Organising focus group interviews usually requires more planning than other types of interviewing as getting people to group gatherings can be difficult and setting up appropriate venues with adequate recording facilities requires a lot of time. The recommended number of people per group is usually six to ten (Macintosh 1993), in our research we used 10 participants and a moderator/facilitator and it lasted approximately an hour. The setting for the research was at the unit lecture theatre, this was a good setting as neutral locations can be helpful for avoiding either negative or positive associations with a particular site or building and the lecture theatre was where the participants had their previous lectures. The participants were seated on seats setup in a circle at the front of the lecture theatre so they were all facing each other and the people observing were facing them. The participants selected for this research were volunteers which the lecturer selected at the previous lecture. The group consisted of both male and female participants and of different ages.
The research topic was selected by voting, at the start of the process the lecturer wrote down ideas and topics which students suggested to her at the time and some of the topics were disregarded by the process of elimination. When there was only 3 topics left the researchers were then asked to vote again to finalise the selection. Once the topic was chosen, the lecturer created the topic questions made them available to the researchers via WebCt.
The recording of data in this research was a rather difficult one. In any research one of the most important aspects is the recording of data, as the aim of the research relies heavily on the data recorded. The researcher had to make sure that data recorded was clear, concise and structured. The method that I used consisted of a dividing the recording sheet into two vertical sections, much like a table. On the left side I recorded the discussion such as the topics that the participants were discussing, and on the right hand side the observation, this being the details about who addressed what issue, their age/gender and body language etc. . The lecture theatre was quiet large and the participants did not have microphones so this meant that they had to speak loud and clear for the researchers to be able to hear. The researchers were also asked to move down to a more comfortable position where they could hear the participants better. Most researchers recorded data on sheets, the use of tape recorders were not allowed as the participants stated that they wouldn’t feel comfortable and so it would be against research ethics to allow it
Results
In this research the data was analysed using the grounded theory. The aim in analysing the data is to formulate a hypothesis based on the data collected in the research (Glaser, 1998). . I generated a hypothesis by constantly comparing conceptualized data on different levels of abstraction; I did not aim for the "truth" but to conceptualize "what's going on" using empirical data. A fundamental property of the theory that I considered was that “all is data”, that means that everything that got in my way when studying a certain area of data, not only questions and responses but anything that helped me generate concepts for the emerging theory was data. I then used open coding to conceptualise written data and transcripts line by line. In the beginning of the study everything was coded in order to find out about the research questions and how was it being discussed in the focus group. This was a difficult stage as many concepts came up in the discussion that had to be coded and compared.
I found that many participants were getting off track as the data which I coded did not relate to the any of the research questions. Often participants talked about themselves and their experiences which led the group off to another topic, the facilitator often having to bring them back on track, an example would be the discussion that the moderator brought about which was “what sort of sex is ok? and sort isn’t?”, this topics then leading onto IVF (In-vitro fertilisation) and eventually ending up with the context of children, which then continued being about children for a number of minutes until the moderator asks the group “how did a sex and relationship discussion turn into a discussion about children?”. A lot of the time the participants were contributing almost as if they were trying to impress the audience, a male participant in his 20’s stating “I was asked by a lesbian couple to give sperm” supports this theory. Another issue that the participants seemed to be concerned with was what parents and society thought of them regarding different relationships. At the very beginning of the discussion the moderator opened the discussion by asking about the different types of relationships, and one participant (female in her early 20’s) stating “I would be very worried about what my parents would think of me if I were to fall pregnant today”, which had nothing to do with the types of relationships.
Discussion and Conclusion
The ethical considerations for focus groups are the same for most other methods of social research. When selecting participants, researchers must ensure that full information about the purpose and uses of participant's contributions is given. The moderator in this research did so before the exercise begun and fully informed the participants. Not pressuring the participants was also good practice by the facilitator, she notified the participants that if at any they do not want to participate in the research anymore they’re free to walk out or just not say anything. A particular ethical issue to consider in the case of focus groups is the handling of sensitive material and confidentiality given that there will always be more than one participant in the group. The moderator clarified that each participant’s contribution will be shared with everyone in the room, she also asked the participant’s permission about the use of tape reorders which the participants rejected due to a fact that they might not feel comfortable with it and so it might effect their contribution to the group. Participants need to be encouraged to keep confidential what they hear during the meeting and researchers have the responsibility to keep data anonymous.This was outlined very clearly by the moderator at the start of the exercise which had a very big contribution towards good practice.overall the research ethics were very ell maintained by the facilitator.
The results in this research show that there is an inconsistency between the research topic and what the participants discussed and covered. , It is not always easy to identify the most appropriate participants for a focus group. If a group is too heterogeneous, whether in terms of gender or class, or in terms of professional and ‘lay’ perspectives, the differences between participants can make a considerable impact on their contributions. Alternatively, if a group is homogenous with regard to specific characteristics, diverse opinions and experiences may not be revealed. Participants need to feel comfortable with each other. Meeting with others whom they think of as possessing similar characteristics or levels of understanding about a given topic, will be more appealing than meeting with those who are perceived to be different (Morgan 1988). It’s sometimes difficult to know what is being said by the participant is what they’re actually thinking, or if they’re trying to impress others in the group, or even what they’re saying is true. A lot of the times I noticed that the participants stuck to the topic of children, a lot of the times they were sliding off track and discussing issues that didn’t relate to the research topic. Another problem that could be seen is that the participants had seen the research questions beforehand, therefore they would’ve been able to prepare for the questions and give answers that weren’t “spontaneous”, such as at the beginning where the discussion starts off about different kinds of relationships and the female participant starts off by talking about pregnancy which I found very confusing and suspicious to as how much the participants had planned for the exercise.
There are also benefits to focus group study. Kitzinger (1994, 1995) argues that interaction is the crucial feature of focus groups because the interaction between participants highlights their view of the world, the language they use about an issue and their values and beliefs about a situation. Interaction also enables participants to ask questions of each other, as well as to re-evaluate and reconsider their own understandings of their specific experiences. Another benefit is that focus groups draw out information in a way which allows researchers to find out why an issue is important, as well as what is salient about it (Morgan 1988). As a result, the gap between what people say and what they do can be better understood (Lankshear 1993). If multiple understandings and meanings are revealed by participants, multiple explanations of their behaviour and attitudes will be more readily distinguished.
On a practical note, focus groups can be difficult to assemble. It may not be easy to get a representative sample and focus groups may discourage certain people from participating, for example those who are not very articulate or confident, and those who have communication problems or special needs. The method of focus group discussion may also discourage some people from trusting others with sensitive or personal information. In such cases personal interviews or the use of workbooks alongside focus groups may be a more suitable approach. Finally, focus groups are not fully confidential or anonymous, because the material is shared with the others in the group. Therefore I’ve come to a conclusion that focus groups are not a very reliable method of social research.
Bibliography
Glaser BG. (1998) Doing Grounded Theory - Issues and Discussions. London, Sociology Press
Lankshear A.J. (1993) ‘The use of focus groups in a study of attitudes to student nurse assessment’, Journal of Advanced Nursing 18: 1986-89.
Macintosh J. (1981) ‘Focus groups in distance nursing education’, Journal of Advanced Nursing 18: 1981-85.
Morgan D.L. (1988) Focus groups as qualitative research. London: Sage
Morgan, D.L., (1997) Focus groups as qualitative research. 2nd Edition, London, Sage.
Powell R.A. (1996) ‘Focus groups’, International Journal of Quality in Health Care 8 (5): 499-504.
