Challenge the future

DelftUniversity ofTechnology

Focus groups

Theory and practice

Joris Hoekstra, OTB - Research for the Built Environment / Delft University of Technology

2 |

Content

1. Defining focus groups

2. Theory: pros and cons of focus groups

3. Practical aspects of organizing a focus group

4. An example: the EU-exclusion project

3 |

Content

1. Defining focus groups

2. Theory: pros and cons of focus groups

3. Practical aspects of organizing a focus group

4. An example: the EU-exclusion project

4 |

Defining focus groupsFocus groups have a long history in market and medical research but they are relatively under-used in social research.

Different sources use different definitions.

Definition of Powell et al. (1996):

A group of individuals selected and assembled by researchers to discuss and comment on, from personal experience, the topic that is the subject of the research.

Focus group or group interview/ group discussion?:•To what extent is there a focus on a specific topic? •To what extent plays the interaction between the participants a role?

5 |

Content

1. Defining focus groups

2. Theory: pros and cons of focus groups

3. Practical aspects of organizing a focus group

4. An example: the EU-exclusion project

6 |

Qualitative versus quantitative research (1)

Quantitative Qualitative Survey Participatory observation

Secondary analysis Discourse /document analysis

Experimental research In-depth interviews

Monitoring Group interviews / focus groupsCase-study research

7 |

Qualitative versus quantitative research (2)

Quantitative Qualitative Size of a phenomenon Nature of a phenomenon

Testing hypotheses (deductive)

Forming hypotheses (inductive)

Large scale Small scale

Cheaper per respondent Expensive per respondent

Less commitment respondent

More commitment respondent

Highly structured Less structured

Little influence researcher Relatively many influence researcher

Generalization is possible Generalization is difficult

Statistical analysis Content analysis

8 |

Interviews vs focus groupsIn-depth interviews Focus groupsVery deep insight Somewhat more limited

insight Suitable for sensitive topics Not suitable for sensitive

topicsOne perspective Different perspectives

No group dynamics Group dynamics

Less influence dominant respondents

Much influence dominant respondents

Relatively expensive Relatively cheap (many information in little time)

Personal information about respondent

Little personal information about respondent

9 |

Uses of focus groups1. Obtaining background information about a topic of

interest

2. Exploring phenomena and generating research hypotheses

3. Stimulating new ideas and creative concepts

4. Generating impressions of products, programs, services or institutions

5. Learning how respondents talk about the phenomenon of interest

6. Interpreting previously obtained quantitative results

10 |

The role of group dynamics (1)• Synergism: respondents can react to and build upon the

responses of other group members. The combined effort of the group will produce a wider range of information and ideas than the accumulation of the results of individual interviews

• Snowballing: A comments by one individual often triggers a chain of responses from the other participants.

• Stimulation: To be valued as experts and to be given the chance to work collaboratively with researchers can be empowering for the participants and can lead to great enthusiasm.

• Spontaneity: In a focus group, people only speak when they have definite feelings about a subject and not because a question requires a response.

• Networking: for the participants themselves, the focus group can be a networking event.

11 |

The role of group dynamics (2)However:

•The researcher has relatively little influence over the data that are produced.

•It is difficult to distinguish between individual opinions and opinions of the group as a whole.

•Focus groups may be threatening for those who are not very confident or articulate.

•People may be hesitant to share personal or sensitive information.

12 |

Content

1. Defining focus groups

2. Theory: pros and cons of focus groups

3. Practical aspects of organizing a focus group

4. An example: the EU-exclusion project

13 |

Practical aspects of focus groups

•Size and composition of the group

•Duration and location of the session

•The role of the moderator

•The agenda (interview guide) of a focus group session

14 |

Size and composition of the group

•Typically somewhere between 6 and 12 people.

•Recruit more people than the number of respondents desired.

•‘Convenience sampling’ methods are often used.

•A certain degree of similarity within the group may stimulate the group interaction process.

•Providing an incentive (money, free lunch) may enhance the participation rate

• Generally, 2 or 3 focus groups on the same topic are carried out.

15 |

Duration and location

•Focus groups typically last between 1,5 and 2,5 hours

•Focus groups preferably take place at a neutral location that can be easily reached by the participants.

16 |

The role of the moderator

•The quality of the moderator largely determines the quality of the research outcomes.

•Moderator balances between sensitivity and empathy on the one hand, and objectivity and detachment on the other.

•There is no best style for leading a focus group, nor is there a single best ‘type’ of moderator. Both the moderator and the strategy for conducting the interview must be matched with the purpose of the research and the characteristics of the group.

17 |

Preparing a focus group session

•Focus groups need a clear structure and agenda.

•The person who makes the agenda for the focus group is not necessarily the moderator.

Two principles: 1.From general to specific2.From very important to less important

Rolling interview guide?

18 |

Analyzing focus group results

Basis for all analyses is the transcript of the focus group.

All methods of content analysis are possible: from highly subjective impressionistic analyses to very sophisticated computer assisted analyses with a strong quantitative component.

=> It is the goal of the research that primarily determines which method should be used.

19 |

Content

1. Defining focus groups

2. Theory: pros and cons of focus groups

3. Practical aspects of organizing a focus group

4. An example: the EU-exclusion project

20 |

The EU-exclusion project as an example

Part of an international comparative research project commissioned by DG-employment of the EC.

Six selected countries: Germany, Hungary, Netherlands, Portugal, UK and Sweden.

Main goal of the research: to provide evidence on the interaction between housing, welfare and employment in the six selected countries.

21 |

Research methods

Three main research methods:

1.Review of existing knowledge

2.Quantitative data analysis: analysis of EU Statistics on Incomes and Living Conditions (EU-SILC).

3.Qualitative fieldwork: focus groups, in-depth interviews and ‘good practice’ case studies.

22 |

Focus groups

Four focus groups in each selected country.

Goal:Get a detailed insight into how the relationship between housing, employment and homelessness works out in practice in the selected country.

Respondents:Policy-makers and practitioners from the field of housing, homelessness, employment, welfare, social services etc.

Context: One or two big cities in the countries concerned.

23 |

Practical aspects focus groups Netherlands (1)

Four focus groups:

•One group on homelessness by national policy makers

•One group on homelessness by local practitioners (from Rotterdam)

•One group on housing and employment incentives by national policy makers

•On group on housing and employment by local practitioners (from Rotterdam)

=> Maximum 8 persons per group

24 |

Practical aspects focus groups Netherlands (2)

Recruiting respondents: Through our own network / knowledge and via the snowball method.

Location: Meeting room of a housing organization in Rotterdam close to a metro station.

Duration: 2 hours, during working time.

Incentives:After the meeting, all respondents received a small present.

All interviews were taped.

25 |

Methodology

Two interview guides: one on homelessness and one on housing and employment.

Ensure comparability between countries by using vignettes (standardised typical cases).

In addition to the vignettes, a number of general questions was asked of well.

Two researchers were present: one moderator and one assistant-moderator (taking notes, checking time, writing answers of respondents on whiteboard etc..).

26 |

Vignettes (1)

27 |

Vignettes (2)

28 |

Analysis

Transcripts of the focus groups were made by the assistant-moderator.

Based on the transcripts, texts for the final report were written.

29 |

Questions?