Download ebooks file Focus Groups Theory and Practice 3rd Edition David W. Stewart all chapters

Download the full version of the ebook at ebookfinal.
com
Focus Groups Theory and Practice 3rd Edition David

W. Stewart
https://ebookfinal.com/download/focus-groups-theory-and-
practice-3rd-edition-david-w-stewart/
OR CLICK BUTTON
DOWNLOAD EBOOK
Download more ebook instantly today at https://ebookfinal.com

Instant digital products (PDF, ePub, MOBI) available
Download now and explore formats that suit you...
Focus Groups Supporting Effective Product Development 1st

Edition Joe Langford (Author)
https://ebookfinal.com/download/focus-groups-supporting-effective-
product-development-1st-edition-joe-langford-author/
ebookfinal.com
Gastroenterology Clinical Focus High yield GI and

hepatology review for Boards and Practice 3rd edition
Qayed
https://ebookfinal.com/download/gastroenterology-clinical-focus-high-
yield-gi-and-hepatology-review-for-boards-and-practice-3rd-edition-
qayed/
ebookfinal.com
Modus Vivendi Liberalism Theory and Practice 1st Edition

David Mccabe
https://ebookfinal.com/download/modus-vivendi-liberalism-theory-and-
practice-1st-edition-david-mccabe/
ebookfinal.com
Groups with Prescribed Quotient Groups and Associated

Module Theory 1st Edition Javier Otal
https://ebookfinal.com/download/groups-with-prescribed-quotient-
groups-and-associated-module-theory-1st-edition-javier-otal/
ebookfinal.com
Focus Group Practice 1st Edition Claudia Puchta
https://ebookfinal.com/download/focus-group-practice-1st-edition-
claudia-puchta/
ebookfinal.com
The Static and Dynamic Continuum Theory of Liquid Crystals

A Mathematical Introduction 1st Edition Iain W. Stewart
https://ebookfinal.com/download/the-static-and-dynamic-continuum-
theory-of-liquid-crystals-a-mathematical-introduction-1st-edition-
iain-w-stewart/
ebookfinal.com
Lawyer Negotiation Theory Practice and Law 3rd Edition Jay

Folberg
https://ebookfinal.com/download/lawyer-negotiation-theory-practice-
and-law-3rd-edition-jay-folberg/
ebookfinal.com
Engineering noise control theory and practice 3rd ed

Edition Hansen
https://ebookfinal.com/download/engineering-noise-control-theory-and-
practice-3rd-ed-edition-hansen/
ebookfinal.com
Interest Rate Modeling Theory and Practice 3rd Edition

Lixin Wu
https://ebookfinal.com/download/interest-rate-modeling-theory-and-
practice-3rd-edition-lixin-wu/
ebookfinal.com
APPLIED SOCIAL RESEARCH
¡\r1ETHODS SERIES
l. SURVEY RESEARCH METHODS (Fifth Edition) 28. EVENT HISTORY ANALYSIS
by FLOYD J. FOWLER. Jr. by KAZUO YAMAGUCHI
2. SYNTHESIZING RESEARCH (Third Edition) 29. RESEARCH IN EDUCATIONAL SETTINGS
by HARRIS COOPER by GEOFFREY MARUYAMA
3. METHODS FOR POL!CY RESEARCH and STANLEY DENO
(SCcond Edition) 30. RESEARCHING PERSONS WITH
by ANN MAJCHRZAK nnd M. LYNNE MARKUS MENTAL ILLNESS
4. SECONDARY RESEARCH (Sccond Edition) by ROSALIND J. DWORKIN
by DAVID W. STEWART and MJCHAELA. KAMINS 31. PLANNING ETHICALLY
5. CASE STUDY RESEARCH (Fifth Edition) RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH (Sccond Edition)
by ROBERT K. YIN
6. META-ANALYTIC PROCEDURES FOR SOCIAL
RESEARCH (Rcviscd Edition)
by ROBERT ROSENTHAL
by JOAN E. SIEBER nnd MARTIN B. TOLICH
32. APPL!ED RESEARCH DESIGN
by TERRY E. HEDRICK,
LEONARD BICKMAN, and DEBRA J. ROG
Focus Groups
7. TELEPHONE SURVEY METHODS (Sccond Edition) 33. DOING URBAN RESEARCH
by PAUL J. LAVRAKAS by GREGORY D. ANDRANOVICH
8. DIAGNOSING ORGANIZATIONS (Second Edition) and GERRY RIPOSA
by MICHAEL l. HARRISON
9. GROUP TECHNIQUES FOR
IDEA BUILDING (Sccond Edition)
by CARL M. MOORE
34. APPLICATIONS OF CASE STUDY RESEARCH (Third Edition)
by ROBERT K. YIN
35. INTRODUCTION TO FACET THEORY
by SAMUEL SHYE and DOV ELIZUR
Theory and Practice
10. NEED ANALYSIS with MICHAEL HOFFMAN
by JACK McKILLIP
11. LINKING AUDITING AND META EVALUATION
36. GRAPHING DATA
by GARY T. HENRY Third Edition
by THOMAS A. SCHWANDT 37. RESEARCH METHODS IN SPECIAL EDUCATION
and EDWARD S. HALPERN by DONNA M. MERTENS
12. ETHJCS AND VALUES and JOHN A. McLAUGHLIN
IN APPL!ED SOCIAL RESEARCH 38. !MPROVING SURVEY QUESTIONS
by ALLAN J.1.'1MMEL by FLOYD J. FOWLER, Jr.
13. ON TIME AND METHOD 39. DATA COil.ECTION AND MANAGEMENT
by JANICE R. KELLY by MAGDA STOUTHAMER-LOEBER
and fOSEPH E. McGRATH and WELMOET BOK VAN KAMMEN
14. RESEARCH IN HEALTH CARE SETTINGS 40. MAIL SURVEYS
by KATHLEEN E. GRADY by THOMAS W. MANGIONE
and BARBARA STRUDLER WALLSTON 41. QUALITATIVE RESEARCH DESIGN
15. PARTIC!PANT ODSERVATlON (Third Edition)
by DANNY L. fOR< iENSLN by JOSEPH A. MAXWELL
16. !NTERl'RETIVE lHTllRACTIONISM (Second Editlon) 42. ANALYZING COSTS, PROCEDURES,
by NORMAN K. DENZIN PROCESSES, AND OUTCOMES
17. ETHNOGRAPHY (Thlrd Edltlon) IN HUMAN SERVICES
by DAVID M. FETTER.MAN by BRIAN T. YATES
18. STANDARDIZED SURVEY fNTERVIEWING 43. DOING LEGAL RESEARCH
by FLOYD J. FOWLER, fr., by ROBERT A. MORRIS, BRUCE D. SALES,
and THOMAS W. MANGJONE
19. PRODUCTIVITY MEASUREMENT
and DANIEL W. SHUMAN
44. RANDOMIZED EXPERIMENTS FOR PLANNING
David W. Stewart
by RODERT O. BRINKERHOFF AND EVALUATION
and DENN!S E. DRESSLER by ROBERT F. BORUCH
20. FOCUS GROUPS (Third Edition)
by DAVID W. STEWART and
45. MEASURING COMMUNITY INDICATORS
by PAUL J. GRUENEWALD, ANDREW J. TRENO,
Prem N. Shamdasani
PREM N, SHAMDASANI GAlL TAFF, and MICHAEL KLITZNER
21. PRACTICAL SAMPLING 46. MIXED METHODOLOGY
by GART T. HENRY by ABBAS TASHAKKORI and CHARLES TEDDLIE
22. DECISION RESEARCH 47. NARRATIVE RESEARCH
by fOHN S. CARROLL and ERIC f. JOHNSON by AMIA LIEBLICH, RIVKA TUVAL-MASHIACH, and
23. RESEARCH WITH HISPANIC POPULATIONS TAMAR.ZILBER
by GERARDO MARIN 48. COMMUNICATING SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH
arld BARBARA VANOSS MARIN TO POLICY-MAKERS
24. INTERNAL EVALUAT!ON by ROGER VAUGHAN and TERRY E BUSS
by ARNOLD J. LOVE 49. PRACTICAL META-ANALYSIS
25. COMPUTER SIMULATION APPLICATIONS by MARK W. LIPSEY and DAVID B. WILSON
by MARCIA LYNN WH!CKER and LEE SIGELMAN so. CONCEPT MAPPING FOR PLANNING
26. SCALE DEVELOPMENT (Third Edition) AND EVALUATION
by ROBERT F. DeVELLIS
27. S.TUDYING FAMILIES
by ANNE P. COPELAND and KATHLEEN M. WHITE
by MARY KANE and WILLIAM M. K. TROCHIM
51. CONF!GURATIONAL COMPARATIVE METHODS
by BENOIT RIHOUX and CHARLES C. RAGIN
($)SAGE
Los Angeles 1London 1New Delhi
Singapore !.Washington DC
($)SAGE
Los Angeles 1 London 1 New Delhi
Singapore 1 Washing1on DC
Contents
FOR INFORMATION: Copyright© 2015 by SAGE Publications, !ne.
SAGE Publlcations, lnc.

Ali rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced
2455 Teller Road or utilized in any forro or by any means, electronic or
Thousand Oaks, California 91320 mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any
E-mail: [email protected] information storage and retrieval system, without permission
in writing from the publisher.
SAGE Publications Ud.
1 Oliver's Yard
Preface to the First Edition xi
55 City Road
Preface to the Second Edition xiii
London EC1 Y 1SP
Printed in the United States of America
United Kingdorn Preface to the Third Edition XV
Library ofCongress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

SAGE Publications India Pvt. Ud. About the Authors xvii
B M 1 Mohan Cooperative Industrial Area
Stewart, David W.
Mathura Road, New Delhi 11 O044
Focus groups : theory and practice / David W. Stewart, Prem
India l. Introduction: Focus Group History, Theory, and Practice 1
N. Shamdasani. - Third edition.
Border Crossl.ngs: The Behavioral Science Origins of Focus Groups 2
SAGE Publications Asia-Pacific Ple. Ud. Contributions From Sociology and Social Psychology 5
pages cm
3 Church Street Includes bibliographical references and index. Contributions From Clinical Psychology 6
#10-04 Sarnsung Hub
Contributions From Marketing Research 7
Singapore 049483 ISBN 978-1-4522-7098-2 (alk paper)
Separation of Practice From Theory 8
l. Focus groups. 2. Social sciences-Research-Methodology.
Focl.ls Group Theory 9
3. Social groups. l. Shamdasani, Prem N. II. Title. Focused Research 9
Group Interactions 10
H61.28.S74 2015 In-Depth Data 12
300.72'3-dc23 2013051223 Humanistic Interview 13
Purpose of the Book 14
Plan for the Book 14
This book is printed on acid-free paper.
Conclusion 15
Review Questions 16
2. Group Dynamics and Focus Group Research 17
Acquisitions Editor: Helen Salman
Influences of Intrapersonal Factors and Individual Differences 18
./J, Pa~!~Óm
Editorial Assistant: Kaitlin Coghill
Production Editor: Olivia Weber-Stenis Demographic Factors 19
Copy Editor. QuADS Prepress (P) Ud. F SC. respons.1b1e sources Physical Characteristics 21
Typesetter. C&M Digitals (P) Ud. WWW.fOO.O'lJ FSC® C014174 Personality 21
Proofreader: Susan Schon Interpersonal Influences 23
lndexer: Will Ragsdale Group Cohesiveness 24
Cover Designar: Karine Hovsepian Group Compatibility, Homogeneity!Heterogeneity 26
Marketing Manager. Nico!e Elliott 14 15 16 17 18 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Social Power 27 Making Contact 61
Group Participation and Nonverbal Communication 29 Incentives 62
Environmental Influences 30 Location 63
The Material Environment fO How Many Participants.? 64
Territoriality !n Recruiting Hard-to-Reach Individuals 65
Spatial Arrangements 31 The Language of the Group 66
Interpersonal Distance 32 Recruiting Participants Across Cultures 67
Moderated Groupings of Strangers 32 Developing the Interview Guide 68
Group Dynamics in Cross-Cultural Focus Groups 34 Formulating Questions 69
Interpersonal Style and Communication Pattern 35 How Many Questions? 70
Nonverbal Communication 36 How Much Structure? 71
Social Power 36 Wording of Questions 73
Group Compatibility, Homogeneity, and Heterogeneity 36 Pretesting 74
Environmental Influences 37 Issues and Trends for the Future 74
Conclusion 37 Conclusion 75
Review Questions 38 Review Questions 76
3. Focus Groups and the Research Toolbox 39 5. The Focus Group Moderator 77
Focus Group Basics: Structure, Process, and Data 39 Leadership and Group Dynamics 78
Place 40 Interviewing Styles and Tactics 81
The Moderator 40 Moderator Selection 86
Topies 41 Moderator Preparation 88
Analy sis 42 Cultural Dimensions of Focus Group Moderation 92
The Role of Focus Groups Among Research Tools 43 Moderator Selection in Cross-Cultural Research 92
Applications, Advantages, and Limitations 44 Moderator Preparation in Cross-Cultural Research 93
Applications of Focus Groups 44 Moderator Bias in Focus Group Interviews 94
Advantages of Focus Groups 45 Conclusion 95
Limitations of Focus Groups 47 Review Questions 96
Steps in the Design and Use of Focus Groups 49
6. Conducting the Focus Group 97
Problem Definition 49
The Physical Arrangement of the Group 98
Identifying the Participants 51
The Moderator and Interview Guide 51 Interviewing Style 99
The Interview 52 Discussion Aids 100
Analysis and Interpretation 52 Intimacy 101
Sorne Practica/ Considerations 52 Observers and Recordings 101
The Logistics of Focus Groups 52 Beginning the Interview 102
Institutional Review Boards 53 Ensuring Participation 104
Conclusion 54 Time Management 104
Review Questions 54 Probing 105
Dealing With Problems 106
4. Recruiting Focus Group Participants Experts 107
and Designing the Interview Guide 57 Friends 107
Establishing the Research Agenda 58 Hostile Group Members 108
Recruiting Participants 60 Special Issues 108
Children as Foeus Group Participants 108 Types of Virtual Focus Groups 160
Foeus Groups With Participants With Special Needs 109 Platforms Available far Condueting Virtual Foeus Groups 163
Observational Techniques uo Reeruitingfor Virtual Focus Groups 165
Dealing With Sensitive and Embarrassing Tapies 1¡10 Benefits of Virtual Foeus Group Reeruitment 165
Focus Groups in International Settings iru Challenges of Virtual Foeus Group Recruitment 165
Conclusion 112 Moderating Virtual Focus Groups 166
Review Questions 113 The Next Phase ofVirtual Focus Groups 168
Other Group Techniques 168
7. Analyzing Focus Group Data 115 The Nominal Group Technique 168
How Much Analysis? 116 The Delphi Technique 169
Transcribing the Interview 117 Brainstorming and Synectics 172
Qualitative Analytic Approaches 118 Leaderless Discussion Groups 174
Epistemologieal Orientation 118 Conclusion 175
Disciplinary Foeus 119 Review Questions 175
W:orkbeneh Issues 120
The Order of Tapies in a Group Diseussion 120 10. Conclusion 177
What Is Diseussed and What Is Not? 120
Time Spent on an Issue 121 References 181
Intensity and Emotional Content of the Diseussion Expression 122
Reasons Versus Responses 122 Index 193
What Is Believable? 122
Individuals Versus the Group 123
Methods of Analysis 123
The Scissor-and-Sort Teehnique 123
Content Analysis 124
Quantitative Analysis 132
Computer-Assisted Content Analysis 133
Conclusion 139
Review Questions 139
8. Focus Groups in Practice 141
Political Campaigns and Focus Groups 143
Television Ads the Public Will Never See 144
Impulsive Consumers, Shoplifters, and Focus Groups 145
A Representative Focus Group Report: Buying a New Car 146
New Car Purchasing Experiences: A Sample Report 146
Purpose 146
Composition of the Groups 148
Majar Faetors Influencing Vehicle Purchase 148
Summary 154
Conclusion 155
Review Questions 155
9. Virtual Focus Groups and Other Group Research Methods 157
Virtual Focus Groups 158
Preface to the First Edition
n late 1986, when we were asked to write a book on focus groups for the Sage
1 series on Applied Social Research Methods, there were few extant sources
on the use of focus groups. There were a few collections of readings and sorne
chapters in various handbooks, but these tended to be either dated or quite
superficial, and Merton and Kendall's (1946) classic The Focussed Interviewwas
long out of print. By the time we completed the book in late 1989, numerous
treatments of the conduct and application of focus groups had appeared. Most
of these books were by experienced focus group moderators and provided
considerable detall about the recruitment of focus group participants, the
actual conduct of groups, and the interpretation of data generated by focus
groups. We have referenced a number of these books in our own monograph,
- and we feel that the reader will find them useful supplements to the material
we offer.
· Despite the recent appearance of other books on the topic, we feel that our
own work offers a unique perspective on focus groups. Our original intent-
and we think we have adhered to it-was to produce a relatively short volume
that provides a simple guide to the conduct and application of focus groups and
places the use and interpretation of focus groups within a theoretical context.
Focus group research had its origins in early research on group dynamics,
persuasive co~munication, and the effects of mass media. These origins and
the rich empirical and theoretical foundations they provide are infrequently
acknowledged and used. We have revisited the origins of focus group research
in our text and have tried to tie focus group research more closely to its origins
in mainstream social science. In doing so, we believe we have set our own book
apart from others on the same topic that tend to provide considerable detall
on the conduct of groups, as well as detailed examples, but tend to place less
emphasis on the theoretical dimension.
The reader will find three chapters are especially concerned with the the-
oretical dimensions of focus groups. Chapter 2 draws heavlly on the literature
of group dynamics and the social psychology of groups. Focus groups are, by
xi
xii FOCUS GROUPS: THEORY AND PRACTICE
definition, an exercise in group dynamics, and the conduct of a group-as well

as the interpretation of results obtained from focus groups-must be under-
stood within the context of group interaction. Chapter 4 considers the liter-
ature on interviewer and moderator effects, including the interaction of ¡:he
group and the moderator. This chapter not only emphasizes the importancé of
the moderator in determining the quality of focus group data but suggests that
the data are themselves the result of a unique interaction of the moderator and
the group. Only an understanding ofthis interaction and the factors that con-
Preface to the Second Edition
tribute to it provides a sound basis for the interpretation of focus group data.
Chapter 6 also includes sorne discussion of the theory of content analysis.
Because this chapter is concerned ~-h-the interpretation of focus group results,
it seemed particularly appropriate to treat the theoretical underpinnings of this
W
interpretation. hen we began work on the second edition of this book, it became evi-
The remaining chapters of the book, as well as portions of the chapters . dent to us that many dimensions of the focus group environment, as
already discussed, are devoted to the mechanics of designing, conducting, and well as the underlying methodology itself, had evolved significantly since we
interpreting the outcome of focus groups. We hope the result is a balance of wrote the first edition. We believe this evolution has been a positive force and
theory and practice that suggests that focus groups need not be ad hoc, atheo- has both expanded the range of problems and settings for which focus groups
rétical, or unscientific exercises. Rather, we have tried to convey the notion that are appropriate and improved the general practice of conducting focus group
focus groups can be useful social science research tools that are well grounded research. Amorig these trends in focus group re.search are the following:
in theory.
No work is ever the sole accomplishment of its authors. Ours is no excep- l. A very significant acceleration of the diffusion of focus groups into the behav-
tion. We would be remiss if we <lid not acknowledge the contributions of others. ioral and health sciences ·
Len Bickmann, coeditor of this Sage series, was instrumental in encouraging us 2. The globalization of focus group research
to undertake the project. Toro O'Guinn of the Department of Advertising at the
University of Illinois reviewed an earlier draft of the manuscript and offered a 3. The consolidation of focus group facility ownership with a consequent
increase in advertising by owners using a diversity of advertising appeals
variety of helpful criticisms and suggestions. Siony Arcilla typed the final ver-
sion ofthe manuscript. To all ofthese individuals we extend our gratitude. Any 4. The growth of niche positionings among focus group facilities and moderators
remaining problems and points lacking in clarity are, of course, our responsi- with specialists emerging to focus on specific ethnic groups, particular age
bility and exist despite the generous help of others. ranges, and specific industries, among others
5. ·The emergence of creative innovations in focus group design and the use of
David W. Stewart technology
Prem N. Shamdasani
These innovations include virtual focus groups that bring people together
November 1989 via Internet or videoconference, th~ use of natural groups (as opposed to the
use of groups of strangers), and the conduct of focus groups in the home or
office where the natural environment can serve as a stimulus for discussion.
· At the same time these positive trends have occurred, there has been growing
criticism of focus groups among the traditional heavy users of them-the mar-
keting community. The trade and acadernic literature criticizes focus groups for a
multitude ofshortcomings: their use as an inappropriate substitute for quantitative
résearch and in-depth individual interviews; their use as an evaluative research
tool rather than an exploratory tool for discovery; and the conduct of "cookie
xiü
xiv FOCUS GROUPS: THEORY AND PRACTICE
cutter" groups conducted by relatively unskilled moderators. Although we believe

there is sorne merit in this criticism, it is our view that such criticism is not so
much about focus group methodology as about the manner in which the meth-
odology is sometimes employed. Even the best of tools will not yield good re~ults
when used inappropriately. A hammer is very useful for driving nails but is a poor
substitute when the need is to cut a two-by-four in half. A hammer can certainly
be used to break a two-by-four in half, but the result is neither pretty nor especially
helpful. The same may be said of the focus group: It is a useful tool for sorne types Preface to the Third Edition
of research problems but neither pretty nor helpful in ali research contexts.
One of our objectives in writing this book was to better define the research
contexts and problems for which focus groups are best suited. We also wanted
to provide practica! advice about how to design, implement, and interpret
focus group research. We did not, however, want to write just another "how-to"
lmost 25 years have passed since the appear~c_e of the first edition of
book-there are many available. Rather, we sought to show how focus groups
fit into the broader fabric of research in the social and behavioral sciences. In
A this book. At the time we wrote the first ed1tlon, focus groups were
l~gely the domain of marketing researchers, and there were few books that
doing this, we also sought to move focus group research from a tool principally
provided guidance for the design, conduct, and interpretation of focus group
used by marketing researchers to a tool more broadly applied. We were grat-
research. Our objectives in writing the first edition were to fill this gap with a
ified to find that the first edition of this book found a broad audience in the
short and accessible treatment of the method and to place focus group research
social, behavioral, and health sciences, as well as among marketers.
within the broader context of social science research. We were gratified with
In this second edition, we have retained our attention to focus groups as a
the reception of the ·book, but shortly after the book appeared, a number of
general research tool for the social sciences. We have also attempted to remain
other very good, and more comprehensive, books on the "how" of focus group
close to original source materials when appropriate. Focus group research is a
. research appeared. The following two decades saw an explosion of the use of
mature methodology, and much that is today considered "best prac!ice" has its
' focus groups and a broadening of their use to a diverse array of social science
origins in earlier work. At the same time, we have updated the book to reflect
and professional disciplines. By the time we wrote the second edition, focus
the positive evolutionary trends in focus group research. We have also added a
third author to expand the experience base and perspectives. _/ groi.lp research was widely employed, but much of the work using such groups
seemed to have lost the strong theoretical and disciplinary history that pro-
We would be remiss if we did not thank the many readers of the first edi-
vided the original foundations of group depth interviews. For this reason, the
tion who have offered us numerous suggestions and thoughts over the years.
second edition of the book sought to more fully explore the historical origins
Our students and our research clients have also challenged us to better explain
of focus group research and demonstrate the very deep epistemological and
the role of focus group research as a social science research method and to help
theoretical underpinnings of. the method. We wanted to make the case that
improve the general level of research practice revolving around focus groups.
in-depth group interviews are a tool for serious social science research and not
Finally, we thank the editors of this series for inviting us to write the first
just something that is done to ihform real science. The second edition appears
edition, encouraging us to develop a revised second edition, and offering
to have accomplished this objective, and it has been cited more than 3,500
helpful and constructive comments about how the book could be improved.
times si~ce it appeared. ·
David W. Stewart As we began the third edition of this book, it became very clear that focus
group research had both matured and moved into new domains of research
Prem N. Shamdasani
questions and methodology. The current edition reflects two of these new
Dennis W. Rook domains. The first is the growing use of focus group research to address an
increasingly broad array of issues with a global span. In addition to the tradi-
January 2006
tional use of focus group research in marketing, such groups are now employed
among rural farmers on the Indian subcontinent, gang members in South
XV
xvi FOCUS GROUPS: THEORY AND PRACTICE
Central Los Angeles, parents who home school their children, and individu-
als suffering from various physical ailments, to name but a few. Focus group
research has certainly extended its reach beyond marketing research applica-
tions focused on relatively affluent consumers.
The second major change is the growing use of virtual groups. The Internet
has brought with it a rich array of tools and technologies for conducting focus
groups with participating individuals who are separated by considerable time
and space. First used as a necessary, if inferior, substitute for physical groups, About the Authors
virtual focus groups are proving to have very unique advantages of their own.
In this edition of the book, we have greatly expanded our treatments of the use
offocus groups in an international context and the use ofvirtual focus groups.
We have also sought to update the book with new and updated source
materials while retaining dassic and timeless materials that were a part of the ear- David W. Stewart, PhD, is President's Professor of Marketing and Law at
lier editions of the book. We have added new materials about procedural details, Loyola Marymount University and editor of the Journal of Public Policy and
such as the role of institutional review board approval and the recruiting of par- Marketing. He has previously seryed as a member of the faculty of the Owen
ticipants. We have also expanded our treatment of the role of the moderator, the Graduate School of Management at Vanderbilt University, the Marshall
conduct of focus groups, and software tools for the analysis of focus group data. School ofBusiness at the University ofSouthern California, and the University
The second edition of the book was enriched by the contributions of a of California, Riverside. In. addition to his responsibilities as a faculty member,
third author, Dennis Rook. Dennis was not able to join in our effort to produce he has served in a number of administrative roles in higher education. He is a
the third edition, but many of his earlier contributions remain in the present past editor ofboth the Journal of Marketing and the Journal of the Academy of
edition. We thank Dennis for his collaboration and acknowledge his earlier Marketing Science. He has served on the Board of Governors of the Academy
work by including him as a contributing author. of Marketing Science and as Vice President, Finance, and a member of the
Th is editlon of the book has been informed by the comment of II1any read- Board of Directors of the American Marketing Association. He has also
ers, including our students, colleagues, clients, and reviewers. We especiallywish served on the Board of the American Marketing Association Foundation.
to express our gratitude to the reviewers who provided us with comments about
the earlier edition: Michael B. Blank, University of Pennsylvania; Christina
) He is a past president of the Academic Council of the American Marketing
Ássociation, a past chairman of the Section on Statistics in Marketing of the
Harnett, Johns Hopkins University; Jane Hunt, Keele University; Sheri Oden, American Statistical Association, a past president of the Society for Consumer
Oakland University; and Marilyn E. Swisher, University ofFlorida. The insights Psychology, and a Fellow of both the American Psychological Association
and suggestions made by these reviewers provided us with direction and guid- and the Association for Psychological Science. He is also a former member
ance for improving and updating the book. We have also heard from many and a past chairman of the U.S. Census Bureau's Advisory Committee of
reséarchers who have used the book as a resource for their research. We very Professional Associations.
much appreciate their suggestions, and we have tried to be responsive to sugges- Stewart has authored or coauthored more than 250 publications and 8
tions. We would be remiss if we did not thank the editorial staff at Sage for their books. His research has examined a wide range of issues induding marketing
encouragement and pátience. We hope that our new edition continues to be as strategy, the analysis of markets, cpnsumer information search and decision
useful as the earlier ones. We thank the editors of this series for inviting us to making, effectiveness of marketing communications, public policy issues
write the first edition and staff of Sage for encouraging us to persist in our work. related to marketing and methodological approaches to the collection and
aríalysis of marketing data. His research and commentary are frequently fea-
David W. Stewart tured in the business and popular press.
In 2007, Stewart was awarded the Elsevier Distinguished Marketing
Prem N. Shamdasani
Scholar Award by the Society for Marketing Advances, and in 2006, he
September 2013 was honored by the Academy of Marketing Science with the Cutco/Vector
Distinguished Educator Award for lifetime contributions to marketing. In
xvii
xviii FOCUS GROUPS: THEORY AND PRACTICE About the Authors xix
2005, he received the Omicron Delta Kappa Men of Merit Award from his UPS, AP Moeller Maersk, Roche, Bayer Healthcare, GSK, Deutsche Bank,
alma mater, Baylor University. He has also been honored for innovation HSBC, Barclays, Ernst & Young, KPMG, Deloitte, Danone, Nestle, Suntory,
in teaching by the Decision Sciences Institute, and he was a member o~ a Volvo, Ikea, Carrefour, Royal Ahold, NTUC Incheon Int'l Airport, Wipro,
four-person faculty team honored by the U.S. Distance Learning Associati?n Singapore Tourism Board, UNICEF, USDA, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
for the "Best Distance Learning Program 1996-Continuing Education'' :in (Singapore), and Commonwealth Secretariat (UK).
1996. In 1998, he received the American Academy of Advertising Award for He is also actively involved in focus group research for consumer prod-
Outstanding Contribution to Advertising Research for his long-term contri- ucts companies and social marketing programs. His research publications
butions to research in advertising. His article on warning messages was named have appeared in the leading regional and international journals and include
the best article published in the Journal of Public Policy and Marketing during the Journal of Consumer Research, European Journal of Marketing, Journal
1992-1994, and he was recipient of the American Academy of Advertising of Advertising Research, Asían Journal of Marketing, Asia Pacific Journal of
Award for best article in the Journal of Advertising in 1989. In 1988, he Management, and the Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services.
was Marketing Science Institute Visiting Scholar at the General Motors He holds a BBA degree with first class honors from the National University
Corporation. He has been included in Whos Who in America, Whos Who of of Singapore and received his PhD in marketing from the University of
the World, Whos Who in American Education, and Whos Who in Advertising. Southern California, Los Angeles. His research and teaching interests include
Stewart's experience includes work as a manager of research for Needham, Brand Management, New Product Marketing, Retail Strategy, Relationship
Harper, and Steers Advertising, Chicago (now DDB) and consulting proj- Marketing, and Cross-Cultural Consumer Behavior.
ects for a wide range of organizations. Among the organizations for which
he has consulted are Hewlett Packard, Agilent Technologies, the Coca-Cola
Company, Hughes, NCR, Texas Instruments, IBM, Intel, Cadence Design
Systems, Century 21 Real Estate, Samsung, American Home Products,
Visa Services, Xerox, the U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Federal Trade
Commission, among others. He has served as an expert witness befare the
Federal Trade Commission, in U.S. Federal Court, and in State Cour~s in cases
involving deceptive advertising claims and unfair business practices, in matters
related to trademarks and intellectual property, and in antitrust actions. He has
)
delivered executive education programs throughout the United States and in
20 other nations on 4 continents.
A native ofBaton Rouge, Louisiana, he receivedhis BA from the Northeast
Louisiana University (now the University ofLouisiana at Monroe) and his MA
and PhD in psychology from Baylor University.
Prem N. Shamdasani, PhD, is Associate Professor of Marketing; Associate

Dean, Executive Education; Academic Director, Asia-Pacific Executive
(APEX) MBA Program; Ca-Director, Stanford-NUS Executive Program in
International Management Program; and Director, Advanced Management
Program at the NUS Business School, National University of Singapore.
He has taught in Singapore and other countries and has received numerous
commendations and awards for teaching excellence. Apart from teaching grad-
uate and executive MBA courses, he is very active in executive development
and training and has worked with more than 80 companies globally, such as
Caterpillar, J&J, I.:Oreal, McDonalds, Nokia, Sony, Samsung, IBM, Microsoft,
3M, DuPont, Asahi Glass, Philips, Siemens, Alcatel-Lucent, Singapore Airlines,
1
lntroduction
Focus Group History, Theory, and Practice
A mong the most widely used research tools in the social sciences are group
depth interviews, or focus groups. Originally called "focussed" (Merton's
preferred spelling) interviews (Merton & Kendall, 1946), this technique carne into
vogue after World War II and has been a part of the social scientist's tool kit ever
since. Focus groups emerged in behavioral science research as a distinctive mem-
ber of the qualitative research family, which also includes individual depth inter-
viewing, ethnographic participant observation, and projective methods, among
others. Like its qualitative siblings, the popularity and status of focus groups
among behavioral researchers has ebbed and flowed over the years, with distinc-
tive patterns in particular fields. Por example, in qualitative marketing studies, the
use of focus groups has grown steadily for more than 50 years, and today, by one
estímate, more than a quarter of a i:nillion focus groups are conducted annually in
the United States alone (FocusVision, 2012). Also, focus groups no longer solely
involve small research projects that rely on two or three groups meeting face-to-
face in a small room. Focus groups are now conducted via webcams, in virtual
worlds, by teleprescence and through social media (McDermott, 2013). It is also
corÍunon to conduct focus groups across the globe and in large numbers. Both
Airbus and Boeing for example, conducted hundreds of focus groups all over the
world to assist the development of their new planes, the A380 and 787, respec-
tively (Babej & Pollack, 2006; Emerson, Johnson, & Koh, 2000).
In sociology, arguably the first field to embrace group research-
qualitative research-flourished through the 1950s, faded away in the 1960s
2 FOCUS GROUPS: THEORY AND PRACTICE Introduction 3
and 1970s, and reemerged in the 1980s. It has been an important part of the The inevitable impact of substantive discipline-based theory on research
social scientist's toolkit ever since. Various patterns of focus group ascen- practices stands in contrast to a tendency today to generalize a one-size-fits-all
dance, decline, and revival characterize other fields, yet it seems reasonable to approach to using focus groups. Focus group methodology may be common
conclude that focus group research has never enjoyed such widespread us:age to many disciplines, but its uses and applications are varied. This chapter seeks
across an array of behavioral science disciplines and subfields as it <loes today. to examine the relationships between focus group theory and practice by
Technology that draws the world together and facilitates communication identifying their primary historical sources and characterizing their prototypic
across time and space has provided new means for conducting focus groups, research designs, which tend to vary dramatically according to their disciplin~
but the basic approach and benefits remain. aryorigin.
The diversity of research purposes, theories, and procedures that characterize As noted earlier, the lineage of focus group research is most commonly
the behavioral sciences suggests that focus groups will materialize differently in and directly traced to the 20th-century studies of persuasive communications
different fields. This, in fact, is the case, and it speaks to the versatility and pro- arid the effects of mass media that were conducted in the early 1940s. Table
ductivity of focus group research. What is problematic with focus group research 1.1 provides a summary timeline of the development of group interviewing as
today, as the anthropologist Grant McCracken (1988) observes, is an intellectual a research tool with a particular emphasis on its evolution within the field of
climate that reflects "substantially more concern with practice than theory'' marketing research where it has found commercial success and a legitimacy
(p. 15). This is particularlythe case in applied research, where dozens of articles and that has made it a staple of social science research. Yet this is only part of the
books tend to emphasize the dos and don'ts surrounding the myriad executional story, as today's focus group methodologies also evolved from two additional
details involving recruiting participants, preparing discussion guides, selecting primary sources: (1) clinical psychological uses of group analysis and therapy
moderators, blocking time slots, inviting observers, ordering food, analyzing data, and (2) sociological and social psychological studies of group dynamics. The
and preparing reports. As Rook (2003) observed, the stage management aspects of history of focus groups is also replete with the enriching effects of interdisci-
focus groups often preoccupy researchers to the extent that more basic issues are plinary collaboration in the early days, as well as the migration of researchers
barely considered. In practice, researchers rarely step back to ask why they want to from one field (e.g., clinical psychology) to another (marketing research).
conduct researeh with groups rather than individuals, and why in a mirrored room Consequently, the theoretical underpinnings of focus group methodology
instead of a natural setting? Answers to these and other questions can be found in emerged from what the pioneer Alfred Goldman described as a "rich stew
closer examination of the nature and conduct of focus groups within the behavioral of socio-psychological and psychotherapeutic traditions and techniques"
science disciplines from which they emerged. (Goldman & McDonald, 1987, p. 3).
Border Crossings: The Behavioral Science

Table 1.1 Milestones in Focus Group Research
Origins of Focus Groups
1913 Strong, E. K., Jr., "Psychological Methods as Applied to Advertising;'
For almost 100 years, researchers in numerous behavioral science disciplines Journal of Educatíonal Psychology, 4, 393-395.
(both basic and applied) have relied on focus groups as a source of primary data. · 1925 Poffenberger, A. T., Psychology in Advertising. Chicago, IL: A.W Shaw.
The fields that have-at various points in time-embraced research with groups 1926 Bogardus, E. S., "The Group Interview;' fournal of Applied Sociology,
include education, sociology, communications, the health sciences, organization 10, 372-382.
behavior, program evaluation, psychotherapy, social psychology, gerontology, 1931 Moreno, J. L., The Fírst Book on Group Psychotherapy. New York, NY:
political science, policy research, sociology, anthropology, information systems, Beacon House.
management, and marketing. The core concerns of these disciplines are obviously 1934 Lazarsfeld, P. F., "The Psychological Aspects of Market Research;'
quite diverse, which suggests that focus groups are likely to be designed, fielded, Harvard Business Review, 13(0ctober), 54-71.
and analyzed from very different perspectives and with different priorities. In other 1937 Lazarsfeld, P. F., "The Use ofDetailed Interviews in Market Research;'
words, the underlying conceptual domain of any field influences how its research- Journal of Marketing, 2(July), 3-8.
ers select samples and construct questions and how moderators probe responses
and manage interactions among focus group participants. (Cqntinued)
Table 1.1 (Continued) However, a stew is not necessarily a melting pot, and fundamental differ-
1940-1945 "Focused Interviews" (both group and individual) conducted by ences exist between sociological, social psychological, clinical psychological,
Lazarsfeld's associates Hadley Cantril, Gordon Allport, and Robert health care, education, and marketing research concerns. Focus group pioneers
Merton, initially for CBS radio program research, later for military were hardly single-minded, and marked differences of opinion and approach
training and morale films. reflect distinctive intellectual priorities within each parent discipline. These
divergent orientations toward research conducted within group settings con-
1944 Edmiston, V., "The Group Interview;' Journal of Educational Research,
tribute to often sharp disagreements about how focus groups should be used,
37, 593-601.
designed, fielded, and interpreted. This has also produced, over time, hybrid
1946 Merton, R. K., & Kendall, P. L., "The Focussed Interview;' American forms of focus groups whose design reflects varying degrees of sociological
Journal of Sociology, 51, 541-557. and psychological influence, as well as the more pragmatic concerns associated
1947 Dichter, E., "Psychology in Marketing Research;' Harvard Business with specific applications and settings. The following discussion examines the
Review, 25, 432-443. origins and uses of focus group research in its three parent disciplines.
1948 Lewin, K., Resolving Social Conflicts. New York, NY: Harper. Not surprisingly, sociology's core interest in social groups and group
behavior led many researchers to employ group interviews in their research.
1949-1953 Trade press cites numerous uses offocus groups by advertising
Both. Karl Mannheim (1936) and E. S. Bogardus (1926) report using group
agencies in NeW York, Philadelphia, and Chicago.
interviews in the 1920s. Since then, qualitative sociologists have used focus
1954 Smith, G. H., Motivation Research in Advertising and Marketing. New groups to study a myriad of group behavior topics, including social interac-
York, NY: McGraw-Hill. tion patterns and personal space; group composition, cohesiveness, decision
1962 Goldman, A. E., "The Group Depth Interview;' Journal of Marketing, mapng, and productivity; and conformity, leadership, and social power.
26,61-68. Sociologists and social psychologists share many common research interests,
1976 Bellenger, D., Bernhardt, K., & Goldstucker, J., Qualitative Research in although the latter tend to focus on the individual rather than the group as the
M~rketing. Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association. unit of analysis.
1979 Higgenbotham, J. B., & Cox, K. (Eds.), Focus Group Interviews: A
Reader. Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association.
Contributions From Sociology and Social Psychology
1982 Fern, E. F., "The Use ofFocus Groups for Idea Generation: The
Effects of Group Size, Acquaintanceship, and Moderator on Response
The most prominent early social psychological uses of focus groups sought
Quantity and Quality;' Journal of Marketing Research, 19, 1-13.
to achieve understanding of the effects of media communications (e.g., radio
1990s Books on focus groups by Stewart and Shamdasani (1990), Templeton broadcasts, government fund-raising appeals, and World War II military train-
(1994), Greenbaum (2000), Morgan (1998), Edmunds (1999), Krueger ing films) and the underlying factors that explained the relative effectiveness
and Casey (2000), and Fern (2001). and persuasiveness of a particclar communication. The most famous and
Late l 990s Criticism of marketing focus groups appears in the trade press influential stimulus of the growth of focus groups sprang from network radio
(Kaufman, 1997). researchers' frustration with their inability to diagnose why different programs
2003 Ethnographic influences emerge in the use of focus groups conducted received different likability seores. Thus, the "focussed" group interview had its
in natural settings with real social groups (Wellner, 2003). origins in the Office of Radio Research at Columbia University in 1941 when
Paul Lazarsfeld invited Robert Merton to assist him in the evaluation of audi-
2007 Growing use of focus group research in developing markets and in a
enée response to radio programs. 1 In this early research, members of a mass
global context (Hennink, 2007).
media studio audience listened to a recorded radio program and were asked to
2012 Growing use ofvirtual groups, virtual worlds, and related technologies press a red button when they heard anything that evoked a negative response-
Nimultaneously expand the definition of"group" in time and space anger, boredom, or disbelief-and to press a green button whenever they had
and extend the scope of modalities by which data may be obtained
a positive response. These responses and their timings were recorded on a
(Houliez & Gamble, 2012).
polygraph-like instrument called the Lazarsfeld-Stanton Program Analyzer
(a recording device that is quite similar to devices still in use in media research discussions and activities; individuals' deeply seated thoughts and feelings; and
today). At the end of the program, members of the audience were asked to extensive, wide-ranging, and spontaneous expressions. Researchers influenced
focus on the positive and negative events they recorded and to discuss the by the psychotherapeutic school tend to favor focus groups that are more
reasons for these reactions (Merton, 1987). i developmental in orientation and design. Such groups place less emphasis on
After the outbreak of World War II, Merton applied his technique to i:he evaluative tasks and tend to use more indirect ways of asking questions. Also,
analysis ·of Army training and morale ftlms for the Research Branch of the in contrast to individual patient-therapist psychotherapy, the interactions
U.S. Army Information and Education Division, which was headed by Samuel among participants in clinical group therapy facilitate individuals' treatment
Stouffer. This experience resulted in the publication of an article outlining the processes.
methodology (Merton & Kendall, 1946) and eventually a book on the tech- An enduring heritage of focus groups' clinical psychological origins líes
nique (Merton, Fiske, & Kendall, 1956). Research findings based on use of the in tociay's cadre of focus group moderators with professional backgrounds in
technique, both during the war and later at Columbia University, formed the traditional psychotherapy, particularly those forros with early-20th-century
basis of one of the classic books on persuasion and the influence of mass media European origins (Kassarjian, 1994). The earliest and the most renowned
(Merton, Fiske, & Curtís, 1946). pioneer, who migrated from clinical psychological to marketing research, was
Merton later adapted the technique for use in individual interviews, and in Paul Lazarsfeld's student Ernest Dichter. Although he tended to prefer indi-
time, the method, both in group and in individual interview settings, became vidual over group interviews, his consulting company trained a large number
rather widely disseminated and used. It also tended to change as researchers of the first generation of focus group researchers. Alfred Goldman (1962) is
began to modify procedures for their own needs and to merge it with other prominent among the second generation of researchers who transitioned from
types of group interviews that <lid not include the media focus procedure clinical to marketing research uses of focus groups, and his article, "The Group
employed by Merton. Thus, what is known as a focus group today takes many Dépth Interview;' is widely considered a definitive classic. Many moderators
different forros and may not follow ali of the procedures Merton identified in today also have specific ties to newer psychotherapeutic techniques, such as
his book on "focussed" interviews. encounter groups, transactional analysis, gestalt therapy, cognitive-behavioral
Ironically, focus groups soon fell out of favor in both academic social therapies, as well as sensitivity training.
psychological and communications research as the fields adopted more exper-
imental and quantitative approaches. However, the theoretical influence of
phenomenological sociology (Schutz, 1967) anda revival in the 1980s of socio- Contributions From Marketing Research
logical interest in qualitative research methods contributed to the reemergence
of focus groups, which caused sorne observers to conclude incorrectly that The successful uses of focus groups in evaluating World War II morale and
they represented a "new tool" for qualitative sociological research (Morgan & training films <lid not go unnoticed by the marketing research community. The
Spanish, 1984). More recently, focus groups have experienced a revival in audi- procedures developed by Lazarsfeld and Merton were imported directly into
ence reception and media research (Jensen, 2011; Kamberelis & Dimitriadis, CBS's research of pilot radio and television programs and are still used today.
2013). Also, focus groups have become an increasingly popular data collection Although it is likely that sorne business studies used focus groups in the 1930s
method in the social and health sciences and in evaluation research (Ansay, (Henderson, 2004), their popularity grew dramatically from the 1950s onward
Perkins, & Nelson, 2004; Hennink, 2007; Walden, 2008, 2009, 2012). (Leonhard, 1967; Smith, 1954).
Marketing researchers quickly discovered the versatility of focus ·groups
in addressing numerous concerns related to designing products and services:
Contributions From Clinical Psychology ob~aining consumers' perceptions of prices, brands, and retail environments;
their reactions to ~dvertising and other marketing stimuli; and their satisfac-
Uses of focus groups in psychotherapeutic research emerged from the quite dif- tion, or dissatisfaction, with various products and services. Also, there is sorne
ferent priorities of clinical diagnosis and treatment. Sorne of the earliest clinical speculation that, in the days befare the rise of commercial interviewing facili-
uses of groups date back to Moreno's (1931) seminal work with psychodrama ties, interviewers grew weary oflugging around heavy reel-to-reel tape record-
and play therapy. Compared with groups conducted in the social psychological ers for capturing their in-home conversations with consumers and responded
tradition, the clinical approach is more likely to emphasize interactive group positively to the idea of sitting down to interview a group of housewives in
someone's family room. In comparison with statistical research, focus groups and fielded completely at odds with the method's core logic is likely to generate
are more user-friendly, and they can often be fielded and analyzed relatively questionable results. The premise of this chapter is that greater awareness of
quickly. They also provide an office getaway that is often social and entertain- focus group theory per se will encourage researchers to design studies in ways
ing, as well as insightful. ! that irnprove the likelihood of discovering things that are more interesting,
Perhaps the most compelling quality of focus groups is their delivery useful, and valid.
of "live" consumers for observation by marketing managers. As Axelrod
exclaimed in 1975, focus groups provide managers "a chance to experience
a flesh and blood consumer" (p. 6). In many ways, market research uses of Focus Group Theory
focus groups reflect both social and clinical psychological traditions to varying
degrees. Their initial emergence in the marketing literature is strongly linked
The preceding discussion begs the question: Are there core elements of focus
to the "motivation" researchers of the 1950s (Smith, 1954), who typically had
group theory and practice that are common across the various disciplines that
intellectual grounding in Freudian and neo-Freudian thought. Groups con-
use focus group research? The answer appears to be yes, although the presence
ducted in this tradition tend to share the exploratory, interactive, playful, and
of any particular element will vary according to the research context. The
confrontational qualities of clinical psychological groups. In contrast, focus
fdllowing discussion proposes four normative criteria that constitute a pro-
groups rooted in social psychological thinking tend to be more evaluative
totypic focus group. This analysis draws heavily on both the seminal work of
in purpose, direct in questioning, and lower in respondent interaction. Such
the sociologist Robert Merton and the thinking of the market research pioneer
focus groups are often heavily involved in gathering consumers' reactions to Alfred Goldman, whose ideas both integrate the social and clinical psycho-
product concepts, marketing communications, and competitive brands. 1logical traditions and bridge academic and practitioner perspectives. Stripped
The intellectual distinctions between the two schools are largely below the
down to its basics, the theoretical pillars of focus group research are reflected
surface and tend to emerge in vague notions about what "scientific" research is
in the (paraphrased) title of Goldman's (1962) classic article, "The [Focused]
and what falls short. Actually, many researchers today are unaware of these his- Group Depth Interview:'
torically competitive ideologies, having learned focus group practice through
the oral traditions and research manuals of advertising agencies, research com-
panies, client organizations, and university courses. The resulting focus group FOCUSED RESEARCH
hybrids reflect varying degrees of psychotherapeutic and social psychological
In a fascinating intellectual retrospective more than 40 years after his
influence, however unconsciously. Overall, this is probably a positive develop-
groundbreaking group studies of radio broadcasts and army morale films,
ment. Focus groups that rely too heavily on individuals' evaluations and voting
Robert Merton (1987) reflected on the historical continuities and disconti-
tend toward superficial faux surveys, and ones that rely entirely on unstruc-
nuities of focus group research. He explained that the basic purpose of the
tured and indirect questioning may not yield sufficiently defmitive findings.
"focussed" interview was to gather qualitative data from individuals who have
experienced sorne "particular concrete situation;' which serves as the focus of
SEPARATION OF PRACTICE FROM THEORY the interview (Merton & Kendall, 1946, p. 541). Interestingly, Merton explains
his vi'ew of the "focussed" interview as a general qualitative research approach
Despite these differing orientations toward focus groups, it is irnportant
that can be used in both individual and group interviews. The objective of
to recognize that the fields that have contributed most to focus group theory
studying and learning about a "particular concrete situation" irnplies that an
and practice actually share several common and basic theoretical positions
interview, whether individual or group, will be relatively singular in focus. This
about the technique's purpose, nature, and structure. Unfortunately, the core
element contrasts with the typical uses of survey research to gather statistical
theory governing focus group research, which connects both the social and
measures of numerous topics and variables, and this is why focus groups are
clinical schools of thought, is largely ignored and often violated by today's
commonly prescribed for research that is either exploratory, clinical, and/ or
growing army of focus group users, practitioners, and facilitators. Sometí.mes
phenomenological (Aaker, Kumar, Leone, & Day, 2012; Calder, 1977).
the consequences of this are mini.mal, and a focus group muddles along,
Numerous published reports of focus group research in the behavioral sci-
yielding sufficient answers to key questions. However, most research seems
ences suggest that most conform to the criteria of focus. In the health sciences,
governed by the garbage-in/garbage-out rule. A focus group that is designed
for example, focus groups have been used to explore the role and concept of the
lb FOCUS GROUPS: THEORY AND PRACTICE Introduction 11
nurse practitioner, social service concerns of women infected with HIV, and common identity and goals, as well as sorne common "concrete situation:' In
doctor-caregiver relationships. Sociological and social psychological studies comparison, focus groups in marketing are often more likely to be populated
have used focus groups to explore the lifestyles of working-class Latina women, with "groupings" of individuals who share a few common demographics and
the psychosocial aspects of widowhood, and various specific aspects of in~er product usage patterns.
personal group dynamics and influences. Much clinical psychological group In the real world, information and influences filter through indi-
research maintains focus dueto the common practice of including individuals viduals' everyday interactions with family members, friends, neighbors,
whose "particular concrete situation" revolves around the same psychological cow.orkers, and other social networks, yet researchers rarely tap these .
condition. In marketing research, focus groups are used extensively to explore natural, existing, and accessible groups. Instead, they tend to rely on the
consumers' lifestyles and trends, their involvements in product categories and convenience of professional recruiters' extensive lists of willing focus group
with competitive brands, and their consumption histories, aspirations, and participants. A countertrend has emerged, perhaps reflecting the growing
concerns. Although many studies are relatively singular in focus, others are influence of ethnography in a variety of disciplines-focus groups con-
dispersed across a potpourri of loosely or unrelated topics, questions, and ducted with real groups or "friend groups;' often in natural settings (their
tasks (Rook, 2003). Such out-of-focus groups arise from managers' pragmatic homes) (Wong, 2010). Participants in such groups tend to talk more, and
concerns about research time and money, as well as their generally diminished thére are opportunities to do things that would be difficult in the typical
interest in theoretical and methodological subtleties. Although focus groups sterile focus group facility. For example, one advertising agency invited a
that have multiple foci may yield information that assists in decision making, group of neighbors to collect in a local backyard with their lawnmower in
they are unlikely to generate the social atmospherics that are conducive to the tow for a discussion of lawn care.
traditional normative criteria of conversational interviewing, in-depth data A major issue in group dynamics research is the influence of
elicitation, and within-group interaction, nor are they likely to produce rich group members' demographics, personality, and physical characteristics.
insights about a well-defined topic. Although the findings are not conclusive, they seem to suggest that groups
that are relatively homogeneous are more productive and "work better:'
One problem with this notion is the fact that many of these studies were
GROUP INTERACTIONS c<:mducted 40 or more years ago, when including Hispanics among a group
A second signature characteristic of a focus group is the objective of of white respondents, for example, might have made both types of partici-
understanding the group dynamics that affect individuals' perceptions, infor- pants feel uncomfortable. Arguably, Americans are more comfortable with
mation processing, and decision making. The compelling logic for conducting diversity today, so earlier conclusions may be time bound. Finally, there is
research in a group rather than an individual setting is to allow observations of a widespread, but rarely articulated, assumption that focus groups should
how and why individuals accept or reject others' ideas. Also, stimulating inter- be pleasant experiences and conflict should be avoided. This is certainly
actions among group participants are hypothesized to generate more informa- not the situation in clinical groups, with their varying emphases on con-
tion than individual interviews would provide, although there is little support fro_!!tational encounters among group members and techniques designed
for this position (Fern, 1982). Three key elements of the design of focus group to surface deep-seated emotions. Focus groups in marketing typically
research directly affect the nature and quality of the interactions among focus avoid conflict that might arise from differences in participants' age, social
group participants: (1) group composition, (2) interpersonal influences, and status, and even gender. Researchers prefer groups that are homogeneous
(3) research environment factors. Numerous behavioral science studies have with respect to these criteria, yet ·many marketing problems spari these
investigated these group behavior influences, and they are summarized in respondent characteristics. For example, a brand that is perceived as "too
Chapter 2, so the discussion here is limited to a few issues. fem_inine" (e.g., Zima) might learn a lot by fielding groups comprising both
Merton (1987) concludes correctly that many focus groups are "not men and women. Similarly, a brand that is perceived as "too old" (e.g.,
... groups in the sociological sense of having a common identity or a con- Cadillac) might obtain useful information by conducting focus groups with
tinuing unity, shared norms, and goals" (p. 555). He recommends that these baby boomers and both their parents and children. On the other hand,
"nongroups" should more appropriately be called groupings. On the other well-managed conflict within a focus group may be very useful when doing
hand, focus group research in sociology, clinical psychology, and the health policy or political research where the points of disagreement and dynamics
sciences is likely- to gather groups comprising individuals who do share sorne of conflict may be of interest.
IN-DEPTH DATA (Boleyn-Fitzgerald, 2010; Zaltman, 2003). Access to these mental zones typ-
A strong thread that connects the diverse family of today's focus group us~rs ically requires more subtle, indirect approaches to asking questions; and it
and providers is a belief that live encounters with groups of people will yield incfe- suggests using nonverbal techniques that involve visualizations or role-playing.
mental answers to behavioral questions that go beyond the level of surface exp1a-
nation. Clinical psychology is rich with qualitative research tools and techniques,
such as projective methods and group involvement techniques, that elicit the HUMANISTIC INTERVIEW
einotions, associations, and motivations that influence particular behaviors. Focus The history of focus group theory and practice is part of the larger history
groups in the health sciences often address emotional, even life-and-death issues. of qualitative research in the behavioral sciences. In comparison with most
Market researchers have similar, although generally less serious concems about quantitative research, qualitative research is a contact sport, requiring sorne
identifying the underlying behavioral factors that account for consumers' attitudes, degree of immersion into individuals' lives. This and its emphasis on meaning
preferences, and motivations. In the 1950s, this similarity of objectives stimulated rather than measurement have contributed to its characterization as "human-
marketing researchers to adapt projective and other qualitative methods for their istic" research (Anderson & Braud, 2011). This is not meant to ennoble qual-
purposes. So many "deep" insights were published that historians have described itative research; rather, it simply points to a general orientation that includes
this period as marketing's "motivation research'' era (Smith, 1954). empathy, openness, active listening, and various types of interactions with
In their early days in marketing research, the prototypical focus group was research participants. Clinical psychological groups exhibit these qualities; and
characterized by a relatively small number ofloosely structured questions that arguably, focus group research in the health sciences is noble in its providing a
revolved around a focal topic or stimulus and encouraged extensive discussion voice to marginalized groups, such as AIDS patients.
and probing. Carl Rogers's work on nondirective interviewing was particularly , Focus groups in sorne disciplines, for example, marketing and politics, among
influential, and many prominent focus group moderators had graduate degrees others, tend to perform less well on the humanistic criterion. This is partly due
in clinical psychology or in related fields (e.g., Ernest Dichter, Ted Nowak, to the tendency to use research more for evaluative than developmental purposes
Perham Nahl, George Horsley Smith, Steuart Henderson Britt, Thomas Coffin, (Zaltman, 1989). Marketers have a voracious appetite for obtaining consumers'
Alfred Goldman, and Irving White). Over time, focus groups have drifted away evaluations of new product concepts, advertising copy; and competitive brands.
from their original emphasis on achieving in-depth consumer insights. Robert Tiíis is understandable and necessary; but such interests rnight be better served
Merton's (1987) own impression of focus groups in marketing concludes that through survey research rather than focus groups. Also, groups that are dedicated
they are "being mercilessly misused" (p. 557). Two factors have contributed to to evaluative polling tend to exhibit characteristics of a "business meeting" (Agar
the decline of depth in much focus group research. & MacDonald, 1995) in which moderators rnisguidedly seek to achieve group
First, focus group discussion guides often tend to include too many ques- consensus. Another factor that is likely to dirninish a group's humanistic qualities
tions, which often make the experience more like a within-group survey than is the erroneous but widespread belief that the moderator should ask every ques-
an interactive discussion. The veteran focus group analyst Naomi Henderson tion that appears in the discussion guide, which often "destroys the elements of
(2004) estimates that in comparison with the early focus groups, today's groups ,freedom and variability within the interview" (McCracken, 1988, p. 25).
cover nearly twice the material in the same time. Rook (2003) quantifies the The criticism of focus group research in a variety of disciplines has been
interaction between the number of questions in the discussion guide and the growing for sorne time, and sorne companies have abandoned them almost
focus group length. It is common today to have 30 or more questions, which entirely in favor of research alternatives such as ethnography, which facili-
can reduce the response time per respondent to 13 seconds or less. In these cir- tate greater immersion into consumers' lives (Kiley, 2005). The controversy
cumstances, the moderator is likely to feel hurried and is unable to probe inter- peaked when Malcolm Gladwell in his best seller Blink (2005) characterized
esting or µnclear responses, ali of which militate against achieving in-depth focus groups as generally useless. He reiterated and elaborated his view as
information and deep understanding. a keynote speaker at the American Association of Advertising Agencies'
A second problem emerges from the tendency to use exclusively direct summer conference and caused quite a stir because advertising agencies are
questions and verbal responses to them. This not only is inconsistent with extremely heavy users of focus groups (Pollack, 2005). The ebb and flow of
the historical nature of focus groups, but it also defies current scientific focus group research across and within various disciplinary fields-and the
understandings about the workings of the human mind. Recent research in attendant intellectual elements of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis-make
neuroscience concludes that the vast majority of human thought is visual, focus groups an interesting and dynamic arena that continues to merit
metaphorical, and emotional and resides deeply in neurological substrata consideration and use.
Purpose of the Book . The k~y to obtaining rich and valid insights through the use of focus groups
IS an effective moderator. Chapter 5 deals with the characteristics of effective focus
Despite its widespread use, the focus group has been the object of rather J.i.ttle gr~up moderat~rs. This chapter summarizes the rich literature on intervíewing
systematic research, particularly in recent years. A number ofhow-to books Have skills and techniques and leadership styles, and it relates the relevant findings to
appeared over the past .two decades (Carey & Asbury, 2012; Krueger & Casey, the focus group setting. In addition to characteristics specific to the intervíewer,
2008; Liamputtong, 2011), but they tend to <leal with the practical aspects of Chapter 5 considers the potential for interaction between various intervíewer char-
recruiting and running focus groups. None reflect recent advances in the use of acteristics and the dynarnics of the group. The implications of such interactions for
computer-assisted content analysis techniques that may be helpful for analyzing the quality of data obtained from focus groups are also discussed. .
focus group-generated data, and few seek to integrate the focus group technique Techniques and approaches for conducting a focus group are treated in
with the rich literature on group dynarnics from which the method sprang. Chapter 6. Methods for drawing out respondents, for probing for additional
Although all of these sources are useful, they are often incomplete, particularly information and clarification of responses, for dealing with domineering or
for the student or scholar seeking a theoretical foundation for the approach. reticent respondents, and for facilitating discussion are reviewed. In addition,
The objective of this book is to provide a systematic treatment of the the. chapter deals with topics such as how to <leal with sensitive or potentially
design, conduct, and interpretation of focus group interviews within the context embarrassing issues; how to present stimulus materials; and how to deal with
of social science research and theory and the substantial literature on group specialized populations, such as children; and how to manage the special issues
processes and the analysis of qualitative data. Much is known about the inter- associated with conducting groups in an international venue. The use of audio
action of small groups and about the analysis of qualitative data. It is on this and video recording equipment is considered in the chapter, as well as the col-
knowledge that the validity of the focus group interview as a scientific tool rests. lection of observational data to supplement verbal responses.
Focus groups generate verbal and observational data. The data must
generally be coded and analyzed by means of content analysis. Chapter 7 pro-
Plan for the Book vides an overview of the content analysis literature and its application to focus
group data. The chapter also offers a discussion of various computer-assisted
a~~roaches to content analysis and the implications of recent research in cog-
The rem¡Uning chapters of this book <leal with specific aspects of the design, use,
mtive psychology on associative networks for the analysis and interpretation of
and interpretation of focus groups. One of the important advantages of focus groups
focus group data. In addition to considering the issues of content coding and
as a research tool is the fact that a substantial body of research and theory exists with
analysis, the chapter discusses the interpretation of such coding and analysis.
respect to behavior in groups. The field of social psychology, and particularly the
Chapter 8 is designed to tie together all of the preceding chapters through
subfield of group dynarnics, provídes a strong foundation on which to build valid
more detailed examples of the uses of focus groups. These examples include a
and useful focus group research. Chapter 2 synthesizes this literature and provídes
discussion of the problem that precipitated the research, the reasons a focus
an overvíew of the theoretical and empirical foundations of focus group research.
/group is appropriate, the development of the interview guide, and the conclu-
It considers topics such as power, leadership, interpersonal communication, social
sions drawn from the focus group and the actions that followed from these
facilitation and inhibition, and the influence of group composition. The literature
conclusions. Chapter 9 considers the issues associated with conducting virtual
related to each of these issues is briefly revíewed, and the implications for designing
focus via telephone and the Internet and describes other group research tech-
and conducting focus group research are discussed. Chapter 3 presents an overvíew
niques, such as synectics, brainstorming, and the Delphi technique. Finally,
of the basic elements and issues involved in focus group research, including the
in Chapter 10, we offer a brief summary of the role focus groups play in the
various applications of focus groups, their relative advantages and disadvantages,
broader array of research tools within the social sciences.
ahd the main steps in the design and use of focus groups.
Next, we turn to the more detailed mechanics of designing, conducting, and
interpreting focus groups. Chapter 4 considers the problem of recruiting partic-
ipants for focus group sessions and designing the intervíew guide. Issues related Conclusion
to the determination of the sampling frame, the use of incentives, scheduling,
and physical facilities are considered in this chapter. Chapter 4 also addresses the In exarnining the historical origins of focus group research in the behavioral
problems associated with the recruitment of special groups of individuals, such sciences, one is struck by the high level of interdisciplinary collaboration and
as business executives, working parents, physicians, and children. creativity. The now famous studies of World War II training and morale ftlms
16 FOCUS GROUPS: THEORY AND PRACTICE
were led by individuals with backgrounds in social psychology, experimental

psychology, and sociology. Similarly, market research uses of focus groups
were strongly influenced by the intellectual border crossings of clinical and
social psychologists into the marketing field. In looking at focus group pracUce
across various disciplines, one can also observe how group research formats
2
and approaches vary according to the core issues that characterize a particular
field. Finally, it is interesting to consider the degree to which focus groups
conform to the historical normative criteria discussed in this chapter. In sorne
cases, the lack of conformity merely reflects the necessities of adaptive use in Croup Dynamics and
a particular field or for a specific research purpose. In the worst cases, a drift
away from historical focus group theory and research design norms results in
focus groups that have little singular focus, elicit superficial consensual data,
Focus Croup Research
rarely achieve in-depth understandings, and end up as group surveys rather
than qualitative interviews.
Review Questions
l. What are the origins of focus group research? Why is the group interview an :¡
appealing method of data collection?
2. Why did much of the early development of focus group research reside in the
study of communications? Is there something about the group interview that
makes focus groups especially useful in such a context? ·
F ocus groups are inherently social phenomena, and it is important to under-
stand the complex and dynamic social context in which group interviewing
takes place (Hollander, 2004; Tubbs, 2011). A primary difference between
3. What disciplines have contributed to the development of modern focus group focus group research and other types of research, such as surveys, individual
practice? What have been the unique perspectives and contributions of these interviews, and laboratory experiments, is that data collection occurs in, and is
fields to focus group practice? facilitated by, a group setting. Over the years, much theoretical and empírica!
4. Why has the popularity of focus group research waxed and waned over time?
research has focused on the behavior of groups and the interactions among
people in groups (see Forsyth, 2014; Tubbs, 2011, for comprehensive reviews
S. What are sorne of the problems associated with the conduct of group depth of this literature). This chapter is designed to summarize this knowledge
interviews?
ib. a way that will place focus group research within a grounded theoretical
context and, in turn, aid in the design of valid and more useful focus groups.
Exercise: Do a search of the Internet usingfocus group as the search term.
By understanding the physical, temporal, social, cultural, psychological, and
Note the types of applications of focus group research you find. Compare and environmental influences on the dynarnics of group behavior, we are better
cdntrast these applications in terms of the research questions, sample, and
able to identify the nature and degree' ofbias in our analysis and interpretation
approach. What <loes this comparison suggest about focus group research? of focus group data. In general, the usefulness and validity of focus group
data are affected by the extent to which participants feel comfortable about
openly communicating their ideas, views, or opinions. The wealth of litera-
Note ture on group dynarnics suggests that there are many variables that influence
participants' "comfort zones:' These influences can be grouped into three broad
l. See Merton (1987) for an interesting recollection of these beginnings, as well categories: (1) intrapersonal factors and individual differences, (2) interpersonal
as how "focussed" interviewing lost its second s.
factors, and (3) environmental factors.
17
18 FOCUS GROUPS: THEORY AND PRACTICE Group Dynamics and Focus Group Research 19
lnfluences of lntrapersonal Factors opinions, and beliefs will produce a rather dull and certainly not very insight-
ful discussion. Conducting of useful focus group research is ensuring enough
and Individual Differences similarity among group members to facilitate the identification of enough
common ground for a meaningful conversation while ensuring that there is
Intrapersonal or individual difference variables include demographic, physi- enough diversity to reveal differing perspectives and ideas and generate sorne
cal, and personality characteristics. Each individual's unique combination of creative tension. In focus group interviewing, the key to success is making the
intrapersonal variables represents a certain behavioral disposition that pregroup dynarnic work in service of the goals and objectives of the research.
disposes the individual to certain modes of behavior in group situations. This Intrapersonal or individual characteristics influence group processes in
behavioral disposition is often "used" by other group members to determine two ways. First, the personal characteristics of individuals (e.g., physical, per-
their reactions or responses to a particular individual. These differences in sonality, and demographic) affect individual behavior in the group and how
individual characteristics and interpersonal expectations should be carefully others react to their words and actions. Second, a particular combination of
considered to maximize focus group participation. For example, in discussing personal characteristics may influence the group's behavior. For example, an
racially sensitive problems, the probability of emotional outbursts in a racially attractive, extroverted person may be perceived to be bright, friendly, and
heterogeneous group can be minimized to a certain extent by including per- candid and may therefore predispose others in the focus group to respond
sons who are more ethnically homogeneous. more favorably to his or her comments or ideas. Focus group participation
In a group situation, it is important to note that the individual charac- can be maximized by increasing interpersonal attraction through appropriate
teristics of group members are only part of the picture. In addition, factors selection and blending of participants. We next consider sorne of the factors
that influence group members' interactions with one another relative to one that influence this successful blending.
another also determine group behavior and performance. These different
interpersonal characteristics influence group cohesiveness, compatibility, and DEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS
homogeneity/heterogeneity, which in turn affect group conformity, leadership
emergence, báses and uses of power, and interpersonal conflict. Demographic factors include age, sex, income, occupation, education,
The need to understand individual influences on group processes is religion, and race. The influence of these factors on group dynamics, though
underscored by the obvious fact that groups are made up of individuals and pervasive, is often difficult to determine. Furthermore, the relationships that
that group outcomes are the consequences of individual actions. However, do exist may be difficult to isolate. For example, even casual observation sug-
Forsyth (2014) defines a group as "two or more individuals who are connected gests that age differences influence group behavior and there is sorne limited
by and within social relationships" (p. 4). This means that members of groups empirical evidence on the effect. However, the extent and direction of the
influence and are influenced by one another. As a result, people behave differ- influence of age is not generally well documented. One reason for this may
ently when they are in groups than when they are alone. In general, research on be that the effects of age on group behavior are considered so obvious that
group dynamics suggests that greater homogeneity is associated with greater cyntrolled studies have seemed unnecessary. Obviously, sorne topics are more
cooperation, greater willingness to communicate, and less conflict among relevant for sorne specific age-gtoups than others, and it is not age per se that
group members (Forsyth, 2014; Stringer, 2008; Tynan & Drayton, 2007). Sid is the critical factor in the behavior of such groups. In addition, other factors
Levy, one of the pioneers of qualitative research, offered the following caution that may be associated with age and the differences in ages among the group
about the use of heterogeneous groups: "Perhaps the results are potentially members can influence group beh<"\vior (Manderson, Bennett, & Andajani-
intriguing-but they are more likely to be a fiasco as the participants struggle Sutjahjo, 2006). ·
to find sorne common ground, or fight the battles of age, sex, and class differ-
ences" (Levy, 1979, p. 35). Agé. Age and its effects on the frequency and complexity of interaction have
On the other hand, diversity provides greater perspective and innovation been exarnined by a number of scholars. Selected findings of studies on age
(Levine & Moreland, 1998). Indeed, Surowiecki (2004) observes that much of suggest that an individual's number and percentage of social contacts increases
the seeming wisdom of large numbers of people grows less from the numbers with age (Beaver, 1932), ability to empathize increases with age (Dymond,
than from the diversity of perspectives present. Indeed, a group composed Hughes, & Raabe, 1952), proneness to simultaneous talking and interruptions
of individuals who are all alike with respect to background, experiences, decrease with age (Smith, 1977), and risk-taking behavior decreases with age
(Chaubey, 1974). There is sorne evidence to suggest that leadership behavior communication. Similarly, in culturally and racially homogeneous group
increases with age as well (see also Stogdill's, 1948, review of trait studies of situations, it may be easier to encourage member participation. This suggests
leadership). Age may also carry a connotation of status, especially in very that group members' similarity with respect to socioeconomic status is more
diverse groups and in sorne cultures. l likely to maximize interaction within the group. On the other hand, in sorne
situations, researchers may wish to explore directly the dialog and differences
Conformity. Conformity, which is a tendency toward uniformity when individ- among individuals of upper, middle, and lower status.
ua]s interne! in a group, .also appears to be related to age. Costanzo and Shaw
(1966) hypothesized a curvilinear relationship between age and conformity:
Conformity increases to a maximum at about the age of 12 and decreases PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
thereafter. Empírica! research seems to support this hypothesis (Berndt, 1979). Physical characteristics of individuals also affect behavior within a group.
This literature suggests that, other things being equal, a mix of ages may be Characteristics such as size, height, weight, general health, and appearance
appropriate for most focus groups. On the other hand, researchers often need influence the behavior of others toward the individual, which in turn influ-
to address questions that may require groups that are very homogeneous with ences the person's behavior toward the group. For example, in a now classic
respect to age: for example, a study of newly licensed teenage drivers' attitudes study, Stogdill (1948) found a positive relationship between leadership and
toward safe driving. weight, height, and measures of the physique. It has been shown that physically
attractive persons are rated as more socially skillful and likeable than those
Gender. It is no surprise that men and women behave differently in group set- less attractive (Goldman & Lewis, 1977). Adams and Huston (1975) found
tings (Canary & Dindia, 2006; Forsyth, 2014). Gender differences in interper- that attractive middle-aged adults are judged by both children and adults to
sonal interactions can be attributed to biological factors as well as differences be more pleasant, more socially at ease, higher in self-esteem, and of a higher
in the social and cultural environments to which they are subjected. Much of occupational status than less attractive middle-aged adults. The physical char-
this socialization is lifelong and manifested in basic personality differences acteristics of group members are unlikely to be known to a researcher prior to
between men and women. Research on sex differences in personality suggests the actual interview, of course. A skillful interviewer, however, quickly sizes up
that men tend to be more aggressive (e.g., physical aggression arid nonver- the group and determines what problems or opportunities are offered by the
bal dominance) than women; women conform more to group pressure than physical characteristics of the individuals in the group. He or she then adjusts
men; women are more sensitive and are better able to interpret emotions than the interview accordingly.
men; and men are more confident about their abilities than women (Swim & Clothing style affects people's impressions about a person (Gibbins, 1969)
Campbell, 2003). and behavior toward him or her (Bryant, 1975). How~ver, Shaw (1981) noted
These stereotypical sex differences in aggressiveness, dependency, social that "relative to other variables, these factors are generally weak and can be
orientation, and emotionality influence different aspects of interpersonal overcome by effects of more powerful variables such as personality and abil-
communication, including nonverbal communication such as body orienta- it)r" (p. 186). Yet there may be sorne situations when physical appearance may
tion and eye contact. Therefore, the ability to create rapport and maximize the well be the single most importaIJ.t determinant of impressions, such as when
scope and depth of focus group discussion is heavily influenced by the gender impression is based on very limited information or when the initial impression
composition of the group. This means that care must be exercised when having shapes the direction of future interactions (Frieze, 1980). Focus groups, for
mixed-gender groups, and the moderator needs to ensure an acceptable level example, tend to lend themselves to· such situations when both observer and
of interaction in those groups. This concern may be particularly acute when participants have to interact with each other based on minimal personal infor-
researching topics that are gender sensitive. mation. Thus, it is probablywise to suggest the manner of dress to group mem-
bers at the time they are recruited, and the moderator should dress accordingly.
Socioeconomic status. Varying socioeconomic backgrounds of individuals,
such as differences in income, occupation, education, and family backgrounds,
can affect the dynamics of group interaction. In general, interaction is easier PERSONALITY
when the group comprises individuals with similar socioeconomic back- Personality characteristics interact with demographic variables to influ-
grounds. Similarity of abilities, intelligence, and knowledge tend to facilitate ence the behavior of individuals in groups. A personality trait represents a
tendency or predisposition to behave in a certain manner across different varying degrees of openness to new experiences can set the stage of a produc-
situations. Por example, an aggressive personality is generally expected to tive exchange of ideas accompanied by useful insights.
display aggressive behavior or tendencies, even in nonthreatening situatibns. A skilled and experienced focus group moderator will do a quick assess-
Although the effects of any single personality variable on group behavior fuay ment of these individual characteristics in the first few minutes of the interview
be relatively weak, they can have a significant influence on interpersonal inter- and try to make adjustments accordingly. This may involve using a more or
action. An aggressive or dominant personality in a focus group situation may, less structured approach, depending on which approach will maximize the
by making emotional and/or negative comments, discourage other participants interaction among ali members of the group. We will discuss the efficacy of
from being candid with their opinions. Chapter 6 offers suggestions for dealing different approaches and amount of structure for conducting focus groups in
with such individuals, but it is irnportant for the moderator to quickly size up Chapters 5 and 6.
the personalities of group members and respond accordingly. Additionally, sorne researchers advocate administering a personality
The influence of personality characteristics on individual behavior has inventory to participants over the telephone prior to their focus group sessions
received a great <leal of attention. Forsyth (2014) provides a discussion of (Quiriconi & Durgan, 1985). By doing this, it is possible to construct homoge-
the influence of the "Big Five" personality traits: extroversion, agreeableness, neous groups (e.g., only trendsetters or only traditionalists) or heterogeneous
conscientiousness, neuroticism, and openness to experience (pp. 1O1-103). personality groups (e.g., both trendsetters and traditionalists), depending
While ali of these traits may have an influence on the interaction among focus on the purpose of the research. Because focus group participants are usually
group participants in at least sorne settings, extroversion, agreeableness, and recruited based on demographics and behavior, prior knowledge of the respon-
openness to néw experiences are likely to have the most common effects on dents' personalities helps a moderator understand why focus participants are
group processes. behaving the way they do and how best to interact with them. On the other
Extroversion is the tendency to be outgoing and to move toward people. hand, Krueger and Casey (2008) suggest caution in selecting respondents
The opposite end of this trait is introversion, which is a tendency to be more based on factors like personality, values, and attitudes because these factors can
reserved and quiet. A room full of extroverts can be an exciting and dynamic be confounded with other factors that may be irnportant for the research ques-
place, but it may also be difficult for a group moderator to maintain focus. In a tion. For example, selecting respondents who are homogeneous with respect
mixed group of extroverts and introverts, a moderator will need to -work hard to their attitudes toward a particular social institution, such as public health,
to keep the extroverts from dominating the discussion while drawing out the may diminish the richness of interaction and dialog among group members
introverts. regardless of whether the attitudes of group members are primarily positive
Agreeableness refers to the tendency to be positive and cooperative. This or primarily negative. The bottom line with respect to the role of individual
<loes not mean that individuals who exhibit a high degree of this trait agree personality factors in focus group research is that it is irnportant to recognize
with everything. Rather, such individuals might be referred to as "nice" by them andina few, lirnited cases, make them the basis for selecting group par-
laypersons. They try to find ways to work together and tend to be warm and ticipants. In most cases, a good mixture of personality types moderated by a
sympathetic toward others. A room full of such individuals is often a pleasant sltined intervi'ewer who knows how to play the orchestra of personalities will
experience, but sometirnes more disagreeable individuals can facilitate the produce the most useful results.
development of a creative tension within a group. Conflict is not a bad thing
in a group if it is well managed, and the "obnoxious" group member can often
stirnulate ne¡v ideas and counterarguments. Interpersonal lnfluences
An individual who is open to new experiences tends to be more creative
and irnaginative. Many focus groups are convened for the purpose of generat- Interpersonal interaction is very much affected by expectations about how
ing new ideas or responding to new ideas, such as new programs, products, or others wi,11 act or behave. These expectations are derived from beliefs about
services. When creativity is the goal of a focus group, a group of participants démographic characteristics (e.g., age, sex, and socioeconomic status), per-
who are creative and irnaginative is ideal. However, there are many occasions sonality traits and physical characteristics (e.g., appearance, dress), as well as
where the purpose of a focus group is to identify sources of potential resistance past experiences. Miller and Turnbull (1986) examined various types of social
to a new idea. A room full of people who have a proclivity to favor new ideas interaction and concluded that "the expectancy that one person (the perceiver)
will not be helpful for such purposes. For many groups, a mix of people with holds concerning another (the target) affects three phenomena: l. the target's :11
.11
·.
·'.11'
l
behavior, 2. the processing of the target's behavior by the perceiver, and 3. the the emotional intensity of the group and is sometimes referred to as esprit de
target's perception ofhim or herself" (p. 234). corps. Finally, there is structural cohesion, which is the degree to which the
Expectations and beliefs are often embodied in stereotypes. The effects group fits together as a whole and each member has a well-defmed role.
of stereotypes on interpersonal processes have received considerable atte~tion Although focus groups tend to be temporary, the cohesiveness of a focus
(Hilton & von Hippel, 1996). The effect of a stereotype not only influences the group is not a trivial issue. The temporary nature of a focus group means that
behavior of individuals holding the stereotype but also exists among individ- social and task cohesion are likely to be the most important types of cohesion,
uals who belong to groups subject to the stereotyping (Lee, Hakkyun, & Vohs, but ali five types of cohesion are important. Indeed, sorne focus groups develop
2011; Steele, Aronson, & Spencer, 2007). Thus, an individual may respond to a strong sense of esprit de corps, and skillful moderators can often create a
others based on the stereotype they think might be applied. Such responses sense of structural cohesion by assigning roles to the group members. It is
may be consistent with the stereotype or contrary to the stereotype. important for the group to identify its mission and provide information con-
Stereotypes tend to be pervasive and resistant to change, and are generally sistent with this mission if the interview is to be successful. This is something
invalid, but they serve an important role in helping make sense of the world the moderator must facilitate early in the focus group meeting.
(McGarty, Spears, & Yzerbyt, 2002). Because stereotypes help give meaning The sources of group cohesiveness include most of the variables affect-
to the world, they do influence interpersonal interactions in terms of group ing interpersonal attraction, such as similarity of backgrounds and attitudes.
cohesiveness, compatibility; and homogeneity/heterogeneity, even when the Pennington (2002) lists a variety of factors that influence the cohesiveness of
stereotypes are not valid. Furthermore, the perception of social power and groups, including mutual attraction and similarities with respect to status,
its use in enhancing group participation and performance is also influenced goals, and values. This <loes not mean that focus groups should consist of
]Jy interpersonal expectations. The focus group moderator has an important people who agree perfectly with one another, but it <loes suggest that groups
role in establishing the expectations of the group. He or she must understand composed of individuals with violently opposed opinions will be troublesome.
that group members bring varying expectations to the group and must subse- Cohesiveness is also influenced by the degree and nature of communi-
quently exp~nd these expectations as they meet other members of the group. cation among group members, proneness to being influenced by other group
The moderator needs to take a firm hand and ensure that the expectations members, and responsiveness to the actions or feedback from members of
of the group members are consistent with and facilitate the putpose of the the group (Levine & Moreland, 1998). In the context of focus groups, this
research. On the other hand, stereotypes can be useful for understanding means that recognition that the group is achieving its purpose can add to the
behavior especially if a moderator is able to surface them and use them in a cohesiveness of the group. Occasional comments by the moderator about the
neutral fashion. Por example, asking a group to describe the type of person quality of the discussion may go a long way toward achieving a sense of task
who engages in a particular behavior or to whom a particular product might cohesiveness and success on the part of the group.
appeal and why can reveal stereotypes that influence perception. Group cohesiveness influences a number of group processes, such as
verbal and nonverbal interaction, the effectiveness of social intluence, pro-
, ductivity, and satisfaction of group members. Shaw and Shaw (1962) studied
GROUP COHESIVENESS pattems of interaction between groups of children who were high or low in
Group cohesiveness is what holds a group together. Pennington (2002) cohesiveness md observed thatrelative to low-cohesive groups, high-cohesive
defined cohesiveness as "the extent to which members of a group are attracted groups were more cooperative, more friendly, and more praiseworthy of each
to each other, accept and agree with the priorities and goals of the group and others' accomplishments. Classic studies by Berkowitz (1954) and Schachter,
contribute to help achieving the goals" (p. 83). Forsyth (2014), however, has Ellertson, McBride, and Gregory (1951) suggested that the more cohesive the
observed that there are a number of types of cohesion. There is social cohe- group, the more power the members have and, therefore, the greater the influ-
sion, which is the degree to which group members are attracted to and identify ence exerted over each other. This means that the cohesiveness of a focus group
with one another and the group. Task cohesion, on the other hand, refers to is a critical element in ensuring interaction. Thus, a sense of cohesiveness may
the degree to which there is a shared commitment among group members facilitate discussion of even the most sensitive topics.
to achieve a particular outcome or goal. Collective cohesion is a very strong Like groups in the real world, virtual groups or "e-groups;' those that are
forro of identification with the group where there is a sense of the group as created and exist online: have been shown to exhibit considerable variability
a team and a self-identity as a team member. Emotional cohesion refers to in cohesiveness. Sorne virtual groups are as cohesive as those in the real world
(Bateman, Gray, & Butler, 2011; Faraj & Johnson, 2011). Such findings are For example, research has found that men are more "personally" oriented, have
consistent with the growing use of virtual groups for focus group research and a greater tendency to address individual members (as opposed to the group
other types of research, though use of such groups <loes pose unique issues that as a whole), and speak about themselves more often in mixed-gender groups
will be addressed later in this book. ! than in same-sex groups (Aries, 1976). In all-male groups, menare more con-
Group productivity and cohesiveness are positively related. Me~bers cerned with status and competition. In contrast, women in mixed-sex groups
belonging to highly cohesive groups also experience greater satisfaction than tend to be less dominant than in all-female groups. Such research suggests that
those in less cohesive groups. Focus groups are generally considered "fun'' by the nature of the interaction and the quality of the data obtained from a focus
participants. A lively, interesting discussion tends to build a sense of cohesive- group is influenced by the gender composition of the group. It is for this reason
ness. Equally important, the sharing of experiences and recognition that others that many researchers conduct both same-sex and mixed-gender groups. This
have had similar experiences adds to the cohesiveness of the group. It is for this practice tends to produce different but complementary insights. It is a practice
reason that focus group moderators will spend time early in a group discussion that also takes maximum advantage of the group as a data collection tool.
seeking common experiences among group members before moving on to Sorne researchers believe that heterogeneous groups are generally more
more controversial topics. effective than homogeneous groups because a variety of skills, perspectives,
and knowledge can be brought to bear on the performance of the task (Nijstad
& Paulus, 2003). On the other hand, mixed gender groups may be more likely
GROUP COMPATIBILITY, HOMOGENEITY/HETEROGENEITY
to seek conformity. There is sorne evidence to suggest that there is greater
Closely related to group cohesiveness is group compatibility, the extent to conformity among members of mixed-gender groups than among members
which members of a group have similar personal characteristics (e.g., needs, of same-sex groups because of greater concern about interpersonal relations
personality, and attitudes). Compatibility has implications for effective group (Reitan & Shaw, 1964; Reysen & Reysen, 2004). Thus, the diversity of opinions
performance and group satisfaction. In general, highly compatible groups per- expressed in a mixed-sex group may be smaller than in a same-sex group.
form their t~sks more effectively than less compatible groups because less time Dyson, Godwin, and Hazelwood (1976) found that leadership traits are more
and energy are devoted to group maintenance (see also Forsyth, 2014; Schutz, likely to emerge in mixed-sex groups than in same-sex groups.
1958). Furthermore, compatible groups experience less anxiety and greater Leadership behavior generally facilitates objective task accomplishment
satisfaction than incompatible groups (Cohen, 1956; Fry, 1965; Smelser, 1961). through the exercise of interpersonal influence and effective communication.
It is important to ncite that compatibility does not necessarily imply homo- This suggests that, topic permitting, mixed-gender groups are more effective in
geneity, although they are closely related. In evaluating compatibility, emphasis encouraging participation and solving problems than focus groups comprising
is placed on the relationships among particular characteristics of group members members of the same sex. However, if a variety of solutions to problems or
rather than the fact that group member characteristics are homogeneous or responses is desired, it may be better to use same-sex focus groups to reduce
heterogeneous (Forsyth, 2014; Shaw, 1981). Por example, focus group members the tendency toward conformity common in mixed-gender groups. Ultimately,
may be homogeneous in terms of gender but incompatible in terms of socioeco- )whether a mixed-gender group or same-sex group is best depends on the
nomic status (e.g., income, occupation, and social status). On the other hand, nature of the topic. It is important to remember, however, that these two types
focus group members may be homogeneous in terms of gender and compatible of groups can produce very different group dynarnics and types of information.
in terms of socioeconornic status. Although these two groups are homogeneous In general, mixed-gender groups are easier to control for the moderator, but
in terms of gender, the lack of socioeconornic compatibility in one of the groups this control may come at the cost ofless spontaneity. Less obvious to the focus
may result in different interaction styles and influence the level of group par- group researcher is the influence of social power (whether perceived or exer-
.ticipation. Such differences in the interaction among group members may alter c!sed) on group dynamics, to which we now turn our attention.
the results obtained from a focus group and should be taken into account when
recruiting respondents and deterrnining the composition of individual groups.
SOCIAL POWER
The influence of the composition of a group in terms of gender has been
frequently studied by social scientists. This research has consistently found dif- Social power is the potential or ability to influence others in a group setting
ferences in the interaction styles of men and women associated with the gender (Forsyth, 2014). It is an ever present phenomenon that has important implica-
composition of the group (Deaux & Lafrance, 1998; Manderson et al., 2006). tjons for small-group interaction and performance. An understanding of the
nature of social power and how it can be used to advantage in the context of on the group. Studies of Air Force crew members (Torrance, 1954) support this
focus group interviewing is an important component of planning and conduct- observation; and it is interesting to note that in these studies, even when the
ing focus group research. lowest-ranked crew member had the correct solution to a problem, he had little
The ability to influence others in a social situation has traditionally peen influence on group decision making. Furthermore, Maier and Hoffrnan (1961)
held to derive from six sources: (1) reward power, (2) coercive power, (3) Íegit- found that a great <leal more time and energy is spent in supporting or reject-
imate power, (4) referent power, (5) expert power, and (6) informational power ing the ideas of a high-status person than in finding alternative solutions to a
(Forsyth, 2014). In most situations, however, it is the perception of power and problem. The focus group moderator must be aware of such tendencies and
not the actual possession of it that influences the behavior of individuals and. must encourage individual idea generation, especially if a variety of perspec-
the reactions of other persons. In the focus group situation, for example, the tives is desired. Furthermore, the moderator needs to legitimize the expression
moderator may be perceived to have more power by virtue ofhis or her posi- of opinions of lower-status individuals by explicitly asking for such opinions
tion and ability to dictate the flow and intensity of the discussion. However, and by providing verbal rewards for such expression. This not only encourages
certain participants may be perceived to have expert power dueto their edu- lower-status members to speak but also models behavior for the rest of the
cation, training, and general experience. This expert power may be real or group that encourages active participation and acceptance of opinions.
simply perceived. Both types of "experts" pose problems for the focus group
moderator, but each must be dealt with differently. In Chapter 6, we discuss
specific strategies for dealing with such experts. GROUP PARTICIPATION ANO
Sometimes, seating preferences among certain group members may be an NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION
indication of their desire to influence the discussion and the opinions of other
participants (Forsyth, 2014). Behavioral implications of spatial arrangements In recent years, the structural (the who and how much of it) and temporal
are discussed in the section of this chapter that considers environmental influ- (the when of it) patterns of participation among group members have received
ences and again in Chapter 6 when we take up the issue of seating participants. increasing interest and greater research attention fueled by the availability of
A number of studies suggest that group members who are perceived to more sophisticated methods for recording, processing, and analyzing informa-
possess greater power are better liked than those with less power (Hurwitz, tion (Forsyth, 2014; Hollingshead, 2003). Researchers are now able to examine
Zander, & Hymovitch, 1953; Lippitt, Polansky, Redl, & Rosen, 1952). This a number of issues, such as patterns of interpersonal trust, cognitive load in
phenomenon appears to be due, in part, to the fact that a person who possesses interactions, self-monitoring in interactions, and patterns of dominance and
power is viewcd as the source of rewards and punishment. Furthermore, if a influence, that have been difficult to examine in detall in the past (see also
high-power person is liked, he or she is more likely to dispense rewards than Hollingshead & Poole, 2011; Napier & Gershenfeld, 2003).
punishment. At the same time, a high-power group member is likely to fmd the Of particular interest in the context of focus groups is research on the non-
group more attractive than a low-power member (Lippitt et al., 1952; Watson & verbal aspects of group interaction. Considerable research exists on gazing and
Bromberg, 1965; Zander & Cohen, 1955). Shaw (1981) noted that eye contact (see also Pennington, Gillen, & Hill, 1999, especially chap. 6). Eye
contact serves important functions within the group. Hargie (2010) describes
a group member who is highly accepted by the group, who is the target of def- severa! functions of nonverbal c.ues within the interpersonal interaction situ-
erential treatment from others, who has great influence on the group process ation: (a) it is preparatory to and signals the initiation of interaction as well
undoubtedly finMthe group more attractive than a member who is not treated so as the flow of the interaction, (b) it is an indicator of responsiveness toward
favorably. (p. 313) others, and (c) it reinforces the act ~f responding, thus facilitating interaction.
Other nonverbal cues such as smiles and body posture can also provide useful
Thus, the focus group moderator must recognize that certain members of the information during interpersonal interaction (Knapp, Hall, & Horgan, 2013).
group may be accorded higher status or power than others within the group. Interpersonal distance or proximity of individuals and its implications for
The moderator needs to use this to advantage when it occurs. We will discuss group interaction has also received sorne research attention and is discussed in
strategies for doing so in Chapter 6. the following section.
Another factor associated with social power that has implications for focus With respect to the accuracy and effectiveness of nonverbal communi-
group interaction is the relationship between power and status. In general, cation, it has been found that nonverbal decoding accuracy is affected by the
low-status persons are accorded less power and therefore have less influence sex and the decoding skills of the receiver (Hall, 1978, 1980). Furthermore,
Group Dynamics and Focus Group Research 31
interaction. For example, Mehrabian and Diamond (1971) observed that

when cues in different modes (e.g., audio vs. visual) are contradictory, receiv-
preoccupation with a puzzle poster reduced affiliative behavior, such as the
ers are apparently more influenced by visual than by auditory cues (DePaulo,
amount of conversation, head nodding, eye contact, and verbal reinforcers. On
Rosenthal, Eisentat, Rogers, & Finkelstein, 1978). In general, visual cues are
the other hand, the presence of an interesting sculpture facilitated interaction
often used to compensate or overcome audio difficulties (Krauss, Gajfock,
among sorne individuals but not ali. These findings suggest that the focus
Bricker, & McMahon, 1977). The role of nonverbal cues in focus group dis-
group setting should be relatively nondescript. Pictures, artwork, or other wall
cussions has important implications for the selection and training of moder-
decorations serve to distract members of the group from the task at hand.
ators, as well as for the conduct of a focus group interview. Furthermore, the
Indeed, the physical environment should serve to focus the attention of the
information represented by nonverbal responses of focus group participants
group on the topic of discussion. When props are used to facilitate discussion,
can be useful and complement the information provided via verbal channels
of communication. It is for this reason that direct observation or videotaping they should be kept hidden until it is time to discuss them.
may be desirable in many focus group research situations. We return to these
issues in Chapters 6 and 7. TERRITORIALITY
Territoriality, which refers to the orientations that individuals adopt
toward geographical areas and objects in these areas, has significant impli-
Environmental lnfluences
cations for small-group interaction (Beebe, Beebe, & Redmond, 2008). Shaw
(1981) noted the following:
The general pleasantness of the focus group environment influences the level
of rapport and participation. Studies on spatial arrangements and interpersonal When a group member assumes a proprietary right to a particular object, the
distance, for example, suggest that the seating arrangement and general proximity smooth functioning of the group depends upon the degree to which other group
of participants can affect the ability of participants to talk freely and openly about members respect that person's assumed territorial right. For example, if one mem-
issues of interest. It is important to recognize that focus groups can be structured ber adopts a particular chair as his or her own and another sits in it and refuses to
in terms ofboth the composition of group members and the physical layout of the move, intra-group conflict is inevitable. (p. 122)
group and room to further the goals of the researcher. Failure to atfend to these
factors can result in a less than optimal outcome of a focus group exercise. Generally, in focus groups, there is a comfortable distance for participants.
The purpose of this section is to briefly review sorne of the more fre- Participants who must sit too close to others may feel uncomfortable and tend
quently studied aspects of the physical environment, such as territoriality, to protect their territory through actions that are not consistent with the pur-
personal space, spatial arrangements, and the patterns of the communication pose of the group. These actions may include withdrawal from the discussion
channel, in addition to the more obvious influences of the material environ- and/ or a tendency to attend to the moderator rather than the group as a whole.
ment, such as shape and size of the room, lighting, ventilation, furniture, and
color of the walls. A more detailed treatment of the physical environment ; . SPATIAL ARRANGEMENTS.
determinants ofindividual and group behavior can be found in Forsyth (2014)
and Levine and Moreland (1998). These factors have important implications Spatial. arrangements, such as seating arrangements, can influence group
for the conduct of focus groups, and we discuss these implications in the members' perception of status, the degree of participation, patterns of inter-
remainder of this chapter. action, and leadership behaviors.In a study of seating preferences, Hare and
Bales (1963) found that people who scored high on dominance tended to
choose the more central seats in the group. Communication among group
THE MATERIAL ENVIRONMENT members seated across the table from one another is significantly greater than
among those in other positions (Steinzor, 1950; Strodbeck & Hook, 1961).
Research on the influence of room size on group interaction has particular
This suggests that seating a group in a circle, or at least in a fashion where ali
implications for focus groups. Lecuyer (1975) found that group interaction on
group members can easily see one another, facilitates discussion and reduces
a task was more intense in a small room than in a large room. On the other
hand, greater polarization of opinions was observed in a small room. The place the tendency for particular members of the group to emerge as dominant or
of furniture and presence of props has also been found to affect interpersonal for subgroups to emerge.
Group Dynamics and Focus Group Research 33
INTERPERSONAL DISTANCE openness of interpersonal communication. Therefore, research fin~ings ~ased

on long-term observations of group members in the work or social envrron-
Group interaction is also affected by the preferred interpersonal distance ment may not always apply to focus group members who in all likelihood are
between group members. Forsyth (2014) observes that the traditional c9ncept perfect strangers and therefore do not have the time to really develop a rap-
of personal space suggests that people consider the space immediately atound port. As noted earlier, A. E. Goldman (1962) describes these circumstances as
their body as personal and prívate. However, the amount of personal space that "groupings" rather than groups. Yet much of the research on group dynamics
people desire varíes With circumstances. For example, interpersonal distances has been carried out within the context of the same type of group that defines
between friends are smaller than between strangers. Even among strangers, a focus group: temporary groups brought together for a specific purpose that
interpersonal distances vary according to the individuals' demographic char- are disbanded once the purpose is served.
acteristics, such as age, sex, and socioeconomic and cultural backgrounds. A frequent but rarely tested assumption about the focus group interview
Interpersonal distances increase with age through adolescence and sometimes is that better data are obtained when participants are strangers. For example,,
beyond (Baxter, 1970; Tennis & Dabbs, 1975). Morgan (1998) argued that acquaintances can seriously upset the dynamics of
The nature of relationships between individuals also affects preferred the group and inhibit responses. He also suggested that the need for strang-
face-to-face distances (Little, 1965; Meisels & Guardo, 1969). Interpersonal ers to explain themselves and their points of view to one another adds to the
distances tend to be greater for strangers than for acquaintances and greater information value of the group. Friends and acquaintances are more likely to
for acquaintances than for friends. In general, females tend to prefer closer possess tacit knowledge about one another that allows them to communica:e
interpersonal distances than males (Patterson & Schaeffer, 1977; Wtllis, 1966). without fully articulating assumptions and context. Fern (1982) tested th1s
Perceptions of relative social status can influence preferred interpersonal dis- acquaintanceship assumption and concluded that an aggregation of the inde-
tances. A study by Lott and Sommer (1967) suggested that interpersonal dis- pendent responses of individuals who are unknown to one another and who
tance does not indicate which person has a higher status because people tend . do not meet as a group is just as effective for generating ideas as focus groups.
to distance themselves from both higher- and lower-status persons. Furthermore, although differences between focus groups and unmoderated
These studies make it clear that the issues of territoriality and personal groups in terms of quantity and quality of ideas are modest, the differences do
space are not simple. Rather, the comfortable distance and seating arrangement favor focus groups.
for a particular focus group depends to sorne extent on the composition of the Generally, focus group sessions are preceded by "get-acquainted" and
group: whether it is mixed gender or same sex, the socioeconomic status of "warm-up" sessions that usually provide participants limited but ample oppor-
the members of the group, and the cultural or sub cultural background of the tunity to get to know one another. Thus, the issue of acquaintanceship appears
participants. These issues must be considered during the design phase of focus to be a matter of degree in most focus groups, and its influence appears modest
group research and should be resolved in a manner consistent with the purpose at best.
of the research and the need to maximize participation by ali members of the There are times, of course, when the purpose of a group requires the use
group. of acquaintances, friends, or close relatives. Groups consisting ofhusb:mds and
wives, parents and children, and coworkers are common and can proVIde espe-
.cially useful insights. It is impórtant to recognize, however, that such groups
MODERATED GROUPINGS OF STRANGERS produce rather different information than would be obtained from stranger~ or
The wealth of theory and research on group dynamics provides a useful even from the same people interviewed in a different context. Thus, separatmg
starting point for understanding the dynamics of interaction in a focus group husbands from wives or parents from children to form two groups most cer-
and for identifying factors that may facilitate or impede the research objectives tainly produces different social dynamics and different information.
·of a focus group. However, the implications of this body ofknowledge must be - The casual, voluntary nature of focus group participation may reduce
tempered with an understanding of the unique characteristics of focus groups participants' motivation to participate in the group's mission of sharing ideas
and the realities associated with applying general principles of group dynamics and responses to problem situations. The temporary nature of focus groups
to the management and analysis of focus groups. The temporary nature of may also affect the efficacy of certain strategies used to influence focus group
focus groups may limit the ability to manage and, more important, predict the outcomes. In the work environment, rewards like promotions and bonuses are
influence of certain demographic factors such as age, sex, and occupation on often used to bring out the best in the individual and the group. On the other
hand, the temporary nature of the focus group and the lack of acquaintance in parts of the world where Western culture is not dominant and where cultural
among the members may facilitate discussion because there are few conse- norms and expectations may differ considerably. In addition, as more focus group
quences associated with each member expressing his or her views. The task research is carried out in developing nations, among less affluent individuals, and
for the focus group moderator is to overcome the limitations arising fnl>m the within different social and community contexts, it is especially important to be
temporary nature of the group and to use the temporary and unique dharac- cognizant ofhow these factors may influence both the interaction within a focus
teristics of the group to facilitate information sharing. group and the types of information that can be obtained.
The moderator must also deal with the consequences of his or her
presence. The presence of a moderator or facilitator, who is almost always
INTERPERSONAL STYLE ANO COMMUNICATION PATTERN
a stranger to the group, may create an atmosphere of artificiality and may
potentially inhibit the free flow of discussion. In work-related groups, leaders Western societies are generally more individualistic than collectivistic (Nevid
gradually emerge orare appointed by group members or authorities to provide & Maria, 1999). In Western cultures, there is a strong oral tradition, which makes
direction and motivation for the achievement of group goals. The moderator of the focus group with its verbal interactions and debate a natural way of gathering
a focus group is thrust on the group and is entrusted with the sometimes dif- information. In contrast, Nevid and Maria (1999) observe that in collectivistic
ficult tasks of creating rapport and motivating participants to share their ideas cultures, especially in Asian cultures, there is a strong cultural tradition that dis-
and feelings. Although this "artificial" leader may hinder the group in sorne courages public display of disagreement or differences in opinion. Hall, de Jong,
ways, this designated leader eliminates much of the distraction associated with and Steehouder (2004) found that European respondents tend to be more critical
the group developing its own pattern ofleadership. We have more to say about in comparison to their Asian counterparts. Other studies by Chavan (2005) and
the role of the moderator in Chapter 5. Colucci (2008) also confirmed the nonconfrontational characteristic of Asian
Focus groups do share many of the characteristics of other small groups. respondents and observed that participants from India refrain from giving neg-
They are, however, also unique with respect to their purpose, composition, ative comments about the products they were asked to review.
and duration. The unique characteristics of focus groups may appear to be People from collectivistic cultures tend to adopt a high-context commu-
one of the limitations of this type of research, but they also provide potential nication pattern-most information is included in the context and is thus
advantages in certain situations. The limitations may be partially .o';ercome by expressed less externally. In contrast, communication in individualistic culture
pregroup screening interviews, providing incentives for participation, selecting tends to be of a low-context style, where communication is direct, clear, and
a convenient time and place for the meeting, and employing a well-trained expressed externally (Hall, 1977; Hofstede, 2001). Another dimension of the
moderator. Proactive efforts to overcome the limitations of focus groups and collectivisticlhigh-context cultures is the tendency of people to care about pos-
to build on knowledge of small-group dynamics set the stage for exploiting the itive face, in that they want to be appreciated by others and want to present a
unique advantages of the group interview and go a long way to~ard creating functional and respectable image of themselves to others. When people care
an atmosphere conducive to active group participation. about positive face, they are afraid that their opinions/experiences would sound
irrelevant, silly, or unusual. Within a group discussion, positive face would
result in passive participations and a reluctance on the part of participants to
Croup Dynamics in Cross-Cultural Focus Croups honestly admit their personal feelings (Lee & Lee, 2009; Nevid & Maria, 1999).
More detailed treatments of the collectivistic/high-context versus individualis-
In an increasingly global economy made smaller and more interconnected by tic/low-context culture can be found in the research work ofTing-Toomey and
information technology, research questions often cross national and cultural Kurogi (1998) on the facework framework and the work of Hall et al. ,(2004),
boundaries. As a result, focus group research frequently involves groups and indi- ¡vhich provides a comparison of these two cultural types.
viduals who differ in their cultural anchorings. Until recently; most of the research Lee and Lee (2009) suggest that when conducting focus groups involving
on focus groups' dynarnics was done within the context of western European participants from a collectivistic culture, it is necessary for the moderator to
and North American cultures (Colucci, 2008; Krueger & Casey, 2000). Scholars more actively intervene and facilitate the emergence of key ideas in order to
(Colucci, 2008; Lee & Lee, 2009; Nevid & Maria, 1999) have pointed out the boost participants' interest and motivation. These interventions include "ice
importance for focus group investigators to be sensitive to the cultural differences breaking" -small talks before the focus group interviews-and using "indirect
especially with respect to general characteristics and interpersonal interactions communication'' techniques, such as using playful props to lighten .the mood
and provide an indirect way to participants to express emotion. Chapters 5 strangers. Colucci (2008) also noted that in sorne contexts, familiarity rather
and 6 provide more details about the techniques that a moderator can adopt in than anonymity can be the key to fluid discussion, so strangers may not be the
working around these cultural issues and to facilitate greater discussion! best composition of a focus group in such situations. Khan and Manderson
1 (1992) have noted that there is a need for flexibility in group composition,
especially with focus groups conducted in developing countries. Their research
NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION
argues that anonymity is hard to attain with participants from small villages or
Different cultures often have varying responses to nonverbal cues. For slums, since they generally come from the same community. Another aspect
example, among Koreans, it is considered disrespectful to exchange eye con- to be considered in terms of group compatibility is the cultural background of
tact with strangers. Among Native Americans, it is not unusual for speakers the moderator. Matching moderators' cultural/ethnical background to that of
to pause for long intervals before responding to questions (Nevid & Maria, the participants is more likely to result in empathy and trust from participants
1999). These differences in nonverbal communication styles need to be taken (Nevid & Maria, 1999). More discussion on selecting moderators for cross-
into account when facilitating focus group interview and can be disconcerting cultural focus group can be found in Chapter 5 of this book.
to someone with a different cultural background.
ENVIRONMENTAL INFLUENCES
SOCIAL POWER
While seating arrangements need to be carefully considered in the con-
Nevid and Maria (1999) note that in a group setting with Asian partici- duct of any focus group, they may be especially important in sorne settings.
pants, individuals tend to coalesce around the majority opinion and avoid any Strickland (1999) found that in conducting focus groups among Pacific
oppositior¡., especially when the majority opinion comes from more senior Northwest Native American participants, it was culturally inappropriate to
members or an authoritative figure of the group. Robinson (1996) attributed arrange the room in a "U" shape that promotes eye contacts, because a cir-
this tendency to a concept called power distance, one of the dimensions of cle is recognized as the culturally appropriate room arrangement. This same
culture indentified by Hofstede (Hofstede, Hofstede, & Minkov, 2010) and research demonstrated the inappropriateness of constant eye contact among
defined as the degree to which less powerful individuals expect and accept the these Native Americans when they were talking about personal/painful top-
greater power of more powerful individuals. ics. Colucci (2008) noted that in focus group with Asians, a barrier placed in
The implication of this cultural orientation for focus group research is front of a person is a welcome physical defense; thus, focus groups customarily
that when other people speak first or dominate the group session, Asian mem- provide desks or tables for participants (Halcomb, Gholizadeh, DiGiacomo,
bers are likely to be quiet and refrain from challenging the more vocal group Phillips, & Davidson, 2007).
leader (Nevid & Maria, 1999). This behavior also applies in the focus group All research requires careful planning to obtain useful results. Focus group
with homogeneous Asian participants. Lee and Lee (2009) demonstrated that research is no exception. When conducting focus groups involving an unfamil-
without any mediation, focus group participants from Korea have fewer and iar culture or with participants from a mix of cultures, it is especially important
less dynamic member-to-member interactions, which lead to a more moder- ,to design to the culture.
ator-focused discussion. Colucci's (2008) research with participants in India
revealed a deference of the group members to the moderator, especially when
the moderator was perceived as being of a higher status, in terms of education Conclusion
level and/or profession.
The substantial body ofliterature on group dynamics provides a general foun-
dation on which to build a methodology for the focus group interview. The
GROUP COMPATIBILITY, HOMOGENEITY, ANO HETEROGENEITY
group setting is an important and very useful element of focus group research,
Within cross-cultural focus groups, homogeneity and heterogeneity of but maximization of the benefits of such research requires understanding,
the participants can have varying degrees of influence on the outcome of a appreciating, and anticipating the influence of the group. Any particular focus
study. Liamputtong and Ezzy (2005) observed that in a Thai context, strangers group research project will benefit from prior careful consideration of how
are not trusted; hence, people were not willing to disclose family matters with individual differences, interpersonal factors, and environmental factors are
likely to affect a group's behavioral dynamics. In the next chapter, we con-

sider sorne of the practica! issues associated with ensuring that the grovps are
designed to maximize the accomplishment of the researchers' purpose. •
1
3
Review Questions
l. An adequate understanding of group dynamics is an essential prerequisite for

the conduct of any meaningful focus group. Discuss. Focus Croups and the
2. How can personal characteristics of focus group participants influence the
nature and intensity of interaction? Research Toolbox
3. How can we use our knowledge of environmental influences, such as spa-
tial arrangements, and the physical environment to enhance focus group
participation?
4. Why must a qualitative researcher be wary of certain sexual or racial stereo-
types when conducting focus groups?
5. Discuss sorne influences of personality on focus group dynamics.
6. Individuals behave differently when)in groups than when they are alone.
What are sorne of the group processes (e.g., cohesiveness and leadership
n the time since Merton's pioneering work, focus groups have become an
emergence) that can affect the productivity of focus groups?
7. Why is it important for the moderator to pay attention to nonverbal aspects
1 important research tool for applied social scientists who work in program
evaluation, marketing, public policy, education, the health sciences, advertis-
of group participation?
ing, and communications. Focus group interviews are but one type of group
8. Under what conditions would a qualitative researcher prefer more heteroge- research, however, though many of these group techniques have significant
neity among focus group participants?
communalities. This chapter provides an overview of the basic elements and
9. Acknowledging the fact that gender differences in attitudes seem inevitable, issues involved in focus group research. Other group research techniques are
what are sorne basic behavioral considerations in designing a focus group discussed in Chapter 9, as well as the use of virtual focus groups.
study to understand contraceptive usage among men and women?
10. When is physical appearance an important determinant of group interaction?
How <loes the physical appearance of a moderator affect his or her ability to Focus Group Basics: Structure, Process, and Data
conduct focus groups effectively?
11. Culture influences the way people interact with one another. How would dif- In a classic early work on focus groups, A. E. Goldman (1962) differentiated
ferences in the way people interact influence the type(s) of information that group depth interviews from other techniques by examining the meaning of
is obtained in a focus group? the three words in the name. A group is "a number of interacting individuals
having a community of interest" (p. 61); depth involves "seeking information
Exercise: Find a place, such as a library, restaurant, or coffee shop, and that is more profound than is usually accessible at the leve! of interpersonal
observe the behavior of severa! groups. Note who the group members are, relationships" (p. 63); and interview implies the presence of a moderator who
who appears dominant, and how strongly each member is affüiated with the "uses the group as a device for eliciting information'' (p. 64). The termfocus in
group. You should be able to make these determinations by observation from the full title simply implies that the interview is limited to a small number of
a distan ce. What cues give you information about the group? How would such issues that are the focal point of a detailed discussion among members of the
cues be useful to a focus group moderator? group. The importance of the group as a means for eliciting information has
39
40 FOCUS GROUPS: THEORY AND PRACTICE Focus Groups and the Research Toolbox 41
been emphasized by G. H. Smith (1954) in his classic definition of group inter- of the strengths of focus group research is that it may be adapted to provide
viewing: "The term group interviewing will be limited to those situations when the most desirable level of focus and structure. If researchers are interested
the assembled group is smali enough to permit genuine discussion amCDng ali in how parents have adapted to the child care requirements created by dual
its members" (p. 59). ! careers, the interviewer can ask very general and nonspecific questions
The contemporary focus group interview generaliy involves 8 to 12 indi- about the topic to determine the most salient issues on the minds of the
viduals who discuss a particular topic under the direction of a moderator who participants. On the other hand, if the interest of the researchers is parents'
promotes interaction and ensures that the discussion remains on the topic reactions to alternative concepts for child care, the interviewer can provide
of interest. Experience has shown that smalier groups may be dominated by detailed information about the concepts and ask very specific questions
one or two members and that groups larger than 12 in number are difficult to about each one. The moderator might also be more or less directive in this
manage and inhibit participation by ali members of the group. A typical focus example by drilling down from an initial series of general questions about
group session will last from 1.5 to 2.5 hours. Although they can be conducted child care, then moving the discussion to more specific issues as the group
in a variety of sites ranging from homes to offices, by conference telephone, proceeds. In fact, it is quite common for an interviewer to start a group with
and even in virtual worlds, it is most common for focus groups to be held in sorne general questions and then switch the focus of the group to more spe-
facilities designed especially for focus group interviewing. Such facilities pro- cific issues as the discussion progresses.
vide one-way mirrors and viewing rooms where observers may unobtrusively
watch the interview in progress.
TOPICS
PLACE It is important to recognize that the amount of direction provided by the

interviewer <loes influence the types and quality of the data obtained from the
Focus group facilities may also include equipment for audio- or videotap- group. The interviewer provides the agenda or structure for the discussion by
ing the interview and perhaps even a small transmitter for the moderator to virtue of his or her leadership role in the group. When a moderator suggests a
wear (a "bug-in-the-ear") so that observers may have real-time input into the new topic for discussion by asking a new question, the group has a tendency to
questions that are asked during the interview. Such facilities tend to be situated comply. A group discussion might never cover particular topics or issues unless
in locations that are either easy to get to, such as just off a major commuter the moderator intervenes to move things forward. This raises the question of
traffic artery, or in places like shopping malls where people naturaliy tend to the most appropriate amount of structure for a given group. There is, of course,
gather. More than 1,000 such facilities exist in the United States today. Most no best answer to this question because the amount of structure and the direct-
major cities around the world also have local focus group facilities. There are ness of the moderator must be determined by the broader research agenda that
numerous lists offacilities. The Impulse Survey of Pocus Facilities (http://www gave rise to the focus groups: the types of information sought, the specificity
.impulsesurvey.com/about.asp) provides an annual review of facilities around of the information required, and the way the information will be used. As
the world based on surveys of moderators and researchers. Other useful guides observed in Chapter l, there is a tendency to try to load too many topics into
to focus group facilities are "The Green Book;' available online at http://www the focus group agenda. The most useful groups will be those where there is
.greenbook.org/market-research-füms.cfm/focus-group-facilities and Quirks. adequate time and opportunity to explore a few topics in depth.
com at http://www.quirks.com/directory/focusgroup/. There is also a balance that must be struck between what is important to
members of the group and what is frnportant to the researchers. Less structured
THE MODERATOR groups will tend to pursue those issues and topics of greater importance, rel-
evance, and interest to the group. This is perfectly appropriate if the objective
The moderator, or interviewer, is the key to ensuring that the group of the researcher is to learn about those things that are most important to the
discussion goes smoothly. The focus group moderator is generaliy (but not group. Often, however, the researcher has rather specific information needs.
always) well trained in group dynamics and interview skills. Depending on Discussion of issues relevant to these information needs may only occur when
the intent of the research, the moderator may be more or less directive with the moderator takes a more directive and structured approach. It is important
respect to the discussion and is often quite nondirective, letting the discus- to remember that when this occurs, participants are discussing what is impor-
sion flow naturally as long as it remains on the topic of interest. Indeed, one tant to the researcher, not necessarily what they consider to be most significant.
ANALYSIS population may be sufficient to determine whether the humor used in an

Although focus group research can produce quantitative data~ focus advertising execution is on the mark or lost on the respondents. Focus groups
groups are almost always carried out with the collection of qualitative fata as are also sometimes used later in a particular research process. For example,
their primary purpose. This is their advantage, because focus groups produce when quantitative marketing research indicates that there are sources of dissat-
a very rich body of data expressed in the respondents' own words and context. isfaction with a product or service, focus groups can often tease out the subtler
There is a minimum of artificiality of response, unlike survey questionnaires sources of satisfaction and dissatisfaction. Indeed, it is not helpful to know that
that ask for responses expressed on 5-point rating scales or other constrained a group of consumers rate the "quality" of a product as low on a survey without
response categories. Participants can qualify their responses or identify follow up to determine what exactly is meant by quality among consumers.
important contingencies associated with their answers. Thus, responses have
a certain ecological validity not found in traditional survey research. This
oftcn makes the data provided by focus groups idiosyncratic, however. It also THE ROLE OF FOCUS GROUPS AMONG RESEARCH TOOLS
makes the results of focus group research more difficult and challenging to If focus groups can be used for both exploration and confirmation, the
summarize and generalize. This <loes not mean that quantitative tools cannot question arises as to how focus groups differ from other tools of science and
be applied to the analysis and interpretation of focus group data. Quantitative what purpose(s) they serve that are not served by other methods. The answer
methods can be used to analyze focus group data, and we will discuss how this lies in the nature or character of the data generated by focus group interviews.
might be done in Chapter ~· Also, quantitative data (e.g., simple surveys) can Sullivan (2009) distinguishes between two types of data: emic and etic. Emic
be gathered in focus groups to anchor respondents' viewpoints as a basis for data are data that arise in a natural or indigenous forro. They are only min-
further dialogue and elaboration. imally imposed by the researcher or the research setting. Etic data, on the
Focus group research has been the subject of much controversy and crit- other hand, represent the researcher's imposed view of the situation. Little of
icism. Such criticism is generally associated with two concerns: first, the view the research that is actually carried out can be described as completely etic or
that focus group interviews do not yield "hard" quantitative data and, second, completely emic. Even the most structured type of research will be influenced
the concern that group members may not be representative of a larger popu- to sorne extent by the idiosyncratic nature of the respondent and his or her
lation, because ofboth the small sample numbers and the idiosyilcratic nature environment. On the other hand, even the most natural of situations may not
of the group discussion. Such criticism is unfair, however. Although focus yield data that are completely emic because the researcher must make decisions
groups do have important limitations of which the researcher should be aware, about what to attend to and what to ignore. Thus, it is perhaps more useful to
these limitations are not unique to focus group"research, and they are not "fatal think of a continuum of research, with sorne methods lying closer to the ernic
flaws;' as all research tools in the social sciences have significant limitations. A end of the continuum and sorne techniques lying closer to the etic end.
focus group is not a substitute for a survey, if a survey is what is necessary, but Focus groups, along with other techniques like unstructured individual
neither is a survey, with its highly structured questions, a substitute for the rich depth interviews, projective methods, and ethnographies, provide data that
information that arises in a well-conducted focus group discussion. are closer to the emic end of the continuum because they allow individuals
The key to successfully using focus groups in social science research is to t'o respond in their own words.using their own categorizations and perceived
ensure that their use is consistent with the objectives and purpose of the research. associations. They are not completely void of structure, however, because the
Indeed, this is also true of the successful use of all social science research meth- researcher does raise questions of one type or another. Survey research and
ods. Focus groups may serve a variety of purposes, depending on where in the experimentation tend to produce data that are closer to the etic end of the
research agenda they are applied and how. For example, focus groups are often continuum because the response categories used by the respondent have been
a useful starting point for the design of survey questionnaires because they generally prescribed by the researcher. These response categories may or may
provide a means for exploring the way potential respondents talk about objects not be those with which the respondent is comfortable, though the respondent
and events, for identifying alternatives for closed-ended survey items, and for may still select an answer. And, even when closed-ended survey questions are
determining the suitability of various types of scaling approaches. the only options available, sorne respondents elect to give answers in their own
Although focus groups are most often used for such exploratory research, words, as most experienced survey researchers have discovered.
they do have a place as confirmatory tools as well. For example, the responses Neither emic nor etic data are better or worse than the other; they simply
of the members of one or two focus groups who are representative of a larger differ. Each has its place in social science research; each complerhents the
other. Each serves to compensate for the limitations of the other. Indeed, one 5. Generating impressions of products, programs, services, institutions, or other
way to view social science research is as a process that moves from the emic to objects of interest
the etic and back in a cycle. Phenomena that are not well understood are often 6. Learning how respondents talk about the phenomenon of interest. This, in
first studied with tools that yield more emic data. As a particular pheno~enon turn, may facilitate the design of questionnaires, survey instruments, or other
is better understood and greater theoretical and empirical structure is built research tools that might be employed in more quantitative research.
around it, tools tha:t yield more etic types of data tend to predominate. As 7. Interpreting previously obtained quantitative results
knowledge accumulates, it often becomes apparent that the explanatory struc-
ture surrounding a given phenomenon is incomplete. This frequently leads to This list illustrates the impressive breadth of application of focus group
the need for data that are more emic, and the process continues. research, but it is hardly exhaustive. One of the most appealing features of
The philosophical issues associated with this view are beyond the scope of focus groups is their robust versatility for shedding light on almost any topic
this book. Nevertheless, an understanding of emic versus etic provides a useful or issue. Focus groups are also widely used because they provide useful infor-
way of distinguishing the purpose and value of focus group interviewing. The mation and offer the researcher a number of advantages. This information and
interested reader can find further discussion of these issues in Markee (2013) the advantages of the technique come at a price, however. We briefly discuss
and Morris, L~ung, Ames, and Lickel (1999). the relative advantages and disadvantages of focus groups and then turn to a
'¡
discussion of the steps involved in the use and design of focus groups.
Applications, Advantages, and Limitations

ADVANTAGES OF FOCUS GROUPS
APPLICATIONS OF FOCUS GROUPS Focus groups provide a number of advantages relative to other types of
research:
Focus groups may be useful at virtually any point in a research program,
but they are particularly useful for exploratory research when rather little is l. Focus groups provide data from a group of people much more quickly
known about the phenomenon of interest. As a result, focus groups tend to and often at less cost than would be the case if each individual were inter-
be used very early in a research project and are often followed by other types viewed separately. They can also be assembled on much shorter notice than
of research that provide more precise quantitative data from larger samples would be required for a more systematic and larger survey. In marketing stud-
of respondents. As mentioned earlier, focus groups have also proved useful ies, focus group data analysis often begins immediately after a session ends,
following the analysis of a large-scale quantitatiVe survey. In the latter use, the yielding preliminary findings quickly.
focus group facilitates interpretation of quantitative results and adds depth to
2. Focus groups allow the researcher to interact directly with respondents.
the responses obtained in the more structured survey. Focus groups also have
This provides opportunities for the clarification of responses, for follow-up
a place as a confirmatory method that may be used for testing hypotheses. This
questions, and for the probing of responses. Respondents can qualify responses
latter application may arise when the researcher has strong reasons to believe
or give contingent answers to questions. In addition, it is possible for the
that a hypothesis is correct, and when confirmation by even a small group
researcher to observe nonverbal responses such as gestures, smiles, frowns, and
would tend to result in rejection of the hypothesis.
so forth, which may carry information that supplements and on occasion even
A variety of research needs lend themselves to the use of focus group
contradicts the verbal response.
interviews. Among the more common uses of focus groups are the following:
3. The open response format of a focus group provides an opportunity
l. Obtaining general background information about a topic of interest to obtain large and rich amounts of data in the respondents' own words. The
2. Generating research hypotheses that can be submitted to further researcli and researcher can obtain deeper levels of meaning, make important connections,
testing using more quantitative approaches and identify subtle nuances in expression and meaning.
3. Stimulating new ideas and creative concepts 4. Focus groups allow respondents to react to and build on the responses
4. Diagnosing the potential for problems with a new program, service, or of other group members. This synergistic effect of the group setting may
product result in the production of data or ideas that might not have been uncovered
in individual interviews. Differences of opinion among group members also

his feelings are not greatly different from those of his peers, and that he or she
help researchers identify how and why individuals embrace or reject particular
can expose an idea without necessarily being forced to defend, follow through,
ideas, communications, or products. or elaborate on it. He or she is more likely to be candid because the focus is
5. Focus groups are very flexible. They can be used to examine! a wide on the group rather than the individual; the respondent soon realizes that the
range of topics with a variety of individuals and in a variety of settings. things he or she says are not necessarily being identified with him or her. (Hess,
1968,p. 194)
6. Focus groups may be one of the few research tools available for obtain-
5. Spontaneity: Because no individual is required to answer any given question in
ing data from children or from individuals who are not particularly literate.
a group interview, the individual's responses can be more spontaneous and less
7. The results of a focus group are extremely user friendly and easy to conventional and should provide a more accurate picture of the person's position
understand. Researchers and decision makers can readily understand the on sorne issue. In the group interview, people speak only when they have defmite
verbal responses of most respondents. This is not always the case with more feelings about a subject and not because a question requires a response.
sophisticated survey research that employs complex statistical analyses. Sponsor Advantages
1
An important question when planning qualitative research is whether to l. Serendipity: It is more often the case in a group, rather than an individual
interview, that sorne idea will "drop out of the blue:' The group also affords the
use a group interview or a series of individual depth interviews. Individual
opportunity to develop it to its full significance.
depth interviews provide the opportunity to develop very rich and detailed
information about an individual that is not possible to obtain in a group 2. Specialization: The group interview allows the use of a more highly trained
setting. However, a series of individual interviews will require far more time but more expensive interviewer because a number of individuals are being
than a focus group, or even several focus groups. In contrast to conducting "interviewed" simultaneously.
individual interviews, focus groups can provide a relatively quick overview of 3. Scientific scrutiny: The group interview allows closer scrutiny. First, the session
a phenomenon. The group setting also affords advantages that are not present itself can be observed by severa! others. This affords sorne check on the
in individual interviews. Table 3.1 summarizes these advantage~. consistency of the interpretations. Second, the session may be tape recorded
or even videotaped. Later, detailed exarnination of the recorded session allows
additional insight and also can help clear up points of disagreement among
analysts.
Table 3.1 Advantages ofFocus Groups Relative to Individual Interviews
4. Structure: The group interview affords more control than the individual interview
Respondent Interaction Advantages
with regard to the topics that are covered and the depth with which they are
1. Synergism: The combined effort of the group will produce a wider range of treated because the "interviewer" in the role of moderator has the opportunity to
information, insight, and ideas than will the cumulation of the responses of a reopen topics that received too shallow a discussion when initially presented.
number of individuals when these replies are secured privately. (But note, sorne
5. Speed: Because a number of illdividuals are being interviewed at the same time,
researchers suggest that this is not always the case.)
the group interview permits the securing of a given number of interviews more
2. Snowballing: A bandwagon effect often operates in a group interview situation, quickly than do individual interviews.
in that a comment by one individual often triggers a chain of responses from the
other participants. SOURCE: Hess (1968).
3. Stimulation: Usually after a brief introductory period, the respondents get "turned
on;' in that they want to express their ideas and expose their feelings as the general
leve! of excitement over the topic increases in the group. LIMITATIONS OF FOCUS GROUPS
4. Security: In an interviewer-interviewee situation, respondents may not be willing Although focus groups are valuable research tools and offer a number of
to expose their views for fear ofhaving to defend these views or of appearing
advantages, they are not a panacea for ali research needs, and they do have
"unconcerned;' "radical;' or whatever the case may be. In the well-structured group,
their limitations. Many of these liÍnitations are simply the negative side of the
on the other hand, the individual can usually find sorne comfort in the fact that
advantages listed above:
l. The small numbers of respondents that participate in even several dif- all manner of research questions, though the issue could more appropriately
ferent focus groups and the convenient nature of most focus group recruiting be addressed by a survey or an experiment. This view is as inappropriate as
practices significantly limit generalization to a larger population. Indeed, per- the view that dismisses the focus group as having no utility. The focus group
sons who are willing to travel to a locale to participate in a 1- to 2-hou~ group is one tool in the social scientist's research tool kit. It should be used when
discussion may be quite different from the population of interest, at least on it is appropriate and for the purposes for which it was designed. Other tools
sorne dimension such as compliance or deference. should be used for other purposes. It has been said that to a man with a ham-
2. The interaction of respondents with one another and with the modera- mer, everything is a nail. There is an unfortunate tendency among sorne social
tor may have two undesirable effects. First, the responses from members of the scientists to view the world in the same way. Thus, they tend to regard focus
group are not independent of one another, which restricts the generalizability groups as appropriate or inappropriate, sound or unsound, without regard to
of results. Second, the results obtained in a focus group may be biased by a the research question. Focus groups are appropriate-more appropriate than
very dominant or opinionated member. More reserved group members may more quantitative techniques-for certain classes of problems. Other tools are
be hesitant to talk. more appropriate for other classes of problems.
Focus groups have a long history as an important tool for discovery and
3. The "live" and immediate nature of the interaction may lead a exploration. When little is known about a particular subject or a certain phe-
resea,,rcher or decision maker to place greater faith in the findings than is actu- nomenon, there are few research alternatives. Sorne type of orienting, human
ally-Jarranted. There is a certain credibility attached to the opinions oflive and interview will be required. The options available are individual interviews or
present respondents that is often not present in statistical summaries. focus groups. Focus groups provide a more rapid and often cost-efficient means
4. The open-ended nature of responses obtained in focus groups often for completing interviews. On the other hand, focus groups are not always
makes stimmarization and interpretation of results difficult. inexpensive because respondent recruiting and compensation costs vary con-
siderably according to the characteristics of the sample. For example, it is easier
5. The moderator may bias results by knowingly or unknowingly provid- to find and cheaper to compensate a sample of individuals who eat potato chips
ing cues about what types of responses and answers are desirable or seeking to than one comprising neurosurgeons. Also, the view that focus groups are less
achieve group consensus on particular topics. expensive than other viable research alternatives often fails to take into account
significant travel, food, and other costs associated with focus group road trips.
Thus, we see that focus groups offer important advantages, but these same Table 3.1 lists a number of other advantages of focus groups relative to individ-
advantages have associated dangeis and limitations. ual interviews. However, the decision to use focus groups instead of individual
As we noted above, focus groups are most often used as a preliminary interviews must recognize the potential for confounding of individual responses.
stage in a research program that eventually includes a larger, more represen-
tative survey of the population or as a means for adding insight to the results
obtained from a survey. However, we should not overlook the cases in which
Steps in the Design and Use of Focus Groups
focus groups alone may be a sufficient basis for decision making. One example
of such a case in an applied research setting would be the identification of flaw
in a program or a serious problem with a new product that would necessitate PROBLEM DEFINITION
redesign. Another would be a situation in which there is reason to believe that Research employing focus groups shares many of the same characteristics
the group of people, or population, of interest is relatively homogeneous, at and procedures as other types of social science research. Figure 3.1 lists the
least with respect to the issue at hand. In such cases, a small number of respon- s.equence of steps in the design and use of focus groups. Like all research, focus
dents is all that is needed to generalize to the larger population. Reynolds and group research must begin with a problem. Focus groups are designed to do
Johnson (1978) provide a useful example of the complementary use of focus exactly what the name implies: focus. A focus group is nota freewheeling con-
groups and survey research. versation among group members; it has focus anda clearly identifiable agenda.
It is true that focus groups yield qualitative data obtained from relatively Problem definition requires a clear statement of what kinds of information
small numbers of respondents who interact with one another, yet this is are desirable and from whom this information should be obtained. A clear
exactly their purpose. There are those who would use focus groups to explore understanding of the problem or general research question is critical because it
gives rise to the specific questions that should be raised by the moderator and IDENTIFYING THE PARTICIPANTS
identifies the population of interest. Once a clear statement of the problem has been generated, it is possible
to move to the second stage of the research. Like any survey, it is important to
identify a sampling frame. A sampling frame is a list of people (households,
Problem definition/formulation of the research question organizations) that the researcher has reason to believe is representative of
the larger population of interest. The sampling frame is the operational defi-
nition of the population. The identification of a sound sampling frame is far
more critical in large-scale survey research than it is for focus group research,
ldentification of sampling frame however. Because it is inappropriate to generalize far beyond the members of
focus groups, the sampling frame need only be a good approximation of the
population of interest. Thus, if the research were concerned with middle-class
parents of school children, a membership list for the local PTA might be an
ldentification of moderator
appropriate sampling frame.
THE MODERATOR ANO INTERVIEW GUIDE

The definition of the research question and identification of the sampling
Generation and pretesting of interview guide
frame provide important information for the third step in the focus group
design process: identification of a moderator and design of the interview guide.
Both the moderator and the types and forros of questions included in the
interview guide should be compatible with the group to be interviewed. The
Recruiting the sample
moderator who is well suited for interviewing children may be inappropriate as
a moderator of a group of design engineers who will be discussing the technical
characteristics of a complex product. Questions that might be used with com-
puter programmers and systems analysts would probably be worded differently
Conducting the group from those used with the lay user of personal computers.
It is common to carry out simultaneously the identification of the moder-
ator and design of the interview guide with the recruitment of participants for
the focus groups.
Analysis and interpretation of data The recruitment process ·requires identification of a time and place for
the group. Special facilities or equipment that might be required to carry out
portions of the interview may dictate a special type of setting, which must be
identified in reasonable proximity to potential participants. Persons in the
Writing the report sampling frame are contacted and asked to participate in a group at a particular
time and place. They are usually informed of the general topic for the interview
because this often stimulates interest and increases the probability of participa-
tion. It is also usually customary to offer participants an incentive for participa-
Decision making and action
tion. Depending on the research budget and the type of participants recruited,
incentives range from small gifts to several hundred dollars per person.
It is generally best to recruit a few more participants than the number
Figure 3.1 Steps in the Design and Use ofFocus Groups desired. Participants often cancel at the last minute, get stuck in traille, have
unexpected emergencies, or otherwise fail to arrive at the designated time and Quite apart from the more difficult issues of finding and obtaining the
place. After recruiting the participants, it is generally a good idea to follow up cooperation of difficult-to-reach populations, there are the more mundane
with a reminder by telephone or mail a <lay or two before the group is scheduled. issues of accommodating the group experience within the daily lives of partic-
! ipants. The focus group organizer must be prepared to answer questions such
as How do I get to the location? Where do I park? Is that near the "T"? Are
THE INTERVIEW
babysitting services provided? Can I be late? Can I bring my friend? Is food
The focus group interview itself is the next step in the process. The mod- provided?
erator leads the group through the questions on the interview guide and seeks And speaking of food, What will be served? Do any of the participants
to facilitate discussion among all the group members. This discussion may be have dietary constraints or preferences? What will be served and when?
audio- or videotaped to facilitate later analysis. The last phases of focus group Talking with a mouthful is not easy and hard to understand. Sorne foods are
research are also similar to those in other types of research. These latter two rather messy (a potential problem unless the focus is on the food!).
phases are analysis and interpretation of data and report writing. Are disabled individuals to be included, or even be the focus of the
research? What accommodations have been or could be provided?
In sorne settings, there may be a need to obtain permission for individuals
ANALYSIS ANO INTERPRETATION
to participate. If children are to be participants, then permission from parents
No research project is complete until the data are analyzed, the results will be necessary. In sorne cultures, it may be necessary, or at least wise, to
are interpreted, and a report of sorne sort is completed. The analysis of focus obtain permission from a local leader such as a tribal elder or gang leader. It is
groups can range from very simple summaries consisting of the impressions also important to be sensitive to cultural norms about·what is appropriate for
of the moderator and the observer to much more sophisticated analytical discussion, especially in groups that will involve both roen and women.
approaches. The list of issues that might potentially influence who show up and what
Each of the phases outlined above will be discussed in greater detall in happens in a focus group are almost limitless. Just remember spontaneity is
later chapters. fun and productive.
SOME PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS

Research in the social sciences is never as pristine and interesting as it In most colleges and universities and in many research institutions around
appears in the classroom, in the media, or in the textbook. There are many the world, there is an IRB that is charged with protecting human subjects
necessary but seemingly mundane tasks. The conduct of focus group research who participate in research. As a forro of social science research that employs
probably falls on the "fun'' side of the scale, but it is not without its own share of human subjects, focus group research should be cleared by the local IRB. In
necessary, if less interesting, tasks. Two of these tasks are logistics and dealing many cases, focus group research will fall in the "exempt" category of research,
with institutional review boards (IRBs). which requires only modest review by the IRB. Exempt research involves very
minimal or no risk and <loes not disrupt or manipulate the normal life expe-
riences of subjects, incorporate any forro of intrusive procedures, or involve
The Logistics of Focus Croups deception. This kind of research ~ill be exempt from full comrnittee review.
While most focus group research would fit this category, there can be instances
Focus groups are about people who are willing to take time from other where this is not the case and a more extensive review is required. Regardless
activities to express opinions. This <loes not make them very different from of the level of review, there are specific things that the researcher should do to
many others who are willing to offer opinions in surveys online or in malls protect individuals who participate in focus groups.
or who express their views through participation in a variety of communi- Individuals who are invited to participate in focus group research should
ties. Sorne types of individuals are difficult to even find, and obtaining their be told who will participate in the group of which they will be a part. This
participation is often even more difficult. Chapter 4 will address recruiting <loes not mean identifying people by name, but rather, it involves providing
in more detail. information about the types of people who will be in the group, for example,
college students who have traveled abroad, women who have recently given í. What <loes it mean to say that the results of a focus group are only as good as
birth to a child, men who have recently lost their job, homeless people, and so the moderator? Why is this so?
on. _Potential_partici~ants sh~uld also be informed about th~ general topic or 8. How are the results offocus groups interpreted? Why is interpretation some-
top1cs that w1ll be d1scussed lll the group. If the focus group is to be au~io- or times difficult?
videotape<l, or if observers will be present, prospective focus group partici-
9. What actions or decisions might be appropriate based on the results obtained
pants should be informed and should agree to these procedures.
from a focus group?
Finally, care should be taken to maintain the confidentiality of the discus-
sion. This generally means using only the first names of participants during the 10. Why is it often useful to do severa! focus groups on the same topic?
discussion and obtaining the agreement of group members that they will not
share any information shared in the group with outsiders. On the other hand, Exercise: Think of a topic with wh~ch you are familiar but that involves
prospective focus group members should also be informed that it is possible sorne degree of controversy (e.g., abortion or legalization of drugs). Design
that other group members might share information with others, so confiden- several survey-type questions with specific closed-ended responses. Convene
tiality cannot be guaranteed. These issues should be clearly specified in a con- a small group (may be justa few friends). Ask your questions without offering
sent form that is explained to potential participants at the time of recruitment. the alternatives you have generated. Toward the end, offer your alternatives to
Everyone who participates in a focus group should sign the consent form. the group and ask how well they capture the opinions of the group's members.
Compare the responses of the group's members with your original survey
items. What do you learn about the use of group interviews? What do you learn
Conclusion about the use of closed-ended survey questions?
Focus group research is a useful research tool, but there are many other tools
in the toolbox. It is impórtant to recognize the unique strengths and limitations
of focus group research. Focus group research produces very specific types of
data that are at once very rich and diagnostic and limited. The use of focus
groups can produce powerful insights, but such use is not a substitute for other
research techniques.
Review Questions
l. What are the key characteristics of a focus group?
2. What are the differences between emic and etic categorization? How do these
differences relate to the use of focus groups?
3. What are the primary uses of focus groups? When would it be appropriate to use
a focus group instead of a set of individual interviews? A standardized survey?
4. What are the advantages and disadvantages of focus groups (a) relative to
surveys and (b) relative to controlled experiments? ,
5. Why is it important to have a clear defrnition of the research question(s) prior

to initiating a focus group?
6. What <loes it mean to say that a good focus group is not too unstructured and not
too structured? What provides the structure of the agenda for a focus group?
4
Recruiting Focus Group
Participants and Designing the
lnterview Cuide
F ocus groups are conducted to obtain specific types of information from a

clearly identified set of individuals. This means that individuals who are
invited to participate in a focus group must be both able and willing to provide
the desired information and must be representative of the population of interest.
Thus, the selection and recruitment of participants for a focus group is a critica!
task. So too is the design of the interview guide because it establishes the agenda
for the group discussion and provides a structure within which participants may
interact and articulate their thoughts and feelings. A focus group is not just a
haphazard discussion or brainstorming session among people who happen to be
available; it is a well-planned research endeavor that requires the same care and
attention that is associated with any.other type of scientific research.
Two critica! elements in successful focus group research are the recruit-
ment of participants and the design of the interview guide. The interview guide
establishes the agenda for the discussion of the group. The nature of the discus-
sion is determined in large measure by the composition of the group and the
interaction that ensues among its members. Thus, the interview guide and the
selection of group members may be viewed, in one sense, as the construction
of the research instrument.
The review of group dynamics in Chapter 2 suggests that particular care
must be given to the composition of the group, because the quality of the
57
58 FOCUS GROUPS: THEORY AND PRACTICE Recruiting Focus Group Participants and Designing the Interview Guide 59
discussion and perhaps even its direction may be determined by the interac- focus group is the most appropriate type of research for the question at hand until
tion of the particular set of people who are brought together. For example, if the problem has been dearly defined. For example, a research question involving
a group of technical specialists is brought together to discuss a comple~ prob- the evaluation of the effects of a specific television commercial would be better
lem, it is likely that the discussion will take on a very different characte:r than answered with an experimental design than a focus group. This question requires
if the group were composed of a few technical people, a few nontechnical but a quantitative answer to the question of "how much'' of an effect the commercial
knowledgeable lay persons, and a few novices. A group composed of parents has on sorne standard measure. On the other hand, a research question focused on
and children will produce a very different type of discussion than a group the identification of specific problems consumers encounter in obtaining service
composed of parents or children alone. Mixed-gender groups often give rise to at the local office of the department of motor vehicles would be a good match with
different outcomes and group dynamics than do single-sex groups. focus group research. In the latter case, the need is for discovery and for answers
The relative homogeneity of groups, on a variety of characteristics, may also related to the question of"what kinds" of problems.
influence the dynarnics of the group. Such differences are not a cause for dismay. An old adage holds that "a problem well defined is half solved:' This is as
They simply suggest that when the group is a part of the measurement tool, consid- true for focus group research as it is for any other type of research. Only by
erable care must be exercised in its design and composition. The researcher should careful definition of the research question can the type of group required be
consider the impact of group composition early in the design phase of the project identified. As we will see, the defmition of the research problem is also critica!
and also ensure that membership in any given focus group is consistent with the to the design of the interview guide. Consider the general research question
objectives of.the research. This means that the research agenda and its objectives of consumers' views regarding the presence of violence in online games. As
must be established dearly and very early. Too often, focus group participants are stated, this question is not sufficiently focused because it does not indicate
recruited based on only a few demographic or behavioral characteristics and with which consumers (parents, teenagers, users, or sorne other group) or what
little sensitivity to more subtle but equally important aspects of group compositions. views (the entertainment value of the games, the perceived harmful effects, or
In this chapter, we consider the construction of the focus group as a sorne other effect). Although the views of all of these groups of consumers on
research instrument. We consider both the recruiting process and the con- all of these topics may ultimately be of interest, any one focus group or small
struction of the interview guide. Both activities must be guided by the pur- number of multiple groups will be able to address only a limited number of
pose of the research. Thus, we begin our discussion with consideration of the respondents and a limited number of topics. A very general research question
research agenda. will produce very general and not very useful results.
Problem formulation must begin with an assessment of what is already
known about the phenomenon of interest and what additional information is
Establishing the Research Agenda required. The purpose of research may be to inform a decision, identify alter-
native hypotheses or courses of action, confirm a hypothesis, explore a defined
Focus group research <loes not differ from other forros of research where prob- domain of behavior, or provide the solution to any of the hundreds of other
lem formulation and the specification of research objectives are concerned. large and small problems. The. purpose of the research must be clearly identi-
Although focus groups are frequently used and are particularly helpful when fied in terms of desired outcomes and the information to be obtained must be
little is known about a phenomenon, this <loes not mean that a focus group related specifically to these outcomes. This is a thought process in which the
should be a substitute for problem formulation. Focus groups are not designed researcher and all parties with a stake in the research should participate.
to be opportunities for a group of people to discuss whatever comes to mind; A well-defmed research question is one that clearly identifies the topic of
they are designed with a particular purpose in mind. Too often, focus groups the research, the population that is relevant to the question, and the specific
are used as a substitute for thinking about a topic, with the result being that issues of interest. Thus, in the case of the video game example above, the
very little useful information is obtained from the group. There is a consider- research question might be stated as the views regarding the entertainment
able difference between not knowing very much about a particular phenome- value of violence among adolescent males who regularly play online games. Of
non and not knowing what you want to learn. course, another different but equally valid research question might be stated in
The first step in establishing the research agenda is problem formulation. terms of the concerns regarding the usefulness of labels regarding violence in
Problem formulation is simply the specification of what problem is being addressed, online games among parents of teenage males. Although both the former and
what information is sought, and for what purpose. Indeed, it will not be clear that a latter questions are quite valid and potentially useful, they lead to very different
types of groups and very different types of questions. Defming a research ques- For example, many organizations maintain lists of their members, employees,
tion too broadly or at too general a level is likely to produce an unsatisfactory or customers. Persons who have recently purchased homes or automobiles
outcome. Focus group research is a tool for exploring a topic in detall¡ Once can be identified easily by examining court or tax records. When such lists
the research question has been clearly articulated, it is possible to mové on to are available, they save considerable time and expense because they reduce the
the recruitment of subjects and the design of an interview guide. number of contacts that must be made to identify individuals who are appro-
priate for the group. Marketing research companies and professional focus
group facilities commonly maintain extensive databases from which they select
Recruiting Participants focus group participants.
When preexisting lists are not available, the only alternative is to con-
Participants in focus groups can be recruited in a variety of ways. The limita- tact individuals by telephone, mail, or e-mail, or through intercepting them
tions on the generalizability of focus group results have at least the advantage in public places. The same types of procedures used to identify and qualify
that convenience sampling can be employed. Indeed, convenience sampling participants who are employed in survey research are ordinarily used in such
is the most common method for selecting participants in focus groups. This instances. For example, random-digit dialing procedures may be employed to
type of sampling saves both time and money, but it does not eliminate the need identify representative households. Then a few brief screening questions can be
to consider the characteristics of the group. The intent of virtually ali focus used to determine whether individuals meet the requirements for participation
groups is to (:iraw sorne conclusions about a population of interest, so the group in a particular focus group. Further information concerning the recruitment of
must consist of representative members of the larger population. If the research representative samples can be found in Fowler (2008) in this series.
question is related to the responses of specific types of individuals (e.g., men, A particularly helpful reference for identifying focus group facilities and
children, and physicians), the composition of the group must reflect this type service providers, including organizations that can assist with recruiting, is
of individual. In addition, it may be desirable in sorne situations to have a the Directory of Focus Group Companies and Services. This directory provides
group that is made up of a particular mix of people (e.g., older and younger information about companies and services around the world. It is also available
individuals, men and women, and users and nonusers of a particular product online at www.greenbook.org/. A similar resource can be found at http://www
or service). Thus, convenience sampling <loes not free the researcher from .quirks.com/ directory/focusgroup/.
matching the sample used in the focus group to the objectives of the research.
Furthermore, as we saw in previous chapters, the composition of the
MAKING CONTACT
group has important implications for the outcome of the discussion. Insofar
as the researcher has a specific agenda and wishes the group to interact in The first step in recruiting a focus group is screening eligibility. The initial
particular ways, he or she will need to structure the membership of the group contact may occur by mail, e-mail, telephone, or in person. When the research-
to maximize the probability of the desired outcome. This may mean ensuring er's purpose requires that groups be composed in a particular way, a few
a certain level of homogeneity/heterogeneity within the group or carrying out qualifying questions may be used. These questions may include demographic
multiple groups that differ with respect to their composition. characteristics, personality factors, or other variables related to the purpose of
Many types of focus groups require only very generally defined groups of the research. When multiple focus groups need to be carried out, with differ-
individuals. For example, in many marketing research applications, the group ent groups composed in different ways, this type of screening is necessary for
may be defined simply in terms of the principal food shopper in a. household matching individuals with specific groups.
or the user of a particular product. Government planners may define groups After it has been determined that the individual contacted is appropriate
in terms of individuals who are likely to be affected by a new program or reg- for participation, the individual is usually given a general description of the
ulation. Health care professionals may seek groups composed of individuals nature of research, including the fact that the research will involve a group
who suffer from a particular disorder or share a specific risk factor. When such discussion. The general topic for research should be identified, and the impor-
general definitions of the group are used, recruitment is relatively easy. tance of the individual's participation and opinions should be emphasized. If
Many civic and religious organizations make their memberships available an incentive is to be used, this should be indicated along with how and when it
for focus group recruitment. Lists of individuals who have certain characteristics will be paid. If refreshments ora meal are to be served or ifbabysitting services
or who have engaged in certain types of activities also may be readily available. are to be provided, this too should be noted. Prospective participants should
then be given the time and place of the group. Both the starting and ending valuable to one person may have little value to another. This is one reason why
times for the group should be indicated. . money is most commonly employed.
It is a good idea to ask group members to arrive 15 to 30 minutes prior Providing membership lists is a common fund-raising activity for many
to the interview in order to account for traffic delays, weather conditionsi, and civic and religious organizations. Such organizations provide the researcher
other assorted minor emergencies. One advantage of scheduling several focus with a ready-made list of individuals who have agreed, at least in principie, to
groups on the same tapie is that the participant can be offered several alterna- serve as research subjects. The disadvantage of using such groups, however,
tive times, dates, and often locations. Such alternatives increase the likelihood is that many of the individuals may be well-known to one another or even
that an individual will be free to participate. be close friends. Such individuals may form small cliques within a group and
Once individuals have agreed to participate in a focus group, they should reinforce the opinions of one another. This may diminish the responsiveness
immediately receive either a written or telephone call confirmation. Written of other group members or move the group toward a consensus opinion more
confirmations are preferable when time permits because they provide a means quickly than might otherwise be the case. Friends are more likely to engage in
for delivering a map and directions to the site of the discussion. Written con- side conversations that may disrupt the flow of discussion in the group or cre-
firmations also carry a more formal tone and imply an obligation that serves ate resentment among others in the group. As we saw in Chapter 2, the dynam-
to increase the commitment of the individual to participate. ics of groups change radically depending on the level of acquaintanceship and
Regardless of the type of confirmation used, participants should be con- the homogeneity of the participants. It is generally not desirable to have a few
tacted again by telephone 24 hours prior to the focus group. This reminds the people who know one another well within a group of strangers. Furthermore,
participant of the earlier agreement and provides an opportunity to ensure that a group composed of rather homogeneous friends is likely to produce less
the participant has accurate directions. variance in opinion than a group of strangers.
In addition, over time, sorne individuals may become professional focus
group participants. Such "professionals" are seldom representative of the larger
INCENTIVES population. For these reasons, it is a good idea to inquire how frequently the
Focus groups are a time-consuming activity for participants. Taking 2 available individuals participate in focus group activities. Prospective partici-
or more hours out of one's life to talk to a group of strangers is riot the most pants can also be screened to ensure that they have not recently participated in
appealing prospect, particularly if one has worked ali day. There are a variety of other focus groups and are not acquainted with other participants. ,:
incentives that may be used to encourage participation, and most focus group
participants are provided monetary and other incentives (e.g., product samples
LOCATION
ora chance to win a prize). In addition, for most people, the focus group itself
is an incentive because it is generally an enjoyable experience. When recruiting Chapter 2 noted that focus groups may take place in a wide variety of set-
participants, this aspect of participation should be emphasized. A stimulating tings and reviewed many of the factors related to location that may influence
discussion is not enough to induce most individuals to spend time in a focus the dynamics of a group's interaction and discussion. This review suggests that
group, however. Commercial research organizations pay focus group partici- location is an important factor to consider when designing a group. Location
pants a range of incentives depending on the nature of the group sought and will also influence the ease with which participants are recruited. In general,
how difficult they are to recruit. Compensation can range from $50 to several the closer the location to participants' homes or work place, the more likely
hundred dollars for participation. they are to participate. Travel time 'is generally more critical than distance in
It is also a good idea to serve snacks or even a light meal if the group will determining convenience; and when the location of the interview can take
be conducted near a mealtime. The presence of food tends to relax partici- place between home and work, there is less a sense of traveling out of one's
pants, and it encourages participation by eliminating concerns about meals. way. The availability of parking or proxirnity to public transportation may also
Food is not always appropriate and may be out of place in sorne international influence the willingness of individuals to participate.
venues. Child care services also help ensure participation. Location also has psychological implications. Many prospective partici-
Other types of incentives that have been used include providing free prod- pants may be reluctant to travel to a location in a seedy part of town or to a
ucts, transportation, and even overnight hotel accommodations. Incentives deserted downtown location. Focus groups held in familiar, well-traveled areas
should be selected that have universal value to the participants. What may be are likely to be perceived as more attractive. This is one reason why shopping
malls are a favored location of many researchers. Shopping malls are familiar, factors reviewed in Chapter 3, because the dynamics of individual groups may
public, and attractive locations in which focus group participants feel comfort- well be related to the purpose of the research.
able. They also serve to set the tone of the focus group as an interesting 'expe-
rience and provide a set of cues for participants that suggest profession~ism,
RECRUITING HARD-TO-REACH INDIVIDUALS
comfort, and purpose.
There are occasions when a particular research question requires that
focus group discussions be carried out with individuals who are difficult to
HOW MANY PARTICIPANTS?
reach. Such individuals include physicians, senior business executives, gov-
Most focus groups are composed of 8 to 12 people. Fewer than 8 partic- ernrnent officials, and an array of other specialists or just very busy people.
ipants makes for a rather dull discussion, and more than 12 participants are Recruiting such individuals for participation in focus groups is not impossible,
difficult for the moderator to manage. The presence of more than a dozen but it may require heroic efforts. In many cases, it may also be found that
participants also does not afford enough opportunity for ali individuals to individual interviews are easier and less costly to schedule. Nevertheless, focus
actively participate. It is generaliy a good idea to recruit more individuals groups have been and can be carried out with such people.
than required, however. A good rule of thumb is to assume that at least two One way to reach individuals who are otherwise difficult to recruit is to
participants will not show up for the interview. This number may vary some- go to places where they tend to congregate. Trade shows, professional conven-
what depending on the nature of the participants and the type of recruitment tions and conferences, and business rneetings are often good places to recruit
used. For example, participants who have significant demands on their time, and carry out focus groups. Groups rnay be recruited prior to the event or
like senior executives and physicians, are often required to make last-minute on-site. Generally, such groups will feature a cocktail party or other event for
schedule changes that may result in their missing a focus group meeting. the participants. Sorne organizations have gone so far as to sponsor their own
Individuals who must travel a long distance through heavy traffic may be conferences, often in attractive locations, just to obtain áccess to such indi-
delayed, even if they had planned to attend the session. On the other hand, viduals. Incentives are generally not required to obtain participation in such
participants who are recruited through a local civic organization for a group settings. Focus groups with business executives are often easier to schedule
that will be conducted in a location a few blocks from their homes are much in airports than in other places. Airports are places where sorne people spend
more likely to attend the group. a significant amount of time simply waiting and where an interview or focus
It is generally better to over-recruit slightly than to cancel a group because group may provide a way to fill sorne time. Physicians may often be recruited
too few individuals are present. If by sorne chance ali participants who were more readily if the location of the interview is a hospital at which they practice.
recruited do happen to show up, it is relatively easy to ask one or two persons In sorne cases, it may be necessary to compensate thern at their hourly rate in
to leave. Most often, the best way to do this is to ask the last persons to arrive order to obtain access.
to leave. The incentive should always be provided, even when the participant One particularly creative telecommunications cornpany decided that it
is asked to leave. needed to talk with the chief executive officers (CEOs) of rnajor corporations.
The question ofhow many is related to the number of focus groups as well Such individuals tend to be extremely busy and are virtualiy impossible to find
as the number of persons in each group. There are no general rules concerning in the same place. The telecommunications firm made an offer too good to
the optimal number of groups. When the research is very complex or when resist. It chartered a cruise ship and invited the CEOs and their spouses for a
numerous different types of individuals are of interest, more focus groups will 3-day weekend cruise, ali expenses paid. The firrn succeeded in drawing more
be required. When the population of interest is relatively homogeneous and the than 200 CEOs to the cruise. Although the cruise cost a considerable sum, it,
research question is relatively simple, a single group or two may be sufficient. was well worth the cost to have a captive research pool for 3 days.
Exceptions do occur, however. In 2000, Newsweek magazine reported Airbus's In recent years, working mothers with young children have increasingly
fielding of more than 120 focus groups to help design their new A3XX jumbo become a difficult group to interview. Providing babysitting services is almost
jet (Emerson et al., 2000). Most focus group applications involve more than a requirement for obtaining their participation. Holding the focus group in
one group, but seldom more than three or four groups. The question of the a shopping mali location and extending the babysitting service for an hour
number of groups to use is ultimately one that rnust be deterrnined based on or so befare or after the focus group provides an additional incentive for
the objectives of the research. It is also a question that rnust be inforrned by the participation.
The key to recruiting any group is an understanding of where and how language-not just fluent, but fluent enough to participate in a high speed,
potential group members spend their time, what barriers may exist that interactive discussion. When language is a concern, the recruiting process
make participation difficult, and what incentives are valued by the $roup. will need to include elements and people that provide a means for assessing
This understanding provides a basis for developing a recruitment plaj.1 that fluency. Language, however, may not always be the most serious issue. Cultural
includes a location that optimizes participation and the identification of ways differences also matter.
to eliminate barriers and provide incentives for participation in a focus group.
It is important to remember that the greatest obstacle to carrying out a
focus group is the need to bring 8 to 12 people together at the same place Recruiting Participants Across Cultures
and time. Time is a finite resource in modern society: The time budget of the
average individual may be more constrained than the financial budget. Asking Recruiting individuals across cultures or in a culture different from your own
individuals to spend 90 minutes to 2 hours in a focus group discussion-plus often necessitates different approaches that accommodate the local culture.
the time traveling to and from the group-is asking for a significant sacrifice In sorne cases, especially with participants from rural areas in developing
on the part of the individual. Rearranging calendars, forgoing dinner, finding nations, it is almost always necessary for the researcher and moderator to
babysitters, or traveling to unfamiliar locations is simply too great a sacrifice first develop trust among the community members before gaining access to
for many potential focus group members. In fact, growing "time poverty" potential participants (Eide & Allen, 2005). Such trust-building can normally
raises sorne .concerns about the lifestyle representativeness of individuals who be accomplished through building relationships with community leaders and
do show up for focus groups. stakeholders. Another way to gain access to potential participants is by engag-
The researcher should be sensitive to and appreciative of the sacrifice ing a "cultural broker" -defined by Eide and Allen (2005) as people who serve
participants make. A $50 incentive is not very much for a 3-hour detour on as "links between individuals or groups who are culturally different" (p. 6). In
the way home from work, particularly if a babysitter for the children costs either case, the recruitment strategy relies on the snowballing effects that grow
$10 an hour. Researcher arrogance may be the single most important factor from the relationships built with the community leaders or cultural brokers.
in the failure of a focus group. Participants are doing the researcher-and his It should be noted that engaging community leaders or cultural brokers
or her sponsors-a favor, regardless of the compensation and other incentives may produce its own problems. For example, sorne leaders/brokers may
provided. Recognition of this fact-and an appreciation of the participants' choose to act as the gatekeeper controlling access to the community members
potential sacrifices-is-a good beginning for scheduling a focus group. (Liamputtong, 2008), forcing potential participants to participate in the focus
group (Colucci, 2008), or simply controlling who <loes and <loes not participate
in the focus group. Thus, it is important for the moderator to remind partici-
THE LANGUAGE OF THE GROUP
pants at the beginning of the focus group session of the voluntary nature of the
In an increasingly multilingual world, a key question when recruiting par- study. It is also important to try to assess how representative group members
ticipants for focus groups is the language in which the discussion will occur. It are of the larger community of interest.
is frequently unreasonable to expect that everyone with something to contrib- Another potentially sensitive issue in sorne cultures revolves around gen-
ute to a topic will speak the same language. It is nearly impossible to conduct a der roles and the norms related to the interactions between men and women.
focus group in multiple languages, though sorne organizations have used head- In sorne cultures, and especially within rural areas in these cultures, it is often
sets providing simultaneous translation for participants. Even with the aid of necessary that amale initiates confact with the community leaders (Vissandjée,
such technology, the subtleties oflanguage are often lost in translation. Thus, a Abdool, & Dupéré, 2002). However, to speak to the women in these areas, a
key decision is the language or languages in which the focus group discussions female would likely need to be involved in the recruiting process itself. It is also
will be conducted. If the discussion is in French, it will be necessary to recruit important to know when mixed-gender groups are acceptable, and even when
participants who speak French. If there is a need to conduct group discussions acceptable, what topics are appropriate for discussion in mixed-gender groups.
with individuals who speak different languages, then multiple groups in differ- There may also be differences in expectations related to age. For example, in
ent languages will need to be scheduled. sorne cultures, younger individuals are expected to defer to their elders. In such
Even when the language of a group is clear, there is still the need to cultures, focus groups with a broad age range of participants may not be very
ensure that the participants who are recruited to participate are fluent in the productive in eliciting comments from younger participants.
Idealiy, when conducting focus group research in an unfamiliar culture, elicit simple "yes" /"no" answers. A focus group interview discussion guide is
enlisting colleagues with knowledge of the culture will prove very useful. This not a verbal version of a survey questionnaire. Survey questionnaires provide
is also true even within a single country if that country has many difftrent a great deal more structure than should a focus group interview guide because
and distinct cultural groups. In fact, this is good advice when dealing /with they serve different purposes. In addition, survey questionnaires often provide
subcultures that may exist outside the mainstream culture, such as gangs, sorne both questions and potential responses from which the research participant
religious orders, inmates, immigrant workers, and other groups with unique selects an answer. Interview guides provide far less structure in the questions
norms and patterns of interaction. themselves and do not suggest potential responses.
It is important to identify who will participate in a focus group before
beginning the development of the interview guide. This is because the types
FORMULATING QUESTIONS
of questions, the focus of the discussion, and even the words used in asking
questions need to be customized for the group. A set ofhighly technical ques- Along with the composition of the group, a key element in the design of
tions may provide the basis for a very productive discussion when talking to a successful focus group is the formulation of questions. Questions serve as
engineers with graduate degrees or physicians but be completely meaningless the agenda for the group discussion, and a good question will elicit substan-
to a nontechnical group. In fact, even for highly educated individuals, there is a tial interaction among group members. There is a rich literature on how to
need to adapt the questions to the audience. Questions about a medical device develop good questions. Perhaps the best book ever written on the topic of
would need to be very different when talking to the engineers who design it question development is The Art of Asking Questions (Payne, 1951). Other
compared with the physicians who use it. The development of the interview useful sources include Bradburn, Sudman, and Wansink (2004), Schaeffer and
guide is the focus of the remainder of this chapter. Presser (2003), and the several practical guides to focus group research refer-
enced elsewhere in this book.
When developing the interview guide, there are two general principles
Developing tlte lnterview Guide to be observed. The first suggests that questions be ordered from the more
general to the more specific. This means that questions of the most general
The interview guide sets the agenda for a focus group discussion. It should and unstructured nature should be placed early, and more specific questions,
grow directly from the research questions that were the ímpetus for the which may suggest specific responses to the more general questions, should
research. Like the selection and recruitment of participants, the construction be placed near the end of the guide. Second, questions should be ordered by
of the interview guide should not proceed until the research agenda and ali of the relative importance to the research agenda. Thus, the questions of gr~atest
the questions related to it have been clearly articulated and agreed on by ali importance should be placed early, near the top of the guide, whereas those of
parties with an interest in the research. lesser significance should be placed near the end.
The development of the interview guide is not typically the sole responsibility These two principles may appear to conflict, and they often do conflict,
of the focus group moderator. Indeed, the moderator may not even be selected but it is frequently possible to establish an agenda that starts with general ques-
until the research agenda has been established and a preliminary interview guide tions about one particular topic, moves to specific questions about this topic,
has been drafted. The interview guide should be developed in collaboration with and~then moves back to another general question. Obviously, this approach
ali parties interested in the research at hand. These include policymakers and deci- <loes not work well when the topics for discussion are very closely related or
sion makers who may use the information, as well as the researchers charged with when the answers to specific questibns regarding one topic may influence the
implementing the research. At sorne point, the moderator should be brought into response to the more general questions to be raised later.
the design process as well to ensure that he or she is comfortable with the instru- . Ultimately, the researcher will need to exercise judgment in making trade-
ment and understands the intent of the questions. Skilled moderators also have a offs between the general-to-specific rule and the most-to-least-important rule.
keen sense of what types of questions "work" and where there may be problems. In sorne cases, when there are many questions of high importance, the only
The moderator is the one who must implement the interview guide, so deference solution may be the use of a number of different focus groups, each with its
to the experience and skill and expertise of a moderator is wise. own interview guide. It is also important to recognize that groups often take
When designing an interview guide, it is important to remember that its on a life of their own, and that the agenda is dictated by the natural flow of
purpose is to provide direction for the group discussion; it is not designed to discussion. Thus, the interview guide is just that-a guide-that the moderator
and group should be allowed to modify if it proves desirable and useful. This interview, and the whole process repeated. This process may continue until a
might occur when two groups are scheduled and a line of questioning doesn't guide is developed with which the researcher is cornfortable or until interviews
"work'' for one group, which leads to its rephrasing or the elimination ofthese with ali groups have been completed. One significant disadvantage associated
questions for the second group. / with this approach, however, is that it makes comparison across groups even
Another factor that must be considered in the design of the interview more difficult. With the use of rolling interview guides, no group is asked to
guide is the amount of effort required to discuss a particular topic. It is virtually respond to exactly the same set of questions. Despite this disadvantage, a roll-
impossible to extend any group beyond two hours without exhausting every- ing interview guide may be the only alternative available and frequently makes
one, but sorne topics create cognitive fatigue more quickly than others. Very the best use of multiple focus groups because it allows information to unfold
technical topics or topics that are emotionally charged will exhaust participants over time as more is discovered about a topic.
more quickly, and the interview guide should reflect this fact. When the topic is
likely to require considerable energy and effort on the part of the participants,
HOW MUCH STRUCTURE?
the interview guide should be shorter and involve fewer questions.
It was noted earlier that questions in the interview guide should not
be survey-like. Rather, they should be structured to provide the maximum
HOW MANY QUESTIONS? opportunity of the potential responses for the discussants. Nevertheless, even
It is often difficult to judge the number of topics and questions that can be cov- when such highly structured, survey-like, questions are avoided, there remains
ered in a designated amount of time. Different groups will spend radically different considerable choice regarding the amount of structure to use when design-
am'Ounts of time on the same topics, and what may evolve as a long and intense ing questions. Although it is impossible to completely eliminate structure in
discussion in one group may be met with disinterest by another group. Chapter 2 questions, it is possible and often desirable to design relatively unstructured
reviewed sorne of the factors that might influence the amount of time required to questions. Such relatively open questions allow respondents to refer to virtu-
<leal with particular topics by groups ofvarying composition. A very homogeneous ally any aspect of the general stimulus identified in the question. The degree
group may be able to move through many questions quickly; whereas a group of response freedom is high. For example, a relatively unstructured question
composed of very heterogeneous individuals on a number of diillensions may might take one of the following forms:
labor over even a small number of questions. An experienced moderator can often
How do you feel about XYZ?
provide sorne guidance with respect to the amount of material that can be covered
on a particular topic. Generally, the more complex a topic, the more emotionally What thoughts went through your head while you watched the program?
involving the topic, or the greater the heterogeneity ofviews on the topic within the What did you think about when you first saw XYZ?
group, the fewer the topics and specific questions that can be covered.
In practice, most interview guides consist of fewer than a dozen questions, How do you do that (referring to a specific behavior)?
although the moderator is frequently given considerable latitude to probe Why? (always a useful follow-up)
responses and to add new questions as the actual interview progresses. A focus
group interview is a dynamic and idiosyncratic exercise, so such flexibility in Note that these questions do not draw attention to any specific aspect
pursuing new questions is critical to the success of the interview. It may be or dimension of the stimulus object referred to in the question. Respondents
helpful during the design of the interview guide to try to anticipate the many can select any aspect or dimension, and, indeed, what they select may have
directions in which a discussion will go. This is often not practical, however, important implications. More specifically, those issues that respondents raise
because one reason for carrying out a focus group is the lack of information first are likely to be those that are most memorable, important, or salient to
regarding the topic for discussion. them (Krueger & Casey, 2001). Exceptions to this general rule are topics that
One option available to the researcher who carries out several focus are threatening or are of a very sensitive or potentially embarrassing nature.
groups is the rolling interview guide. As suggested earlier, an interview guide Structure may be introduced into a question by providing information
is developed for the first group. Then, based on the outcome of the first group about those dimensions or aspects of the stimulus object on which the respon-
discussion, the guide is. revised for use in the second group. Information ' dent should focus. Thus, a question may ask respondents about a particular
obtained in the second group may then be used for yet another revision of the dimension of the stimulus object in the question:
72 FOCUS GROUPS: THEORY AND PRACTICE Recruiting Focus Group Participants and Designing the lnterview Guide 73
Do you think a value-added tax will help the very rich or the very poor? stimulus object or response to the object is very salient, it may not be offered as
How do you feel about the safety ofX automobile? part of a response to a relatively unstructured question for fear ofbeing wrong
or embarrassed. Such situations benefit from skillful moderator probing. Also,
When do you use your widget? providing additional structure may serve to bring out such responses by sug-
gesting an interest in the topic and by communicating that such responses are
Alternatively, the question may draw attention to a particular stimulus acceptable.
object: Because the objective of a focus group is to stimulate discussion, questions
that call for a direct, one- or two-word response should be avoided. Questions
How <lid you feel about the woman in the perfume ad?
that can be answered simply by "yes" or "no" provide little information and
Did you find the spokesperson believable? stifle discussion. Although closed-ended questions of the agree-disagree vari-
What did you learn from the advertisement that you didn't know before? ety-or questions that suggest specific sets of responses-may be particularly
appropriate in survey research, they are of little use in focus group research.
Generally, the less structured types of questions will precede those with Questions that include words like how, why, under what conditions, and similar
more structure, because those with more structure tend to be more directive probes suggest to respondents that the researcher is interested in complexity
and establish a direction for response. Although more structured questions do and wants to facilitate discussion. On the other hand, an occasional group
not suggest a specific answer, they do tend to move the discussion in a partic- "vote" can elevate the group energy and provide a basis for continued elabo-
ular direction and narrow its scope. rated discussion.
Although it may appear that less structure is better in focus group inter- The forro and characteristics of the questions are not the only determinant
views, this is not always the case. Sorne people need help in articulating a of the amount of structure in a focus group discussion. The style and person-
response. Providing a key word or cue may help the respondent formulate ality of the moderator, as well as the composition of the group itself, also influ-
an answer. In other cases, those aspects of the stimulus object that are most ences the amount of structure and its desirability. Thus, we will return to the
salient and easily remembered for respondents may not be aspects of primary issue of structure in Chapters 5 and 6, when we will examine the influence of
interest to the researcher. This often occurs in communication research when the moderator and the ways in which focus groups may be conducted.
the researcher may be interested in the full array ofbeliefs and feelings com-
municated, but the respondent is able to recall only the most salient aspects of WORDING OF QUESTIONS
the communication. More specific cues-aspects ofthe communication-may
be required to elicit less salient or memorable portions of the communication. Respondents can give meaningful responses only to questions they under-
On the other hand, it is important that the interviewer not lead the respondent, stand. This means that questions should be phrased simply in language that
in the sense of providing an answer. respondents understand. Long, complex, multipart questions are not only dif-
Rephrasing a question can be helpful, but suggesting what the respondent ficult to understand but also difficult to respond to and irritating to the group.
should say is not appropriate. A skillful moderator is often able to handle this The way in which questions are worded may also place respondents in
problem by having other group members interpret or rephrase the question. an embarrassing or defensive situation. This should be avoided, and in most
This is not always a viable solution, however, because another group member circumstances, questions can be phrased to avoid threatening or embarrassing
may simply be suggesting an answer. Even so, this is more desirable because the respondent. For example, "Why don't you take your child in for a regular
the other group members are less aware than the moderator of the research check-up with a doctor?" is a potentially embarrassing question. The same
agenda. A critical issue in determining the amount of structur~ is the preserva- question might be asked as follows: "What prevents you from taking your
tion of the emic mode of data collection referred to in Chapter 3. Focus groups child to the doctor as often as you would like?" It may even be possible for the
are designed to determine how respondents structure the world, not how moderator to have other group members raise these questions or play off the
participants respond to the researcher's view of how the world or a particular responses of the group in such a way as to place the question within the natural
phenomenon is structured. flow of the discussion. This often reduces the anxiety or embarrassment of a
More structured questions may be useful when respondents are uncer- respondent, and a skillful moderator will know when to use this technique to
tain or embarrassed about a particular response. Even when an aspect of the broach a topic rather than ask a question directly. In these situations, indirect
projective techniques often prove useful in eliciting data about sensitive tapies. a typical focus group. Naomi Henderson (2004) estimates that compared
A little forethought and sensitivity go a long way toward the prevention of with a few decades ago, moderators today commonly have to cover twice as
embarrassing and threatening questions and may make the difference between many questions in the same amount of time. This has had a chilling effect
a lively, talkative group and one that is sullen and uncomfortably quiet. / on the overall quality of focus groups.
Second, moderators who have to wade through 35 to 40 questions in 75
minutes are likely to feel (and look) rushed and are highly unlikely to probe
PRETESTING participants' responses. The group members quickly pick up the idea that it's
There is no substitute far trying out an interview guide prior to its use. No best to provide relatively terse reactions and help move things forward. Focus
matter how experienced the researcher and the moderator and how thorough groups that materialize this way are actually closer to within-group surveys
and conscientious the designers, it is impossible to predict in advance the way than focus group depth interviews. Rook (2003) provides a framework for bet-
respondents will interpret and respond to questions. Professional researchers ter understanding in advance the trade-offs involved in selecting the number
are not typical individuals, and no matter how skilled, their articulation of of questions, participants, and allocated time.
questions is not usually representative of the research population. This means Finaliy, focus group discussion guides tend to rely largely on direct ques-
that at least sorne degree of pretesting is appropriate. Such pretesting may take tions about consumers' purchase behavior, motivations, and perceptions. These
a variety of forms ranging from a smali mock focus group to simply trying out are important issues, but in many situations, consumers are unlikely to be able
the questions on a few individuals. At the minimum, those persons involved in or willing to provide the desired information. Many questions are sensitive,
the pretest should not have been involved in the design of the interview guide potentially embarrassing, or affected by social desirability influences, so focus
and should not be aware of the purpose of the research. When practical, it is group respondents may resist answering or may distort their responses. Also,
highly desirable to carry out the pretesting with respondents who are represen- as Gerald Zaltman (2003) demonstrates in his book How Customers Think,
tative of those who will participate in the actual focus groups. individuals may simply be unable verbally to express deep-seated feelings and
Pretesting of the interview guide provides an opportunity to determine nonverbal images. In recent years, a spike in uses of projective research meth-
whether wording of questions is appropriate, to determine whether questions elicit ods (in both group and individual interviews) owes much to their distinctive
discussion, and to identify questions that are not easily understood. It should be strengths in eliciting indirectly data about such tapies.
noted, however, that the interview guide is only one part of the research instru-
ment; the group itself and the moderator are also parts of the research instrument.
This means that it is impossible to fully pretest the total research instrument out- Conclusion
side a group setting.
The selection and recruitment of participants far a focus group is a critical part
of the design process. The fact that focus groups are not designed to produce
lssues and Trends for the Future projectable statistical results <loes not mean that care should be forsaken when
recruiting respondents. As in ali research, respondents should be selected from
Decisions about the number of focus group participants and the number an identified population of relevance to the research question. Likewise, the
and type of questions to be addressed in the group are separate consider- interview guide should be designed with care and with a clear understanding
ations, yet they inevitably interact and exert strong influences about the of the research problem.
quality and effectiveness of the group discussion. In the marketing research Focus groups are not random discussions among a group of individuals
field where as much as a billion dollars are spent annually on focus groups, "'Cho are brought together haphazardly. Rather, they are group discussions
three trends related to these issues have had the effect of encouraging focus among carefully selected individuals guided by a skilied moderator who fol-
groups that are very different from their theoretical origins and design. lows a weli-constructed but loase and flexible interview guide. Ultimately, the
First, the time poverty of both managers and participants has resulted in a composition of the group, the structure of the interview guide, and the loca-
slow creep toward shorter, clown-to-business focus groups that wrap things tion of the interview must flow from a weli-defmed research objective. Like ali
up quickly. This is not necessarily harmful by itself, but it has occurred at other research, focus group research begins with and should be guided by a
the same time that managers have significantly increased the workload of well-articulated purpose.
Review Questions
l. Why is the establishment of the research agenda, or research question, the
first step necessary in both recruiting focus group participants and dedigning
an interview guide?
5
2. Why is convenience sampling the most common type of sampling employed
in selecting respondents for a focus group? What are the relative advantages
and disadvantages of this approach to recruiting participants?
3. Why must attention be paid to the composition of focus groups? What fac-
The Focus Group Moderator
tors should be considered when determining the composition of a particular
group?
4. What steps may a researcher take to ensure the participation of potential
group members?
5. What types of individuals are difficult to recruit for participation in focus
groups? Why? For each group identified, list sorne ways to increase the prob-
ability of their participation.
6. What is the purpose of a focus group interview guide? How does such a guide
differ from a survey questionnaire? What are the reasons for this difference?
7. What are the two principal rules governing the design of an interview guide?
T hroughout the first four chapters of the book, we have suggested that an effec-
tive moderator is one of the keys to the collection of rich and valid insights
from focus groups. In this chapter, we examine the role of the moderator and con-
Ho.w does one resolve conflicts between these two principles? sider issues related to bis or her selection and training. In so doing, we draw on the
substantial literature on interviewer effects and interviewing (Blom & Korbmacher,
8. What is a "rolling" interview guide? Why is it used? What are its advantages
and disadvantages? - 2013; Kreuter, 2008; Schaeffer, Dykema, & Maynard, 2010; Stewart & Cash, 2011).
It is clear that what distinguishes the most effective focus group moderators from
9. What is a relatively structured question? How should structure be introduced
the others is a function of both individual and situational factors. These include
into a focus group question? Why is the use of structure necessary?
personal characteristics (e.g., age, sex, personality), educational background and
10. What factors should be .considered when selecting the wording of questions training, amount of experience as a moderator, and situational characteristics, such
used in the focus group interview guide? Why are these factors important? as the sensitivity of the topic, the scope and depth of coverage required, the condu-
11. Why is pretesting a necessary step in developing an interview guide? How civeness of the physical setting, and time constraints. Mastering the technique of
would a researcher pretest an interview guide? ¡:rioderating a focus group is an art requiring a moderator to wear many hats and
assume different roles during the course of even a single focus group. He or she has
Exercise: Select a topic. Develop a description of the type of individuals the unenviable task of balancing the requirements of sensitivity and empathy, on
you would includein a focus group discussion of this topic. Indicate how you one hand, and objectivity and detachment, on the other.
would recruit such individuals. Develop an interview guide for a discussion of An important first question is whether a moderator should be selected
this topic. .on the basis of specific requirements related to the purpose of the group, the
group's composition, and the location of the group or whether there exists an
ideal general-purpose moderator who can handle most if not ali focus group
interviews. To answer this question, we need to examine what it takes to be a
good moderator or facilitator and then see if these requirements or standards
are representative of an individual or require an interaction of specific char-
acteristics of the moderator with characteristics of the group. For example,
Karger (1987) suggests the following characteristics of a successful m.oderator:
77
78 FOCUS GROUPS: THEORY AND PRACTICE The Focus Group Moderator 79
The best facilitator has unobtrusive chameleon-like qualities; gently draws consumers may be regarded as social influence; however, leaders occupy powerful
into the process; deftly encourages them to interact with one another for optirnum positions in a group" (p. 125). Two classic definitions serve to illustrate the
synergy; lets the intercourse flow naturally with a minimum of intervention;,listens process nature of leadership:
openly and deeply; uses silence well; plays back consumer statements in a di¡;tilling
waywhich brings out more refined thoughts or explanations; and remains cor:rip!etely Leadership is the process of influencing group activities toward goal setting and
non-authoritarian and non-judgmental. Yet the facilitator will subtly guide the pro- goal achievement. (Stogdill, 1950, p. 3)
ceeding when necessary and intervene to cope with various kinds of troublesome
participants who may impair the productive group process. (p. 54)
Leadership is interpersonal influence, exercised in situation and directed, through
the communication process, toward the attainment of a specified goal or goals.
Stewart and Cash (2011) emphasize th~t the choice of the moderator is (Tannenbaum, Weschler, & Massarik, 1961, p. 24)
critica! and point out the following:
There is sorne communality among the numerous definitions of leader-
The interviewer must be skilled not only in listening insightfully to interactions ship: It involves people, influence, and goals. Certainly, by these criteria, the
and asking open-ended, probing questions but in drawing out group members
focus group moderator is a leader. Carter (1954) in his classic study ofleaders
who may be hesitant to express or defend opinions or inhibited by the give-and-
take of a free-flowing interaction among 8 or 10 interviewees. (p. 7) identified three broad clusters of traits related to leadership:
Group goal facilitation, which includes those abilities that are necessary to help the
Given these broad expectations of moderators, let us now review sorne of group attain its goal (e.g., insight, intelligence, knowing how to get things done)
the theoretical bases for the art of moderating. Insights on effective moderating
can be drawn from three major streams of research and practice: (1) interview- Group sociability, which includes those factors that are necessary to keep the group
ing techniques and tactícs, (2) leadership studies, and (3) group dynamics. This functioning smoothly (e.g., sociability, cooperativeness, popularity)
knowledge together with an adequate understanding of the research problem
can help improve the effectiveness of moderating in four ways: (1) selection of Individual prominence, which includes factors related to the person's desire for
the moderator, (2) preparation of the moderator, (3) the process of moderat- group recogoition (e.g., inítiative, self-confidence, persistence) (pp. 477-484)
ing, and (4) analysis of focus group data (including evaluating the unintended
consequences of moderator behavior). As pointed out in Chapter 2, the emergence of leadership is influenced
This chapter focuses primarily on the application of interviewing principles by individual characteristics, such as personality and intelligence, and inter-
and knowledge of leadership styles to moderator selection and preparation. personal processes, such as group cohesiveness, compatibility, and the homo-
The d.ynamics of moderating a focus group and the role of the moderator in geneity/heterogeneity of the group. Furthermore, situational variables such
the analysis of focus group data are discussed in greater detall in Chapter 6. We as spatial position and location in the communication network can affect the
begin with a brief review of leadership styles and interviewing strategies and probability of a person becoming a leader. For example, a person occupying a
discuss their implications for different styles of moderating. This is followed by a spatial position providing the maximum eye contact has a greater probability
discussion of the issues related to moderator training, preparation, and selection. of emerging as a leader.
Also, central positions in communication networks enhance leadership
selection and emergence. Thus, the focus group moderator is not only the
Leadership and Group Dynamics nominal leader of the group but is generally seated in a central position within
~e group, which tends to reinforce the leadership role. These factors alone,
The focus group moderator is placed by default in the role of nominal leader however, do not make the moderator a leader. Personal traits and behavior
of the group. Exactly what this role entails will vary from group to group, how- must reinforce the initial role designation, or the moderator will lose his or her
ever. There are many interpretations ofleadership. It has often been associated leadership position to others in the group.
with motivation, exercise of social influence (power), giving direction, and The traditional approach to studying leadership, called the trait approach,
providing a good example for others in the group. Pennington (2002) observes has been based on the assumption that leaders possess certain traits or char-
that it is important to distinguish between leader and leadership: "Leadership acteristics that distinguish them from nonleaders. Thus, one might expect
Exploring the Variety of Random
Documents with Different Content
Mount Hólma 436
Mount Kurúlu 439
Ground-plan of Huts 440
Couch-screen 441
Picturesque Cone 442
Mountain Range beyond Saráwu 445
Mount Konkel 446
The Governor’s Audience-hall 463
Picturesque Cone 476
Ground-plan of Hut in Múbi 480
Household Furniture 480
Handbill 482
Shield 484
Different Shape of Huts 489
Granary 569
Harpoon 596
Ornamented Granary 601
Ground-plan of Building 602
MAP OF NORTH AND CENTRAL AFRICA, SHOWING DR. BARTH’S ROUTES.
TRAVELS AND DISCOVERIES
IN
AFRICA.
CHAPTER I.
FROM TUNIS TO TRIPOLI.
Mr. Richardson was waiting in Paris for despatches, when Mr.

Overweg and I reached Tunis, by way of Philippeville and Bona, on
the 15th of December, 1849; and having, through the kind
interference of Mr. Ferrier, the British vice-consul, been allowed to
enter the town after six days’ quarantine, we began immediately to
provide ourselves with articles of dress, while in the meantime we
took most interesting daily rides to the site of ancient Carthage.
Having procured many useful articles for our journey, and having
found a servant, the son of a freed slave from Gober, we left Tunis
on the 30th of December, and passed the first night in Hammám el
Enf. Early next morning we followed the charming route by
Krumbália, which presents a no less vivid specimen of the beauty
and natural fertility of the Tunisian country than of the desolate state
to which it is at present reduced. We then passed the fine gardens of
Turki, a narrow spot of cultivation in a wide desolate plain of the
finest soil; and leaving el Khwín to our right, we reached el Arbʿain.
Both these places enjoy a peculiar celebrity with the natives. El
Khwín is said to have been once a populous place; but nearly all its
inhabitants were destroyed by a spring of bituminous water, which
according to tradition, afterwards disappeared. El Arbʿain, the locality
of the “forty” martyrs, is a holy place; and ʿAli, our muleteer, in his
pious zeal, took up a handful of the sacred earth and sprinkled it
over us. It is a most picturesque spot. Keeping then along the wild
plain covered with a thick underwood of myrtle, we beheld in the
distance the highly picturesque and beautiful Mount Zaghwán, the
Holy Mountain of the ancient inhabitants, which rose in a majestic
form; and we at length reached Bir el buwíta, “the well of the little
closet,” at one o’clock in the afternoon. The “little closet,” however,
had given place to a most decent-looking whitewashed khán, where
we took up our quarters in a clean room. But our buoyant spirits did
not allow us long repose; and a quarter before eleven at night we
were again on our mules.
I shall never forget this, the last night of the year 1849, which
opened to us a new era with many ordeals, and by our endurance of
which we were to render ourselves worthy of success. There were,
besides ourselves, our servants, and our two muleteers, four
horsemen of the Bey, and three natives from Jirbi. When midnight
came my fellow traveller and I saluted the new year with enthusiasm,
and with a cordial shake of the hand wished each other joy. Our
Mohammedan companions were greatly pleased when they were
informed of the reason of our congratulating each other, and wished
us all possible success for the new year. We had also reason to be
pleased with them; for by their not inharmonious songs they relieved
the fatigue of a long, sleepless, and excessively cold night.
Having made a short halt under the olive-trees at the side of the
dilapidated town of Herkla, and taken a morsel of bread, we moved
on with our poor animals without interruption till half an hour after
noon, when we reached the funduk (or caravanserai) Sidi Bú Jʿafer,
near Súsa, where we took up our quarters, in order to be able to
start again at night, the gates of the town being kept shut till morning.
Starting before three o’clock in the morning, we were exactly twelve
hours in reaching el Jem, with the famous Castle of the Prophetess,
still one of the most splendid monuments of Roman greatness,
overhanging the most shabby hovels of Mohammedan indifference.
On the way we had a fine view, towards the west, of the picturesque
Jebel Trutsa, along the foot of which I had passed on my former
wanderings, and of the wide, out-stretching Jebel Useleet.
Another ride of twelve hours brought us, on the 3rd of January,
1850, to Sfʿakes, where we were obliged to take up our quarters in
the town, as our land-journey was here at an end, and we were to
procure a vessel to carry us either direct to Tripoli, or to some other
point on the opposite side of the Lesser Syrtis. The journey by land
is not only expensive, particularly by people who are encumbered
with a good deal of luggage, as we then were, and very long and
tedious, but is also very unsafe, as I found from experience on my
former journey. The island of Jirbi, which forms the natural station of
the maritime intercourse between the regency of Tunis and that of
Tripoli, had been put under the strictest rules of quarantine, rather
from political considerations than from those of health, all intercourse
with the mainland having been cut off. It was therefore with great
difficulty that we succeeded in hiring a “gáreb” to carry us to Zwára,
in which we embarked in the forenoon of Saturday the 5th of
January.
During our two days’ stay in Sfʿakes we made the acquaintance of
a Jew calling himself Baránes, but who is in truth the Jew servant
named Jacob who accompanied Denham and Clapperton, and is
several times mentioned in the narrative of those enterprising
travellers as self-conceited and stubborn; yet he seems to be rather
a clever fellow, and in some way or other contrives to be on the best
terms with the governor. He communicated to us many anecdotes of
the former expedition, and, among other things, a very mysterious
history of a Danish traveller in disguise whom they met in Bórnu
coming all the way from Dar-Fúr through Wadaï. There is not the
least mention of such a meeting in the journal of the expedition, nor
has such an achievement of a European traveller ever been heard
of; and I can scarcely believe the truth of this story, though the Jew
was quite positive about it.
The vessel in which we embarked was as miserable as it could be,
there being only a small low cabin as high as a dog-kennel, and
measuring, in its greatest width, from six to seven feet, where I and
my companion were to pass the night. We thought that a run of forty-
eight hours, at the utmost, would carry us across the gulf; but the
winds in the Lesser Syrtis are extremely uncertain, and sometimes
so violent that a little vessel is obliged to run along the coast. At first
we went on tolerably well; but the wind soon became unfavourable,
and in the evening we were obliged to cast anchor opposite Nekta,
and, to our despair, were kept there till the afternoon of Tuesday,
when at length we were enabled to go forward in our frail little shell,
and reached Méheres—not Sidi Méheres, as it is generally called in
the maps—in the darkness of night. Having made up our minds
rather to risk anything than to be longer immured in such a
desperate dungeon as our gáreb, we went on shore early on
Wednesday morning with all our things, but were not able to
conclude a bargain with some Bedouin of the tribe of the Léffet, who
were watering their camels at the well.
The majestic ruins of a large castle, fortified at each corner with a
round tower, give the place a picturesque appearance from the
seaside. This castle is well known to be a structure of the time of
Ibrahim the Aghlabite. In the midst of the ruins is a small mosque.
But notwithstanding the ruinous state of the place, and the desolate
condition of its plantations, there is still a little industry going on,
consoling to the beholder in the midst of the devastation to which the
fine province of Byzacium, once the garden of Carthage, is at
present reduced. Several people were busily employed in the little
marketplace making mats; and in the houses looms, weaving
baracans, were seen in activity. But all around, the country
presented a frightful scene of desolation, there being no object to
divert the eye but the two apparently separate cones of Mount
Wuedrán, far in the distance to the west, said to be very rich in
sheep. The officer who is stationed here, and who showed us much
kindness, furnishing us with some excellent red radishes of
extraordinary size, the only luxury which the village affords, told us
that not less than five hundred soldiers are quartered upon this part
of the coast. On my former journey I had ample opportunity to
observe how the Tunisian soldiery eat up the little which has been
left to the peaceable inhabitants of this most beautiful, but most
unfortunate country.
Having spent two days and two nights in this miserable place
without being able to obtain camels, we resolved to try the sea once
more, in the morning of the 11th, when the wind became northerly;
but before the low-water allowed us to go on board, the wind again
changed, so that, when we at length got under weigh in the
afternoon, we could only move on with short tacks. But our captain,
protected as he was by the Promontory of Méheres, dared to enter
the open gulf. Quantities of large fish in a dying state, as is often the
case in this shallow water when the wind has been high, were
drifting round our boat. The sun was setting when we at length
doubled the promontory of Kasr Unga, which we had already clearly
distinguished on the 8th. However, we had now overcome the worst;
and when on the following morning I emerged from our suffocating
berth, I saw, to my great delight, that we were in the midst of the gulf,
having left the coast far behind us. I now heard from our raïs that,
instead of coasting as far as Tarf el má (“the border of the water”), a
famous locality in the innermost corner of the Lesser Syrtis, which
seems to preserve the memory of the former connection between
the gulf and the great Sebkha or Shot el Kebír (the “palus Tritonis”),
he had been so bold as to keep his little bark straight upon the
channel of Jirbi.
Our voyage now became interesting; for while we were advancing
at a fair rate, we had a charming view of the mountain-range, which
in clear contours extended along in the distance behind the date-
groves on the coast, seen only in faint outlines. The western part of
the chain is very low, and forms almost a group apart, but after
having been intersected by a gap or “gate,” the chain rises to greater
elevation, being divided, as it would seem from hence, into three
separate ranges enclosing fine valleys.
We had hoped to cross the difficult channel to-day; but the wind
failing, we were obliged to anchor and await the daylight, for it is not
possible to traverse the straits in the night, on account of their
extreme shallowness. Even in the light of the following day, when we
at length succeeded, our little bark, which drew only two or three
feet, struck twice, and we had some trouble to get afloat again. On
the conspicuous and elevated promontory the “Jurf,” or “Tarf el jurf,”
stood in ancient times a temple of Venus, the hospitable goddess of
the navigator. Here on my former journey I crossed with my horses
over from the main to the Island of Jirbi, while from the water I had
now a better opportunity of observing the picturesque character of
the rugged promontory. After traversing the shallow basin or
widening, we crossed the second narrowing, where the castles
which defended the bridge or “kantara,” the “pons Zitha” of the
Romans, now lie in ruins on the main as well as on the island, and
greatly obstruct the passage, the difficulty of which has obtained
celebrity from contests between Islam and Christianity in
comparatively modern times.
Having passed safely through this difficult channel, we kept
steadily on through the open sea; and doubling Rás Mʿamúra, near
to which our captain had a little date-grove and was cheerfully
saluted by his family and friends, we at length entered the harbour of
Zarzís, late in the afternoon of Sunday, and with some trouble got all
our luggage carried into the village, which is situated at some
distance. For although we had the worst part of the land journey now
before us, the border-district of the two regencies, with the unsafe
state of which I was well acquainted from my former journey, and
although we were insufficiently armed, we were disposed to endure
anything rather than the imprisonment to which we were doomed in
such a vessel as our Mohammed’s gáreb. I think, however, that this
nine days’ sail between Sfákes and Zarzís, a distance of less than a
hundred and twenty miles, was on the whole a very fair trial in the
beginning of an undertaking the success of which was mainly
dependent upon patience and resolute endurance. We were rather
fortunate in not only soon obtaining tolerable quarters, but also in
arranging without delay our departure for the following day, by hiring
two horses and three camels.
Zarzís consists of five separate villages—Kasr Bú ʿAli, Kasr
Mwanza, Kasr Welád Mohammed, Kasr Welád Sʿaid, and Kasr
Zawíya; the Bedouin in the neighbourhood belong to the tribe of the
Akára. The plantation also is formed into separate date-groves. The
houses are in tolerable repair and neatly whitewashed; but the
character of order and well-being is neutralised by a good many
houses in decay. Near the place there are also some Roman ruins,
especially a cistern of very great length; and at some distance is the
site of Medinet Ziyán, of which I have given a description in the
narrative of my former journey.
Besides the eight men attached to our five animals, we were
joined here by four pilgrims and three Tripolitan traders; we thus
made up a numerous body, armed with eight muskets, three
blunderbusses, and fourteen pistols, besides several straight
swords, and could venture upon the rather unsafe road to the south
of the Lake of Bibán, though it would have been far more agreeable
to have a few trustworthy people to rely on instead of these turbulent
companions. Entering soon, behind the plantation of Zarzís, a long
narrow sebkha, we were struck by the sterile and desolate character
of the country, which was only interrupted by a few small depressed
localities, where a little corn was cultivated. Keeping along this tract
of country, we reached the north-western corner of the Lake of
Bibán, or Bahéret el Bibán, after a little more than eight miles. This
corner has even at the present day the common name of Khashm el
kelb (the Dog’s Nose), while the former classical name of the whole
lake, Sebákh el keláb, was only known to Tayyef, the more learned
of my guides, who, without being questioned by me, observed that in
former times towns and rich cornfields had been where the lake now
is, but had been swallowed up by a sinking of the ground. The real
basin has certainly nothing in common with a sebkha, which means
a shallow hollow, incrusted with salt, which at times is dry and at
others forms a pool; for it is a deep gulf or fiord of the sea, with which
it is connected only by a narrow channel called Wád mtʿa el Bibán.
The nature of a sebkha belongs at present only to its shores, chiefly
to the locality called Makháda, which, indenting the country to a
great distance, is sometimes very difficult to pass, and must be
turned by a wide circuitous path, which is greatly feared on account
of the neighbourhood of the Udérna, a tribe famous for its highway
robberies. Having traversed the Makháda (which at present was dry)
without any difficulty, we entered upon good arable soil, and
encamped, after sunset, at about half a mile distance from a Bedouin
encampment.
Starting from here the following day, we soon became aware that
the country was not so thinly inhabited as we had thought; for
numerous herds covered the rich pasture-grounds, while droves of
gazelles, now and then, attested that the industry of man did not
encroach here upon the freedom of the various orders of creation.
Leaving the path near the ruins of a small building situated upon a
hill, I went with Tayyef and the Khalífa to visit the ruins of a Roman
station on the border of the Bahéra, which, under the name of el
Medaina, has a great fame amongst the neighbouring tribes, but
which, with a single exception, are of small extent and bad
workmanship. This exception is the quay, which is not only of interest
in itself, formed as it is of regularly hewn stones, in good repair, but
of importance as an evident proof that the lake was much deeper in
ancient times than it is now. Traversing from this spot the sebkha,
which our companions had gone round, we soon overtook them, and
kept over fine pasture-grounds called el Fehén, and further on,
Súllub, passing, a little after noon, a group of ruins near the shore,
called Kitfi el hamár. At two o’clock in the afternoon, we had directly
on our right a slight slope which, according to the unanimous
statement of our guides and companions, forms the frontier between
the two regencies; and keeping along it we encamped an hour
afterwards between the slope and the shore, which a little further on
forms the deep gulf called Mirsá Buréka.
Starting at an early hour, we reached after a march of ten miles
the ruins of a castle on the sea-shore, called Búrj el Melha, to which
those of a small village, likewise built of hewn stone, are joined,
while a long and imposing mole called el Míná juts out into the gulf.
Four and a half miles further on we reached the conspicuous hill on
the top of which is the chapel of the saint Sidi Sʿaid ben Salah,
sometimes called Sidi Gházi, and venerated by such of the natives
as are not attached to the Puritan sect of el Mádani, of which I shall
speak hereafter. All our companions went there to say a short prayer.
Here we left the shore, and, having watered our animals near a well
and passed the chapel of Sidi Sʿaid, close to which there are some
ruins, we passed with expedition over fine meadows till we
approached the plantation of Zowára, when, leaving Mr. Overweg
and my people behind, I rode on with the Khalífa, in order to procure
quarters from my former friend Sʿaid bu Semmín, who, as I had
heard to my great satisfaction, had been restored to the government
of that place. He had just on that very day returned from a visit of
some length in the capital, and was delighted to see me again; but
he was rather astonished when he heard that I was about to
undertake a far more difficult and dangerous journey than my former
one along the coast, in which he well knew that I had had a very
narrow escape. However, he confided in my enterprising spirit and in
the mercy of the Almighty, and thought if anybody was likely to do it,
I was the man.
We had now behind us the most dreary part of our route, having
entered a district which in ancient times numbered large and wealthy
cities, among which Sabratha stands foremost, and which even in
the present miserable state of the country is dotted with pleasant
little date-groves, interrupted by fine pasture-grounds. In the
westernmost part of this tract, however, with the exception of the
plantation of Zowára, all the date-groves, as those of Rikdalíye,
Jemíl, el Meshíah, and Jenán ben Síl, lie at a considerable distance
from the coast, while the country near the sea is full of sebkhas, and
very monotonous, till the traveller reaches a slight ridge of sand-hills
about sixteen miles east from Zowára, which is the border between
the dreary province of that government and a more favoured tract
belonging to the government of Bú-ʿAjíla, and which lies a little
distance inland. Most charming was the little plantation, of Kasr
álaiga, which exhibited traces of industry and improvement.
Unfortunately our horses were too weak and too much fatigued to
allow us to visit the sites either of Sabratha or Pontes. The ruins of
Sabratha are properly called Kasr álaiga, but the name has been
applied to the whole neighbourhood; to the ancient Pontes seem to
belong the ruins of Zowára eʾ sherkíyeh, which are considerable.
Between them lies the pretty grove of Om el hallúf.
About four o’clock in the afternoon we traversed the charming little
valley called Wady bú-harída, where we watered our horses; and
then following the camels, and passing Asermán with its little
plantation, which is bordered by a long and deep sebkha, we took up
our quarters for the night in an Arab encampment, which was
situated in the midst of the date-grove of ʿUkbah, and presented a
most picturesque appearance, the large fires throwing a magic light
upon the date-trees. But there are no roses without thorns: we were
unfortunately persuaded to make ourselves comfortable in an Arab
tent, as we had no tent of our own; and the enormous swarms of
fleas not only disturbed our night’s rest, but followed us to Tripoli.
We had a long stretch the following day to reach the capital, which
we were most anxious to accomplish, as we expected Mr.
Richardson would have arrived before us in consequence of our own
tedious journey; and having sent the Khalífa in advance to keep the
gate open for us, we succeeded in reaching the town after an
uninterrupted march of thirteen hours and a half, and were most
kindly received by Mr. Crowe, Her Majesty’s consul-general, and the
vice-consul Mr. Reade, with whom I was already acquainted. We
were surprised to find that Mr. Richardson had not even yet been
heard of, as we expected he would come direct by way of Malta. But
he did not arrive till twelve days after. With the assistance of Mr.
Reade, we had already finished a great deal of our preparations, and
would have gladly gone on at once; but neither the boat, nor the
instruments, nor the arms or tents had as yet arrived, and a great
deal of patience was required. However, being lodged in the neat
house of the former Austrian consul, close to the harbour, and which
commands a charming prospect, our time passed rapidly by.
On the 25th of January Mr. Reade presented Mr. Overweg and me
to Yezíd Bashá, the present governor, who received us with great
kindness and good feeling. On the 29th we had a pleasant meeting
with Mr. Frederic Warrington on his return from Ghadámes, whither
he had accompanied Mr. Charles Dickson, who on the 1st of January
had made his entry into that place as the first European agent and
resident. Mr. F. Warrington is perhaps the most amiable possible
specimen of an Arabianized European. To this gentleman, whose
zeal in the objects of the expedition was beyond all praise, I must be
allowed to pay my tribute as a friend. On setting out in 1850, he
accompanied me as far as the Ghurián; and on my joyful return in
1855 he received me in Murzuk. By the charm of friendship he
certainly contributed his share to my success.
CHAPTER II.
TRIPOLI.—THE PLAIN AND THE MOUNTAIN-
SLOPE; THE ARAB AND THE BERBER.
As soon as it became apparent that the preparations for our final

departure for the interior would require at least a month, Mr.
Overweg and I resolved to employ the interval in making a
preliminary excursion through the mountainous region that
encompasses Tripoli in a radius of from sixty to eighty miles. With
this view, we hired two camels, with a driver each, and four donkeys,
with a couple of men, for ourselves and our two servants,
Mohammed Belál, the son of a liberated Háusa slave, and Ibrahim, a
liberated Bagirmi slave, whom we had been fortunate enough to
engage here; and through the Consul’s influence we procured a
shoush, or officer, to accompany us the whole way. Neither the
instruments provided by Her Majesty’s Government, nor the tents
and arms, had as yet arrived. But Mr. Overweg had a good sextant,
and I a good chronometer, and we were both of us provided with
tolerably good compasses, thermometers, and an aneroid
barometer. Mr. Frederic Warrington, too, was good enough to lend us
a tent.
We had determined to start in the afternoon of the 4th of February,
1850, so as to pass the first night in Ghargásh; but meeting with
delays, we did not leave the town till after sunset. We preferred
encamping, therefore, in the Meshíah, a little beyond the mosque,
under the palm-trees, little knowing at the time what an opportunity
we had lost of spending a very cheerful evening. Soon after starting,
we emerged from the palm-groves which constitute the charm of
Tripoli, and continued our march over the rocky ground. Being a little
in advance with the shoush, I halted to wait for the rest, when a very
peculiar cry, that issued from the old Roman building on the
roadside, called “Kasr el Jahalíyeh,” perplexed us for a moment. But
we soon learnt, to our great surprise, not unmixed with regret, that it
was our kind friend Frederic Warrington, who had been waiting for us
here the whole night. From the top of the ruin, which stands on an
isolated rock left purposely in the midst of a quarry, there is a widely
extensive view. It appears that, before the Arabs built the castle, this
site was occupied by Roman sepulchres. A little further on we
passed the stone of Sidi ʿArífa. This stone had fallen upon the head
of a workman who was digging a well. The workman, so runs the
legend, escaped unhurt; and at Sidi ʿArífa’s word the stone once
more sprung to the surface. Further on, near the sea-shore, we
passed the chapel of Sidi Salah, who is said to have drawn by magic
to his feet, from the bottom of the sea, a quantity of fish ready
dressed.
From this point our kind friend Mr. Frederic Warrington returned
with his followers to the town, and we were left to ourselves. We then
turned off from the road, and entered the fine date-plantation of
Zenzúr, celebrated in the fourteenth century, as one of the finest
districts of Barbary, by the Sheikh eʾ Tijáni, passing by a great
magazine of corn, and a mouldering clay-built castle, in which were
quartered a body of horsemen of the Urshefána. Fine olive-trees
pleasingly alternated with the palm-grove, while the borders of the
broad sandy paths were neatly fenced with the Cactus opuntia.
Having passed our former place of encampment in Sayáda, we were
agreeably surprised to see at the western end of the plantation a few
new gardens in course of formation; for there is a tax, levied not on
the produce of the tree, but on the tree itself, which naturally stands
in the way of new plantations. Having halted for a short time at noon
near the little oasis of Sidi Ghár, where the ground was beautifully
adorned with a profusion of lilies; and having passed Jedaim, we
encamped towards evening in the wide courtyard of the Kasr
Gamúda, where we were kindly received by the Kaimakám
Mustapha Bey, whom I was providentially destined to meet twice
again, viz. on my outset from, and on my final return to, Fezzan. The
whole plantation of Zawíya, of which Gamúda forms a part, is said to
contain a hundred and thirty thousand palm-trees.
Ibrahim gave me an interesting account to-day of Negroland.
Though a native of Bagirmi, he had rambled much about Mandara,
and spoke enthusiastically of the large and strong mountain-town
Karawa, his report of which I afterwards found quite true; of the town
of Mendif, situated at the foot of the great mountain of the same
name; and of Mora, which he represented as very unsafe on account
of bands of robbers,—a report which has been entirely confirmed by
Mr. Vogel. Our chief interest at that time was concentrated upon
Mandara, which was then supposed to be the beginning of the
mountainous zone of Central Africa.
While the camels were pursuing the direct track, we ourselves,
leaving our former road, which was parallel to the sea-coast, and
turning gradually towards the south, made a circuit through the
plantation, in order to procure a supply of dates and corn, as we
were about to enter on the zone of nomadic existence. The morning
was very fine, and the ride pleasant. But we had hardly left the
plantation, when we exchanged the firm turf for deep sand-hills
which were broken further on by a more favoured soil, where melons
were cultivated in great plenty; and again, about four miles beyond
the plantation, the country once more assumed a genial aspect. I
heard that many of the inhabitants of Zawíya habitually exchange
every summer their more solid town residences for lighter dwellings
here in the open air. A little before noon we obtained a fine view over
the diversified outlines of the mountains before us. In the plain there
are many favoured spots bearing corn, particularly the country at the
foot of Mount Mʿamúra, which forms a very conspicuous object from
every side. As we advanced further, the country became well
inhabited, and everywhere, at some distance from the path, were
seen encampments of the tribe of the Belása who occupy all the
grounds between the Urshefána and the BuʿAjíla, while the Urjímma,
a tribe quite distinct from the Urghámma, have their settlements
south-west, between the Nuwayíl and the BuʿAjíla. All these Arabs
hereabouts provide themselves with water from the well Núr eʾ dín,
which we left at some distance on our left.
The encampment near which we pitched our tent in the evening
belonged to the chief of the Belása, and consisted of seven tents,
close to the slope of a small hilly chain. We had scarcely pitched our
tent when rain set in, accompanied by a chilly current of air which
made the encampment rather uncomfortable. The chief, Mohammed
Chélebi, brought us, in the evening, some bazín, the common dish of
the Arab of Tripoli. We wanted to regale him with coffee, but, being
afraid of touching the hot drink, and perhaps suspicious of poison, he
ran away.
Continuing our march southward through the fine and slightly
undulating district of el Habl, where water is found in several wells, at
the depth of from fifteen to sixteen fathoms, we gradually
approached the mountain-chain. The strong wind, which filled the
whole air with sand, prevented us from obtaining a very interesting
view from a considerable eminence called el Ghunna, the
terminating and culminating point of a small chain of hills, which we
ascended. For the same reason, when I and Ibrahim, after lingering
some time on this interesting spot, started after our camels, we lost
our way entirely, the tracks of our little caravan being totally effaced,
and no path traceable over the undulating sandy ground. At length
we reached firmer grassy soil, and, falling in with the path, overtook
our people at the “Bir el Ghánem.”
Hence we went straight towards the slope of the mountains, and
after little more than an hour’s march reached the first advanced hill
of the chain, and began to enter on it by going up one of the wadys
which open from its flanks. It takes its name from the ethel (Tamarix
orientalis), which here and there breaks the monotony of the scene,
and gradually widens to a considerable plain bounded by majestic
ridges. From this plain we descended into the deep and rugged
ravine of the large Wady Sheikh, the abrupt cliffs of which presented
to view beautiful layers of red and white sandstone, with a lower
horizontal layer of limestone, and we looked out for a well-sheltered
place, as the cold wind was very disagreeable. The wady has its
name from its vicinity to the chapel, or zawíya, of the Merábet Bu-
Máti, to which is attached a large school. On setting out from this
hollow we ascended the other side, and soon obtained an interesting
view of the varied outlines of the mountains before us, with several
half-deserted castles of the Arab middle ages on the summits of the
hills. The castle of the Welád Merabetín, used by the neighbouring
tribes chiefly as a granary, has been twice destroyed by the Turks;
but on the occasion of nuptial festivities, the Arabs, in conformity with
ancient usage, still fire their muskets from above the castle. The
inhabitants of these mountains, who have a strong feeling of liberty,
cling to their ancient customs with great fondness.
We descended again into Wady Sheikh, which, winding round,
crossed our path once more. The regular layers of limestone, which
present a good many fossils, with here and there a layer of marl,
form here, during heavy rains, a pretty little cascade at the foot of the
cliffs. We lost much time by getting entangled in a branch of the
wady, which had no outlet, but exhibited the wild scenery of a glen,
worn by the torrents which occasionally rush down the abrupt rocky
cliffs. Having regained the direct road, we had to cross a third time
the Wady Sheikh at the point where it is joined by Wady Ginna, or
Gilla, which also we crossed a little further on. In the fertile zone
along the coast, the monotony of the palm-groves becomes almost
fatiguing; but here we were much gratified at the sight of the first
group of date-trees, which was succeeded by others, and even by a
small orchard of fig-trees. Here, as we began to ascend the elevated
and abrupt eastern cliffs of the valley, which at first offer only a few
patches of cultivated plateau, succeeded further on by olive-trees, a
fine view opened before us, extending to the south-east as far as the
famous Roman monument called Enshéd eʾ Sufét, which is very
conspicuous. Having waited here for our camels, we reached the
first village, whose name, “Ta-smeraye,” bears, like that of many
others, indubitable proof that the inhabitants of these mountainous
districts belong originally to the Berber race, though at present only a
few of them speak their native tongue. These people had formerly a
pleasant and comfortable abode in this quarter, but having frequently
revolted against the Turks, they have been greatly reduced, and their
villages at present look like so many heaps of ruins.
Having passed some other hamlets in a similar state of decay, and
still going through a pleasant but rather arid country, we reached the
oppressor’s stronghold, the “Kasr il Jebel,” as it is generally called,
although this part of the mountains bears the special name of Yefren.
It lies on the very edge of the steep rocky cliffs, and affords an
extensive view over the plain. But though standing in a commanding
position, it is itself commanded by a small eminence a few hundred
yards eastward, where there was once a large quadrangular
structure, now in ruins. The castle, which at the time of our visit was
the chief instrument in the hands of the Turks for overawing the
mountaineers, contained a garrison of four hundred soldiers. It has
only one bastion with three guns, at the southern corner, and was
found by Mr. Overweg to be 2,150 feet above the level of the sea.
The high cliffs inclosing the valley are most beautifully and regularly
stratified in layers of gypsum and limestone; and a man may walk
almost round the whole circumference of the ravine on the same
layer of the latter stone, which has been left bare,—the gypsum, of
frailer texture, having been carried away by the torrents of rain which
rush violently down the steep descent. From the little eminence
above mentioned, there is a commanding view over the valleys and
the high plain towards the south.
After our tent had been pitched, we received a visit from Haj
Rashíd, the Kaimakám or governor, who is reckoned the second
person in the Bashalík, and has the whole district from Zwára as far
as Ghadámes towards the south-west and the Tarhóna towards the
south-east, under his military command. His salary is 4,600
mahhbúbs annually, or about 720l. He had previously been Basha of
Adana, in Cilicia; and we indulged, to our mutual gratification, in
reminiscences of Asia Minor.
Early in the morning I walked to a higher eminence at some
distance eastward from the castle, which had attracted my attention
the day before. This conspicuous hill also was formerly crowned with
a tower or small castle; but nothing but a solitary rustic dwelling now
enlivens the solitude. The view was very extensive, but the strong
wind did not allow of exact compass observations. While my
companion remained near the castle, engaged in his geological
researches, I agreed with our shoush and a Zintáni lad whom I
accidentally met here, and who on our journey to Fezzan proved
very useful, to undertake a longer excursion towards the west, in
order to see something more of this interesting and diversified slope
of the plateau.
I was anxious to visit a place called Ta-gherbúst, situated on the
north side of the castle, along the slope of a ravine which runs
westward into the valley; accordingly, on leaving the site of our
encampment, we deviated at first a little northwards. Ta-gherbúst is
said to have been a rich and important place in former times. Some
of its inhabitants possessed as many as ten slaves; but at present it
is a heap of ruins, with scarcely twenty-five inhabited houses. From
hence, turning southward, we descended gradually along the steep
slope, while above our heads the cliffs rose in picturesque majesty,
beautifully adorned by scattered date-trees, which, at every level
spot, sprung forth from the rocky ground, and gave to the whole
scene a very charming character. A fountain which gushed out from
a cavern on a little terrace at the foot of the precipice, and fed a
handsome group of date-trees, was one of the most beautiful objects
that can be imagined.
The Turks, two years ago, made a small path leading directly
down from the castle to this fountain, which supplies them with
water. After sketching this beautiful spot while the animals were
watering, we followed a more gradual descent into the valley of el
Ghasás, which here with a rough level widens to a plain, while its
upper or southern part, called Wady Rumíye, forms a very narrow
and picturesque ravine. We then continued our march in a westerly
direction, having on our right the plain extending, with slight
undulations, towards the sea, and on our left the majestic offshoots
of the plateau jutting into the plain like vast promontories, with a
general elevation of two thousand feet. This grand feature is
evidently due to the waters which, in ancient times, must have
rushed down the slope of the plateau in mighty streams. At present,
the chief character of the country is aridity. On asking my guide
whether great torrents are not still occasionally formed along those
ravines strong enough to reach the sea, he replied, that once only—
forty-four years ago—such a torrent was formed, which, passing by
Zenzúr, gave a red colour to the sea as far as the Island of Jirbi. He

Download ebooks file Focus Groups Theory and Practice 3rd Edition David W. Stewart all chapters

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Download ebooks file Focus Groups Theory and Practice 3rd Edition David W. Stewart all chapters

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Download ebooks file Focus Groups Theory and Practice 3rd Edition David W. Stewart all chapters

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Download the full version of the ebook at ebookfinal.

Focus Groups Theory and Practice 3rd Edition David

Download more ebook instantly today at https://ebookfinal.com

Focus Groups Supporting Effective Product Development 1st

Gastroenterology Clinical Focus High yield GI and

Modus Vivendi Liberalism Theory and Practice 1st Edition

Groups with Prescribed Quotient Groups and Associated

The Static and Dynamic Continuum Theory of Liquid Crystals

Lawyer Negotiation Theory Practice and Law 3rd Edition Jay

Engineering noise control theory and practice 3rd ed

Interest Rate Modeling Theory and Practice 3rd Edition

SAGE Publlcations, lnc.

Library ofCongress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

definition, an exercise in group dynamics, and the conduct of a group-as well

cutter" groups conducted by relatively unskilled moderators. Although we believe

Prem N. Shamdasani, PhD, is Associate Professor of Marketing; Associate

Border Crossings: The Behavioral Science

were led by individuals with backgrounds in social psychology, experimental

interaction. For example, Mehrabian and Diamond (1971) observed that

INTERPERSONAL DISTANCE openness of interpersonal communication. Therefore, research fin~ings ~ased

likely to affect a group's behavioral dynamics. In the next chapter, we con-

l. An adequate understanding of group dynamics is an essential prerequisite for

PLACE It is important to recognize that the amount of direction provided by the

ANALYSIS population may be sufficient to determine whether the humor used in an

Applications, Advantages, and Limitations

in individual interviews. Differences of opinion among group members also

THE MODERATOR ANO INTERVIEW GUIDE

SOME PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS

l. What are the key characteristics of a focus group?

5. Why is it important to have a clear defrnition of the research question(s) prior

F ocus groups are conducted to obtain specific types of information from a

Mr. Richardson was waiting in Paris for despatches, when Mr.

As soon as it became apparent that the preparations for our final

You might also like