey items indicate similarity between themes from the qualitative data and the subsequent quantitative data. Percentage of participants agreeing to the items ranged from 41.7 to 63.1% across all adapted perception of aphrodisiac use items. Item-total correlations for each adapted perception of aphrodisiac use item indicates the internal consistency of the newly developed items within their respective domains. All item-total correlations were statistically significant, except two reverse coded items. The significant Pearson’s correlation coefficient values ranged from − 0.33 to 0.70, with most items having moderate correlations. As expected, the negative correlations were for items worded to be in the opposite direction as compared to other items within the domain.

• Psychometric analysis

Initial polychoric correlation was analysed (Fig.  1 ) where items C15i, C15ii, and C15iii significantly correlated with one another having values that ranged between 0.66 and 0.73; items C16i and C16ii had a correlation value of 0.89; items C15iv and C16iii with a value of 0.51 moderately correlated with each and all items of C17 subtypes significantly correlated with one another in values that ranged from − 0.55 to 0.97.

Polychoric correlation matrix plot of university student’s perception of aphrodisiac use. Items C15i, C15ii, and C15iii significantly correlated with one another having values that ranged between 0.66–0.73; items C16i and C16ii had a correlation value of 0.89; items C15iv and C16iii with a value of 0.51 moderately correlated with each and all items of C17 subtypes significantly correlated with one another in values that ranged from − 0.55 to 0.97

Exploratory factor analysis was conducted using Maximum likelihood statistics for extracting factors. This yielded four factors from its minimum residual solution that rotated on its default oblimin transformation. These factors explain 66.31% of the variance in the original 15 variables.

The first batch of factor analysis on perception of use of aphrodisiac produced items of Factor 1 (C17v, C17vii, C17viii, C17vi, C17iv, C17ii, C17iii) which constitute “prolonged sexual performance”, questions C15ii, C15i, C15iii and C17i made up the scale “erectile dysfunction or by medical advice use”, questions C16i and C16ii made up the scale “recreational purpose” and questions C15iv and C16iii aggregated for “To treat erectile dysfunction”. The reliability test for the factors indicated excellent improvement when items C17i and C17iii were removed from the items of factors that connote aphrodisiac use for “erectile dysfunction or by medical advice and prolonged sexual performance” and “prolonged sexual performance”. Based on this outcome, a second round of factor analysis without the deleted items still suggested a four-factor solution with Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of 0.89. The factors and their respective Cronbach alpha values are Recreational purpose, α = 0.62; Aphrodisiac use without medical condition or medical advice, α = 0.84; To treat erectile dysfunction = 0.91 and Prolonged and improved sexual performance = 0.84. Table  3 .

A four-dimensional model derived from the exploratory factor analysis of thirteen items was subjected to CFA. All the CFA goodness of fit indices were within acceptable values except RMSEA that was just within marginal range (TLI = 0.931; CFI = 0.948; SRMR = 0.047; RMSEA = 0.083). Figure  2 .

CFA path diagram of four factors of perception of aphrodisiac use of university students (F1 = prolonged sexual performance, F2 = erectile dysfunction or by medical advice use, F3 = recreational purpose, F4 = To treat erectile dysfunction) and their observed variables

Composite reliability

The composite reliability measure of each factor of perception of aphrodisiac use was strong (F1 = 0.90, F2 = 0.85, F4 = 0.92) except for factor 3 which indicated a moderate reliability (F3 = 0.63).

Convergent and divergent validity of constructs

The inter item correlation of each of the constructs was significantly greater than 0.5 thus satisfying the convergence criteria.

The minimum correlation of each construct was greater than the correlations of respective inter-item correlations of adjoining constructs. By calculation, the total number of comparisons is 53 deduced from 6 × 6 + 3 × 3 + 2 × 2 + 2 × 2 and total violations are 0. According to Campbell and Fiske [29] the violation counts should be less than one-half the potential comparisons hence the discriminant holds valid.

Respondents’ perceptions of aphrodisiac use scores were converted to domain Z scores and assessed against respondents’ socio-demographic characteristics. Male students, those of Ibo ethnic group and having mothers with primary educational significantly all had poor perception of the domain of aphrodisiac use for prolonged sexual performance’s Z score. (-0.03 ± 0.02; -0.01 ± 1.00, p  < 0.05; -0.01 ± 1.00). p  < 0.05. Table  4 .

In terms of age, those older than 20 years and male respondents had statistically significant weak differences in perception of use of aphrodisiac for condition of erectile dysfunction or by medical advice (-0.06 ± 1.01, p  < 0.05; -0.11 ± 1.01, p  < 0.05).

Poor Z mean score of perception of aphrodisiac use for treating erectile dysfunction statistically varied among the married, those of Ibo tribe, and educational status of respondents’ parents. Values decreased in a proportional manner to educational status of either parent. (-0.11 ± 1.20, p  < 0.05; -0.40 ± 1.20, p  < 0.05; -0.50 ± 1.14, p  < 0.05, -1.0 ± 1.10). Table  4 .

Significant statistical differences were also found between poor perception of recreational purpose use of aphrodisiac and the male students, Ibo ethnic group, mothers with primary education as well as in those earning above 20000 naira monthly. (-0.10 ± 1.03; -0.20 ± 1.10: -0.10 ± 1.00: -0.21 ± 1.02)

The physical and psychological symptoms of using aphrodisiacs were computed against the Z scores of factors derived from perception of its use. Table  4 . Those with symptoms of sex addiction, priapism, performance, self-confidence and body weakness significantly varied with unsatisfactory Z mean measures of perception of aphrodisiac use for ‘without a medical condition or by medical advice’ construct. (-0.61 ± 0.66; -0.58 ± 0.81; -0.57 ± 0.86; -0.66 ± 0.69) p  < 0.05. Weak standardized mean scores of perceptions of aphrodisiac use for recreational purpose statistically differed among respondents who had problems of sustained erection, body weakness, self-esteem and the perverts (-0.47 ± 1.01; -0.57 ± 0.80; -0.62 ± 0.92; -0.56 ± 0.92) p  < 0.05.

Quantitative

The average item scores and significant item-total correlations were important indicators of the initial validity and reliability of the culturally adapted survey items in this population. Most items had average scores ranging from 2.10 to 3.32, (with the extreme means being 2.00–3.44) an indication that participants in general found the items relevant to their perception of aphrodisiac use. There are no extreme values among the items an indicator of item quality when the goal of the assessment is normative.

Two items (people with erectile dysfunction can use aphrodisiac, use of aphrodisiac should be completely avoided by youth) indicated poor item-total correlation with the domain of indications for use of aphrodisiac. These items were retained for further evaluation in construct validity to determine if they are internally valid with the construct or to be deleted from the survey items if they are not.

Qualitative

The initial qualitative phase was essential to explore perception of aphrodisiac use that may be peculiar to undergraduate youths in Nigeria university. Themes on perception of aphrodisiac use such as indications for using aphrodisiac and benefits of using aphrodisiac and as well as themes on medical and psychological impacts of using aphrodisiac were all informed by environmental awareness and experiences common to students of tertiary institutions. It was important to explore the perception of using aphrodisiac because of the connectedness they have with health and psychological impact on young users [ 14 , 17 ]. By addressing these unique perceptions among students of higher learning, it would allow for creation of evidence based interventions for protective and responsible behaviours in sexual activities.

Most research findings done in West Africa indicated that the major reason for using aphrodisiacs is the excitatory psychological benefits they render to heightening of sexual pleasures and its compensating benefits and challenges that re-trigger the cycle of use [ 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 ]. The other reason for aphrodisiac use is the medical indication of erectile dysfunction which could be caused by biological and behavioural underlining factors [ 12 , 13 , 19 ]. Participants in this study discussed their views about indication for use of aphrodisiacs by undergraduate youths. They obviously do not reckon with the therapeutic use of except for the diverse opinions of KII participants that ranged between belief that there are indications for the use among youths and no indication for aphrodisiac use by the specified populations. The theme on benefits of aphrodisiac use, however, received huge perceptive agreements among all categories of discussants. The essence of sexual engagements which is not subjected to any particular age groups except among juveniles could explain the strong perception and tendency to usage of aphrodisiacs among discussants which may have been derived from testimonies of peers or personal experimentation [ 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 ]. These major themes shaping perception of aphrodisiac use are accounted for in the adapted survey instrument.

The remarkable description of knowledge of psychological and medical impacts of aphrodisiac use by majority of participants portray that youths perceive immediate or latter life dangers in uncontrolled and habitual use of the substances [ 14 , 17 ]. This offers a window of opportunity to design public health interventions that will promote health sexual choices and lifestyle for the youth.

Integration

Integration of qualitative and quantitative data occurred at two phases, first when using the building approach to create newly adapted (university undergraduates focused) items and then when using the merging approach to report the results through the joint display. The cultural adaptation evolved from qualitative themes for composition of quantitative survey items, as well as the creation of new items. Creating uniquely adapted items based on in-depth qualitative data resulted in enhanced content validity of the items. Matching the themes to the theoretical domains of perception of aphrodisiac use led to an approach that dovetailed to development and structuring of final survey items.

Although there is no guarantee that research structure of this study for the population of interest will be the same if applied to general population. However, the construct validity evaluated through structural equation modelling of the domains’ items by this study could suffice for the measurement of the perception of aphrodisiac use among the population of interest in any African university. It could be used at such locations after conducting prior pretest for psychometric validity for further fine-tuning of the instrument.

The main objective of the psychometric analysis was to develop and validate perception of aphrodisiac use from university undergraduates from the original survey instrument. A four-factor structure for 13 out of the 15 items was evident, based on a principal components exploratory factor analysis with an oblimin rotation of the scale’s polychoric correlation matrix.

The fitted model for perception of aphrodisiac use among university undergraduates proposed four-factor structure, involving prolonged and improved sexual performance (6 items; 0.915), without medical condition or medical advice (3 items; 0.847), to treat erectile dysfunction (2 items; 0.627), Recreational purpose (2 items; 0.918) factors. This indicates good internal consistency except a questionable factor 3. However, each of the factors could probably be made robust by further refining of items for the purpose of clarity to the target audience. The two items under factor 3 implied the same meaning indicating need to delete one of them and to substitute it with one or more combinations of new items that could align to and elicit same construct.

The four-factor and 13 items scale that were extracted through EFA was validated by CFA to establish a relationship between the exogenous variables (items of perception of aphrodisiac use) and the endogenous latent constructs vis-a-viz acceptable goodness of fit measures. The first and only CFA done as suggested by the EFA produced the fit to the model. Perception in psychology is one of the key attributes of attitude which forms human habit. All components that made up attitude were transactions with one’s physical and social surroundings and that the direction of influence flowed either direction ways—our attitudes are influenced by the social world and our social world is influenced by our attitudes. With respect to the outcome of the psychometrics validation of this study, a theoretical framework has been established as different items on perception of realities of aphrodisiacs aggregated into four constructs that could influence its habitual use. Thus, future studies can examine these domains with respect to use of aphrodisiac substances particularly among youths in institutions of higher learning. This study was also conducted to also assess the validity of the perception of aphrodisiac use among tertiary education students by their socio-demographic characteristics and consequences of its use. This is to determine factors that could influence perception of aphrodisiac use among young adults when the validated instrument is applied. The observed differences in mean scores of the perception of aphrodisiac use among the subjects further underscore the need to use the domains described for comparison of each subgroup of independent variables. With regards to socio-demographic characteristics of respondents, being a male and of Ibo ethnic background presented poorly in all constructs of perception of aphrodisiac use except in respective perception of “aphrodisiac use for treating erectile dysfunction and use of aphrodisiac for condition of erectile dysfunction or by medical advice”. The different findings with the male sex transcend cultural and socioeconomic status since several qualitative and quantitative studies focusing on factors predisposing perception and use of aphrodisiacs established this natural phenomenon [ 11 , 24 ]. Universally, men have the propensity for aiming to achieve sexual satisfaction characterized by prolonged pleasure to prove their phallic capabilities to themselves and to the opposite sex.

The marked variations between the married, young adults and those from non to early educated parents with poor perceptions of use of aphrodisiac for condition of erectile dysfunction or by medical advice and treating erectile dysfunction are realistic associations. For the married, undesirable sexual experience is one of the underlying problems causing marital crisis that could prompt preference for aphrodisiac substances to ameliorate the condition [ 25 , 26 ]. Studies by Oniye et al. (2016) [ 25 ] and Sanni [ 26 ] have investigated the use and pattern of aphrodisiacs by couples to correct sexual dysfunction. The fact that individuals above 20years significantly had poor perception of aphrodisiac use have been reported in previous literature [ 9 , 27 ]. The demand for and dependency on aphrodisiac for sexual pleasure or medical reason is higher among this group [ 9 ]. The indication for mothers’ lowered educational status and the identified domains of aphrodisiac perception among the population of interest could be considered in future assessment of the scale. studies have not been conducted to evaluate this area, it would be interesting to investigate how parental higher level of education influences young adults’ perception of aphrodisiac use and its medical implications. The significant variation of the higher monthly earning of the students with construct of perception of use of aphrodisiac for recreational purposes should be explored in future use of the scale. This could help in understanding how financial wherewithal could shift the perception of aphrodisiac use among undergraduate students.

The scale was able to differentiate between subgroups of physical and psychological consequences of using aphro­disiac, suggesting a good construct validity of this instrument designed to measure the multi-domain perception of aphrodisiac use. Those who have sex addiction, priapism, lack of sexual performance self-confidence, body weakness, loss of self-esteem and perversion from using aphrodisiacs significantly had worse scores on perception of aphrodisiac use without a medical condition or by medical advice and for recreational purposes.

Several studies have linked abuse of aphrodisiac substances to venereal diseases, psychological health conditions and simple to life threatening non-communicable diseases such as heart failure and kidney problems ] [ 17 , 28 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 ]. Manortey et al. [ 7 ] reported that despite health regulatory bodies’ issuance of public awareness on concerns for abuse of unregistered sex enhancing products, purchase remains high amidst menacing side effects. This report corroborated our study’s findings and they all implied that having health problems associated with use of aphrodisiac and the knowledge thereof are not important to having right perception to use of aphrodisiac. Based on this premise, it would be worthwhile, for future use of this scale to assess the significance of health outcomes of aphrodisiac users against the underlying perception to its use.

Limitations

A number of limitations of the study can be spotlighted. The findings of this study cannot yet be fully generalized due to the wording and interpretation of specific items that aggregated to some factors and the restriction to student population of just one university. Nevertheless, research efforts should be extended to detail and thorough exercise on the scales’ items development and testing in a variety of tertiary educational institutions in order to enhance its robustness and flexibility for generalizability purposes. Another limitation of the research is the restricted number of items that statistically constitute some factors, which may cause availability of limited or no options for researchers, should removal of items be required.

This study used a mixed methods design and construct validity analysis to develop and validate a survey instrument on perception of aphrodisiac use among students of a Nigerian tertiary institution. The mixed methods validation of the survey for measuring perception of aphrodisiac use among the undergraduates led to statistically significant integration of quantitative domain items with thematic domains of qualitative analysis. The construct validity indicated that all the domains that emerged from the analysis statistically reflect the stimuli, cognitive, translation, behaviour and performance components of perception to aphrodisiac use. The four-factor generated model showed a good fit, indicating that sexual elongation pleasure, use of aphrodisiac substances without erectile dysfunction, treatment of erectile dysfunction and recreational purpose are adequate components to measure the perception of aphrodisiac use among university undergraduates. The resulted 13 items showed valid factors loadings and high values of internal consistency and reliability reinforced through CFA procedures. There are evidences of statistically significant differences between groups of certain socio-demographic characteristics and consequences of aphrodisiac with domains of perception of aphrodisiac use.

Equally, all the items of the four constructs from the reliable construct validity outcomes also aligned with the integrated mixed method results.

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Wallen K, Zehr JL. Hormones and history of the evolution and development of Primate Female sexuality. J Sex Res. 2004;41(1):101–12.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Yakubu MT, Akanji MA, Oladiji AT. Male sexual dysfunction and methods used in assessing medicinal plants with aphrodisiac potentials. Pharmacog Rev. 2007;1:49–56.

Google Scholar  

Porst H. C7- pp. 75–93. Oral Pharmacotherapy of Erectile Dysfunction SN-9781405157193. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470755235.ch7 . https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470755235.ch7.

Bhagavathula AS, Elnour AA, Shehab A. Pharmacovigilance on sexual enhancing herbal supplements. Saudi Pharm J. 2016;24:115–8. [CrossRef] [PubMed].

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Fiaveh DY, Masculinity. Male sexual virility, and Use of aphrodisiacs in Ghana. J Men Stud. 2020;28:165–82.

Article   Google Scholar  

Taberner PV. In: Aphrodisiacs, editor. Drugs used clinically as Aphrodisiacs. Boston, MA: Springer; 1985. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-6700-0_8 .

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Manortey S, Mensah P, Acheampong G. Evaluating factors Associated with the Use of aphrodisiacs among adult male residents in Ashaiman Municipality, Ghana. Open Access Libr J. 2018;5:1–13.

Makwana S, Solanki M, Raloti S, Dikshit R. Evaluation of Recrea-tional use of aphrodisiac drugs and its consequences? An online questionnaire based study. Int J Res Med. 2013;2:51–9.

Dandekar R, Shafee M. Aphrodisiacs use and its client profile: an exploratory study in Aurangabad city, Maharashtra. Int J Biomedical Res. 2013;486. https://doi.org/10.7439/ijbr.v4i9.343 . 4.

Lampiao F, Miyango S, Simkoza H. Herbal aphrodisiac use among male adolescents and teenagers in a rural area of Blantyre district, Malawi. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2017;4(3):581–3. https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20150055 .

Yiana A, Ziblim S, Azusiyinne M. The increasing use of sex enhancing drugs among men in the Tamale Metropolis. Int J Med Res Health Sci. 2018;7(11):186–96.

Amidu N, Owiredu WKB, Woode E, Addai-Mensah O, Gyasi-Sarpong KC, Alhassan A. Prevalence of male sexual dysfunction among Ghanaian Populace: myth or reality. Int J Impot Res. 2010;22:337–42.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Akre C, Berchtold André, Gmel G, Suris J-C. The evolution of sexual dysfunction in Young men aged 18–25 years. J Adolesc Health. 2014;55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.05.014 .

McCabe SE. Correlates of nonmedical use of prescription benzodiazepine anxiolytics: results from a national survey of U.S. college students. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2005;79(1):53–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2004.12.006 .

Osinowo HO, Agberotimi SF, Abubakar SY, Rogo IS, Opayinka AO. Non-medical use of pharmaceutical drugs and motivation for change among street youth in Kano, Nigeria. Afr J drug Alcohol Stud. 2019;18:121–30.

Fatoye F. (2003). Psychosocial correlates of substance use amongst secondary school students in South Western Nigeria. East African medical journal. 80. 154–8. https://doi.org/10.4314/eamj.v80i3.8685 .

Danquah C, Koffuor GA, Anto BP, Nimako KA The indiscriminate use of sex enhancing products among Ghanaians: Prevalence, and potential risk. Adv. Appl. Sci. Res.,2011, 2, 350?359.

Ahmed AF, Alshahrani S, Morgan A, Gabr AH, Abdel-Razik M, Daoud A. (2017) Demographics and Sexual Characteristics of Sex-Enhancing Medication Users: Study of a Web-Based Cross-Sectional Sample of Sexually Active Men. Arab Journal of Urology, 15, 366–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aju.2017.09.003 .

Atindanbila S, Mawusi AS, Attiogbe A, Abasimi E, Amooba P. (2014). Bio-psychosocial Factors Associated with the Use of Sexual Enhancers Among Ghanaian Men. International Journal of Research -GRANTHAALAYAH. Vol.2(Iss.2):November,2014] ISSN- 2350 – 0530.

Fetters MD, Curry LA, Creswell JW. Achieving integration in mixed methods designs – principles and practices. Health Serv Res. 2013;48(6pt2):2134–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12117 .

Holgado FP, Carrasco MA, del Barrio MV, Moscoso S. Factor analysis of the big five questionnaire using polychoric correlations in children. Qual Quant. 2009;43:75–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-007-9085-3 .

Lee S, Poon. WY. Two-step estimation of multivariate polychoric correlation. Commun Stat - Theory Methods. 1987;16(2):307–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610928708829368 .

R Core Team. (2013). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL http://www.R-project.org/ .

Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: The Guilford; 2011. p. 425.

Wang J, Wang X. (2012). Structural Equation Modeling: Applications Using Mplus.

Hoboken NJ. Wiley, Higher Education Press. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118356258 .

Cronbach LJ: Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika., Raykov T. (1997). Estimation of composite reliability for congeneric measures. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21(2), 173–184.

Raykov, T. (1997). Estimation of composite reliability for congeneric measures. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21(2), 173-184.

Campbell DT, Fiske DW. (1959). Convergent and Discriminant Validation by the Multitrait-Multimethod Matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81–105. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046016 .

Amoah PA, Adjei SB, Arthur-Holmes FA. Social– ecological study of perceptions and determinants of sexual Enhancement Drug Use among men and women in Ghana. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19:6521. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19116521 .

Oniye AO, Odebode AA, Ajape SA. Patterns of aphrodisiac herbs usage as expressed by married adults in Kwara State, Nigeria. Nigerian J Guidance Counselling. 2016;21:117–34.

Sanni A. Sexual dysfunctionality and Aphrodiasic Approach among couples of Ebiras in Kogi Central. J Res Humanit Social ScienceVolume 9 ~ Issue. 2021;4(ISSNOnline):10–5.

Prins J, Blanker MH, Bohnen AM, Thomas S, Bosch JLHR. Prevalence of erectile dysfunction: a systematic review of population-based studies. Int J Impot Res. 2002;14(6):422–32.

Ajao AA, Sibiya NP, Moteetee AN. Sexual prowess from nature: a systematic review of medicinal plants used as aphrodisiacs and sexual dysfunction in sub-saharan Africa. S Afr J Bot. 2019;122:342–59. [CrossRef].

Download references

Acknowledgements

The university of Ibadan undergraduate students and all the qualitative study participants are appreciated because without them, this study would be impossible.

The authors did not receive support from any organization for the submitted work.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Community Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria

Olawumi Cecilia Fatade, Gabriel Ifeoluwa Makinde & Ayodeji Matthew Adebayo

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

F.O.C: Manuscript text development, Data collection, Final authorization of completed workMakinde G.I: Study conceptualization, Data analysis and presentation of findings, discussion of findingsAdebayo A.M: Data collection methodology conceptualization and assessorAll authors: Were involved in reviewing of manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gabriel Ifeoluwa Makinde .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

All methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations of the University of Ibadan/University College Hospital Ethical Review Board which referenced the study as 19/0297 and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. A signature that endorsed our research informed consent statement which encompass protection of dignity, integrity, right to self-determination, privacy and data confidentiality were obtained from study participants.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Fatade, O.C., Makinde, G.I. & Adebayo, A.M. Development and psychometric properties of an instrument to measure perception of aphrodisiac use among undergraduates in a southwestern Nigerian university. BMC Public Health 24 , 1331 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-18736-y

Download citation

Received : 18 August 2022

Accepted : 24 January 2023

Published : 17 May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-18736-y

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Aphrodisiacs
• Polychoric analysis
• University undergraduates

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]
• General enquiries: [email protected]