The What, Why and How of Conducting Focus-Group Research

Abstract

Qualitative research methodology is considered to be appropriate if a researcher plans to scrutinise a new area of study or research a topic when it is not suitable to use observational techniques such as attitudes and decision-making. The choice of any research methodology depends on the purpose of the research. In social science research, the three most common qualitative methods are observation, interviews, and focus groups. Each method is particularly suitable for obtaining a specific type of data. For example, the use of observation is suitable for collecting data on naturally occurring behaviour found in their usual contexts. Interviews are most appropriate for collecting data on people's personal histories, perspectives, and experiences, particularly when exploring sensitive topics. Focus groups are effective in obtaining information on how groups of individuals think or feel about a specific issue and they also give greater insight into why certain beliefs are held. This paper aims to highlight different issues with regard to using focus groups as a qualitative method in the field of social sciences that can be integrated into an overall study design or can occur independently when a specific issue is being investigated. It starts off with an overview of focus groups and presents the values and limitations of using focus groups followed by some principles for composing them. The paper also discusses the role of the moderator. It concludes with the ethical considerations that should be taken into account when planning to use the focus group methodology.

The End of Traditional Focus Groups?

“…The chief value of focus groups over the newer methodologies leveraging on Big Data, is the ability to dive deeper into a topic and glean a fuller, more nuanced understanding. The interactive nature (Almutrafi, 2019;Gundumogula, 2020) of focus groups remains a key and unique characteristic which often leads to sparks of insights. Furthermore, the role of the moderator is not simply to ask questions and receive responses, but to go further and deviate from expected responses by reading between the lines of the responses, through observations of individual behaviours, group dynamics, and other non-verbal cues.…”

“…While the moderator was able to accurately summarise the issues, this is dependent on their capability and expertise (Almutrafi, 2019), and it is possible that they may incorrectly highlight an issue as part of the respondents' collective top 3. In comparison, the responses from the DC@S study shown in Tables 1 and 2 show more accurately the issues which were most salient and why.…”