Focus Groups And Interviewing

Definition and Theoretical Assumptions

A focus group is a planned dialogue of a small cluster of individuals on an agreed subject (Stokes, 2003). Interviews are the principal means by which an individual utilizes persons as sources of proof in their exploration. The technique permits one to discover people’s sentiments, thoughts, and attitudes (Stoke, 2003). The theoretical assumptions of focus groups and interviews are subjectivity and idealism. In idealism, people shape their conceptions of the world through thought and subjectivity augurs that people’s experiences are different (May 2011). The other assumption is one of facilitation. Every method should be built on a theoretical framework that will guide the research according to the objective of qualitative research (Jensen, 2012).

Strengths and Limitations

Strengths of Focus Groups and Interviews

Focus groups have a number of advantages that make them a prime tool to be utilized for qualitative research. First, they can save on time and money when compared to individual interviews (Evalued, 2006). As the name implies, focus groups are made up of a number of people. More time is saved conducting a dialogue with the whole groups at the same time as opposed to individual interviews which will consume more money and time in the long run. Second, focus groups aid in getting more detailed and accurate information about group feelings, insights and sentiments (Evalued, 2006). People act differently in a group; thus to understand the group dynamic of an issue, focus groups will be a significant advantage. Third, focus groups allow an opportunity to seek clarification and gives the researcher to look beyond hard numbers and see the people. Interviews have a number of strengths. First, it aids the researcher to capture not only verbal cues but also non-verbal cues (DeFranzo, 2014). While verbal cues will tell the researcher what the interviewee is thinking, non-verbal cues will aid in adding contexts that would otherwise be missed when evaluating data only. Second, the researcher has total control of the interview (DeFranzo, 2014). Since the researcher has full control over the discussion, they can guide the conversation in the best way they deem fit devoid of any distractions such as social media. Third, it is easier to screen interviewees more accurately (DeFranzo, 2014). In online surveys, individuals may offer false information relating to their age, gender, and race. However, with interviews, the researcher will get more accurate data since some information will be apparent.

Limitations of Focus Groups and Interviews

Focus groups have several limitations. First, it relies on aided conversation to yield outcomes; thus it necessitates facilitation (Leung, 2009). The quality of the dialogue in the group will depend on the facilitator and if an incompetent facilitator is leading then retrieved information may not meet the required needs. Second, assertive and aggressive individuals may take over the discussion (Leung, 2009). In a group dynamic, there will always be those that talk more so rather than group opinions and sentiments being heard it is the thoughts of that individual that will be at the forefront of the discussion. Therefore, a strong and assertive facilitator is needed to guide the group in the right direction. Third, results obtained from focus groups may not be representative of the whole population (Leung, 2009). Since participants in focus groups are self-selected results obtained from this methodology may not be extrapolated to the larger population. For results that will reflect the broader community, a narrow selection of individuals will be needed. Interviews have several limitations. First, they are time-consuming (Reddy, 2016). Interviews are time-consuming depending on the type of questions and the number of questions the researcher seeks to ask. Second, they are costly. The interview method is generally more expensive and the more intensive the process, the higher the costs of utilizing it. Third, a structured interview will be less flexible (Reddy, 2016). For a formal interview, the researcher may only ask the questions that are set within a set time limit which will not leave enough room for organic conversation to ensue.

Practical Considerations

There are a number of practical considerations that must be taken into account when utilizing focus groups and interviews as research methods. First, an examination of the available resources should be taken into account (Hesse-Biber, 2007). The available resources will determine the efficacy of using the research methods and the degree to which the techniques can and should be applied. Second, voluntary involvement should be esteemed (CIRT, n.d.). Participants of the process should be made to sign consent forms that show that they are there out of their own volition and that they were not coerced into participating in the research. In a focus group, the moderator should ensure that silent individuals do not feel pressured to respond during the session. Third, a skilled moderator should be selected (Williams, 2001). An experienced moderator is essential, especially in a focus group setting. The moderator will guide the conversation in relation to the required objectives and research goals. A trained moderator will also be able to encourage people to share information that they would otherwise be unwilling to share. Fourth, confidentiality is vital. People have chosen to participate in the research, and the information that they reveal should remain confidential, and when it is used in sensitive analysis, the researcher should obtain the consent of the participants and change their names to protect their identities. Therefore, practical considerations should be made when utilizing focus groups and interviews in qualitative research.

Critical Reflection

The in-class exercise exposed me to the value of focus groups and interviews. The practice taught me that research is much more than hard, unyielding data. Interviews and focus groups help in adding context to the information presented by quantitative data. For example, quantitative data may state that 100 people detest a particular brand. Focus groups and interviews will not only conclude that 100 people despise the brand, but it will give reasons why people do not like the brand as interpreted through the prism of both verbal and non-verbal cues. The exercise also taught me that an appropriate research method should be chosen. Focus groups and interviews are excellent choices when carrying out qualitative research, but in quantitative analysis, they would not be useful. Therefore, it is essential to select the research method that best fits the research objective one is looking to fulfill. As such it is crucial that one is aware of the various advantages and disadvantages that each method offers and their proper application. The in-class exercise also taught me that both approaches could not be applied at the same time. Focus groups are best utilized in relation to research such as finding if people like or detest a particular brand. Interviews are best employed when more personal outlooks are required. Therefore, the in-class exercise aided me to understand focus groups and interviews better.

References

• CIRT., n.d. Focus group considerations.
• DeFranzo E, S., 2014. Advantages and disadvantages of face-to-face data collection. Accessed 23 February 2019.
• Evalued., 2006. Focus groups. Accessed 23 February 2019.
• Hesse-Biber, S. N. (2007). The Practice of Feminist In-Depth Interviewing. In Feminist research practice: a primer. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Jensen, K. B., 2012. The handbook of media and communication research: qualitative and quantitative methodologies, 2nd ed. Abingdon & New York: Routledge.
• Leung, F., 2009. Spotlight on focus groups. Accessed 23 February 2019
• May, T., 2011. Social research: issues, methods, and process, 4th ed. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
• Reddy, C., 2016. Interview methods and types: Advantage and disadvantage.
• Stokes, J. C., 2003. How to do media & cultural studies. London & Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Williams, A. & Katz, L., 2001. The use of focus group methodology in education: some theoretical and practical considerations. International Electronic Journal for Leadership in Learning, Accessed 23 February 2018.