scholarly journals Issues in the Analysis of Focus Groups: Generalisability, Quantifiability, Treatment of Context and Quotations

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lilla Vicsek
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Group Discussion ◽  
Concrete Situation ◽  
Focus Group Research ◽  
Group Research ◽  
Group Data ◽  
Focus Group Data ◽  
Quantifying In

In this paper I discuss some concerns related to the analysis of focus groups: (a) the issue of generalisation; (b) the problems of using numbers and quantifying in the analysis; (c) how the concrete situation of the focus groups could be included in the analysis, and (d) what formats can be used when quoting from focus groups. Problems with respect to generalisation are discussed; types of generalisation are presented which can be used in focus group research. Arguments are made against using a primarily quantitative perspective in the evaluation of focus group data. It is argued that the situation of the particular group discussion should be taken into account in the analysis. A scheme for analysis that has been developed by the author is presented. Suggestions are made for the characteristics of the quotations in the analyses.

scholarly journals A Qualitative Framework for Collecting and Analyzing Data in Focus Group Research

2009 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie ◽  
Wendy B. Dickinson ◽  
Nancy L. Leech ◽  
Annmarie G. Zoran
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Specific Information ◽  
Focus Group Research ◽  
Response Characteristics ◽  
Group Data ◽  
Focus Group Data

Despite the abundance of published material on conducting focus groups, scant specific information exists on how to analyze focus group data in social science research. Thus, the authors provide a new qualitative framework for collecting and analyzing focus group data. First, they identify types of data that can be collected during focus groups. Second, they identify the qualitative data analysis techniques best suited for analyzing these data. Third, they introduce what they term as a micro-interlocutor analysis, wherein meticulous information about which participant responds to each question, the order in which each participant responds, response characteristics, the nonverbal communication used, and the like is collected, analyzed, and interpreted. They conceptualize how conversation analysis offers great potential for analyzing focus group data. They believe that their framework goes far beyond analyzing only the verbal communication of focus group participants, thereby increasing the rigor of focus group analyses in social science research.

scholarly journals What Influences Saturation? Estimating Sample Sizes in Focus Group Research

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (10) ◽  
pp. 1483-1496 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monique M. Hennink ◽  
Bonnie N. Kaiser ◽  
Mary Beth Weber
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
Degree Of Saturation ◽  
Sample Sizes ◽  
Focus Group Discussions ◽  
Group Discussions ◽  
Focus Group Research ◽  
Group Research ◽  
Group Data ◽  
Focus Group Data ◽  
Group Stratification

Saturation is commonly used to determine sample sizes in qualitative research, yet there is little guidance on what influences saturation. We aimed to assess saturation and identify parameters to estimate sample sizes for focus group studies in advance of data collection. We used two approaches to assess saturation in data from 10 focus group discussions. Four focus groups were sufficient to identify a range of new issues (code saturation), but more groups were needed to fully understand these issues (meaning saturation). Group stratification influenced meaning saturation, whereby one focus group per stratum was needed to identify issues; two groups per stratum provided a more comprehensive understanding of issues, but more groups per stratum provided little additional benefit. We identify six parameters influencing saturation in focus group data: study purpose, type of codes, group stratification, number of groups per stratum, and type and degree of saturation.

scholarly journals Joint Stories and Layered Tales: Support, Contradiction and Me aning Construction in Focus Group Research

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Agnieszka Kosny
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
East Coast ◽  
Work Experiences ◽  
Focus Group Research ◽  
Group Research ◽  
Group Data ◽  
Group Methods ◽  
Meaning Creation ◽  
Focus Group Data ◽  
Group Members

This paper uses focus group data about women’s work experiences gathered in five Canadian east coast communities to examine some of the strengths and weakness associated with focus group research. I explore the case made against the use of focus group methods and the basis for some of the critiques aimed at focus group research. By examining the evolving discussions between focus group members, it is possible to understand some of the benefits of group-talk, including the creation of a unique opportunity for interaction, joint meaning creation and contradiction.

scholarly journals Analysing group interaction in focus group research: Impact on content and the role of the moderator

1970 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 16-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mette Grønkjær ◽  
Tine Curtis ◽  
Charlotte De Crespigny ◽  
Charlotte Delmar
Keyword(s):  
Social Interaction ◽  
Focus Group ◽  
Group Interaction ◽  
Focus Group Research ◽  
Group Research ◽  
Group Data ◽  
The Social ◽  
Focus Group Data ◽  
The Impact

Interaction between group participants is considered the distinct advantage and hallmark of focus group research. It is therefore necessary to include the social interaction dynamics in analysing focus group data. Little information is however available on analysis of the social interaction in the group and the analytical outcome for the content of the data. This paper contributes to the discussion of the value of participant interaction in focus group research by analysing sequences of interaction collected recently during a research project. This project utilized focus groups to investigate the perceptions and meanings of alcohol use in Denmark. As a frame for analysing group interaction, elements of conversation analysis were used. The aim of this paper is to illustrate group interaction and its impact on the content of focus group data, and highlight the role and some of the challenges posed by group interaction for moderating the focus group discussion. The interaction analyses led to the construction of four interactional events: Negotiating and constructing normality in interaction, disagreement and/or consensus, homogeneity and the impact on interaction and content, and coming to and making sense of a dead-end (including the risk of hierarchical issues). The interactional events are followed by considerations on the impact they may have on the role of the moderator.

scholarly journals Keskustelunanalyysi ja fokusryhmien diskursiivinen tutkimus

2018 ◽  
pp. 114-136
Author(s):  
Melisa Stevanovic ◽  
Elina Weiste
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
Conversation Analysis ◽  
Social World ◽  
Group Approach ◽  
Focus Group Research ◽  
Group Research ◽  
Group Data ◽  
The Social ◽  
Focus Group Data ◽  
Group Members

We introduce a focus-group approach where we draw on a combination of discursive focus-group research and conversation analysis. We explore how the analysis of focus-group talk may attend equally to the content of the group members’ talk and to the interactional dynamics of that talk. Essentially, we propose that the notions of social praxis and action allow researchers to consider focus-group data as a window to the social world that pre-exists the focus-group encounter. However, this world is accessible to the researcher only through the local organization of action in the encounter, which needs to be taken as the priority of analysis. In eliciting maximally spontaneous and minimally interview-led talk around the research topic, we demonstrate the fruitfulness of using stimulus material in the research encounters. The end part of the paper consists of examples of data analysis, through which we illustrate our approach.

User-centered Requirements for Patient Fluid Intake Monitoring Support

2020 ◽  
Vol 64 (1) ◽  
pp. 736-740
Author(s):  
Ellen J. Bass ◽  
Andrew J. Abbate ◽  
Yaman Noaiseh ◽  
Rose Ann DiMaria-Ghalili
Keyword(s):  
Data Analysis ◽  
Focus Group ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Information Needs ◽  
Fluid Intake ◽  
Fluid Consumption ◽  
Registered Dietitians ◽  
Group Data ◽  
Focus Group Data

There is a need to support patients with monitoring liquid intake. This work addresses development of requirements for real-time and historical displays and reports with respect to fluid consumption as well as alerts based on critical clinical thresholds. We conducted focus groups with registered nurses and registered dietitians in order to identify the information needs and alerting criteria to support fluid consumption measurement. This paper presents results of the focus group data analysis and the related requirements resulting from the analysis.

scholarly journals Assessment of students’ satisfaction with a student-led team-based learning course

2015 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Justin W. Bouw ◽  
Vasudha Gupta ◽  
Ana L. Hincapie
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
Student Perceptions ◽  
Group Discussion ◽  
Barriers To Success ◽  
Self Directed Learning ◽  
Group Data ◽  
Team Based Learning ◽  
Focus Group Data ◽  
Directed Learning ◽  
Students Satisfaction

Purpose: To date, no studies in the literature have examined student delivery of team-based learning (TBL) modules in the classroom. We aimed to assess student perceptions of a student-led TBL elective. Methods: Third-year pharmacy students were assigned topics in teams and developed learning objectives, a 15-minute mini-lecture, and a TBL application exercise and presented them to student colleagues. Students completed a survey upon completion of the course and participated in a focus group discussion to share their views on learning. Results: The majority of students (n=23/30) agreed that creating TBL modules enhanced their understanding of concepts, improved their self-directed learning skills (n=26/30), and improved their comprehension of TBL pedagogy (n=27/30). However, 60% disagreed with incorporating student-generated TBL modules into core curricular classes. Focus group data identified student-perceived barriers to success in the elective, in particular the development of TBL application exercises. Conclusion: This study provides evidence that students positively perceived student-led TBL as encouraging proactive learning from peer-to-peer teaching.

scholarly journals Two Approaches to Focus Group Data Collection for Qualitative Health Research

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 160940691775078 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel Flynn ◽  
Lauren Albrecht ◽  
Shannon D. Scott
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Focus Group ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Qualitative Health Research ◽  
Group Data ◽  
Focus Group Data ◽  
Qualitative Focus Groups

This article discusses four challenges to conducting qualitative focus groups: (1) maximizing research budgets through innovative methodological approaches, (2) recruiting health-care professionals for qualitative health research, (3) conducting focus groups with health-care professionals across geographically dispersed areas, and (4) taking into consideration data richness when using different focus group data collection methods. In light of these challenges, we propose two alternative approaches for collecting focus group data: (a) extended period of quantitative data collection that facilitated relationship building in the sites prior to qualitative focus groups and (b) focus groups by videoconference. We share our experiences on employing both of these approaches in two national research programs.

Stance Analysis

2011 ◽  
pp. 262-283 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peyton Mason ◽  
Boyd Davis ◽  
Deborah Bosley
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Financial Services ◽  
Multivariate Techniques ◽  
Online Chat ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Online Focus Groups ◽  
Group Data ◽  
Focus Group Data ◽  
Marketing Information

In this chapter, we will first discuss what stance is and highlight how we identify and measure stance using multivariate techniques, using an ongoing example taken from an Online Financial Focus Group. We review differences in stance between online real-time focus groups and online chat, as well as between online and face-to-face focus groups; and finally, proffer examples of stance analysis in two very different online focus groups: older adults discussing financial services and teens discussing clothes. As marketers see that online focus groups offer valuable marketing information by understanding the significance of how something is said as well as what is said, their confidence in the use of online focus-group data should increase.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document