So, I haven't written any posts recently as my surveys were live and I didn't want to confuse people who were accessing my blog to complete them. Many thanks to all of you that did take time to complete them the results are very interesting.
I have also been very busy recently juggling my dissertation with my PGCE application, student finance forms, ISTD applications and two jobs. This whole semester is really teaching me how to manage my time and I personally think I could do it better. I have had to prioritise whats more important and unfortunately everything had a deadline before my dissertation.
Now everything else is pretty much out of the way I have more time to focus on my dissertation. I have sent chapters 1 & 2 and my analysis from my surveys to Peter for feedback, as I am doing two part research I have had to analyse my surveys so I can come up with further research questions for my focus group that takes place on Sunday 17th. Im looking forward to my focus group as I really want to know in depth answers to what I found from my surveys. I have secured the venue, bought refreshments, advertised the session and drafted contracts for ethical purposes. So, until my focus group I have to draft the questions that I want to ask and check my audio recorder as I will be audio recorded for future reference to my dissertation all of which is explained in the contracts. I also need to write up chapter 3 as soon as my focus group is complete as this also needs to be sent in by the 19th October which is the deadline for these chapters. I hope to get this written by the 18th so I can ask questions about all of my chapters at the campus session with Peter on Tuesday 19th October.
I am unsure how I feel about my progress so far, at first I didn't know where to start, I found it very overwhelming as I knew what I wanted to write, and what I needed to include. This is something that i'm passionate about so you would think it is easy to sit down and get on with, however I found it difficult to start as I felt like everything sounded like I was repeating myself and this put me off writing anything, then I felt bad when I didn't do anything at all. Finally I found my way and words became to flow because of Peters feedback on the literature review. This got me going as I had already got a decent amount of literature reports from last semesters project proposal.
In one way I feel like I am ahead as I am writing my analysis from my surveys, however in another way I am behind because I can't write chapter 3 because I haven't done my focus group yet. Doing two part research I feel is very beneficial to my learning and my research, however I don't know if this could also hinder my deadlines or my word count until I have got further into my dissertation. Only time will tell and I don't like that I don't know the answer to that yet.
I feel for now I have done all that I can, I could start to edit and add to my previous chapters but think it would be more beneficial to receive the feedback first. So until Sunday I am going to plot my questions and cross my fingers that Sunday goes well.
Showing posts with label Focus groups. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Focus groups. Show all posts
Thursday, 14 October 2010
Monday, 26 April 2010
Focus groups
I have just recently researched “Focus Groups” another way to collect data from people. It is pure qualitative data, Peter explained to me that it would be another useful way for me to collect my data as I want to find out people’s perceptions. I found this website that explains some advantages and disadvantages and explains a little more about them http://focusgroups.pbworks.com/Issues-including-advantages-and-disadvantages
The advantages of focus groups
The Authority Role of the Moderator
The face-to-face involvement of a qualified moderator can ensure that the conversation is always on track, and encourage participants’ engagement without one individual dominating the meeting.
The Ability of Group Participants to Interact With Each Other
When participate are stimulated to discuss, the group dynamics can generate new thinking about a topic which will result in a much more in-depth discussion.
The Dynamic Nature of the Methodology
Due to the dynamic environment the moderator can modify the topics, which are prepared before the session to make the topic more suitable for the purpose.
The Ability to Involve the Client Personnel in the Research Process
In traditional focus groups it is possible for the client personnel to watch the whole discussion behind a one-way mirror. The client personnel can provide their thinking to the moderator, which may help the moderator better handle the direction of discussion, and improve the quality of output.
The Capability to Utilise Non-Verbal Behaviour As A Research Input
The expression, attitude of individual, the intensity of the conversation etc. can be perceived by the researcher, which can modify the moderator’s decision and also can be counted in the research result.
The Level of Participant Involvement in the Research
Because every participant is under observation by the moderator and everybody knows the process has been videotaped, it is easy to make participants fully engage even during non-discussion time.
The Greater Security Associated With Traditional Focus Group Research
The possibility to screen each participant lets the researcher know who have been involved. This ensures that for example your competition is not involved.
________________________________________
The disadvantages of focus groups
Focus groups are not the optimal technique for all research situations, the criticisms below have been mentioned by people who promote some other qualitative research methods.
“Focus Groups tend to become influenced by one or two dominant people in the session thus making the output very biased”
The moderator plays an essential role in handling the situation, but if the moderator is not experienced enough, it is very easy for the whole discussion to be dominated by a few people.
“Focus Groups are not as effective as individual detailed interview’s when dealing with sensitive topics”
It is difficult to have the participants share their real feelings towards some sensitive topics publicly. This can in turn influence the output data.
“Focus Group output is not projectable”
If a great deal of consistency in the results from a series of focus groups have been identified, then it is very likely that the results from these sessions probably can represent a larger number of people. We can’t expect focus groups to be projectable in the same way as quantitative study findings can be.
Furthermore, traditional focus groups can only be held in a few cities, unlike some internet and telephone focus groups which could be organized in various situations without limitation of time and location. This also makes data from focus groups less representative of the total universe.
“Focus Groups are a very artificial environment which can influence the responses that are generated”
This is frequently the argument that ethnographers will use when recommending their methodology versus focus groups. Researchers using the ethnographic technique will situate themselves in the real environment, this is unreachable for focus groups. In focus groups people are collected in a meeting room, thus they might behave differently from how they behave when they are not watched and it will affect the quality of research results.
________________________________________
The special features of Focus Groups
In qualitative research, focus groups have some differences from other survey methodologies.
• Insight not Rules
Focus group can provide trustworthy naturalistic data that also lead to important insights about human behaviours by allowing all participants to say anything they would like in front of the whole group. Meanwhile, researchers listen not only for the content of discussions but observe something beyond talking, such as tone and emotions which help them to learn or confirm not just the facts but the meaning behind the facts.
• Social not Individual
In a focus group session, conversation among participants results in discussion data. In this way, focus groups elicit information that paints a portrait of combined local perspectives because the research may seek ways to fit all together. It is possible to gauge a groups’ overall reaction to educational materials, but not on an individual basis.
• Homogenous not Diverse
Focus group researchers select and invite 20-25 people with similar characteristics to a single session. The goal is to fill the room with a minimum of 10-12 participants that are similar (Krueger and Casey, 2000) which is supposed to increase the quality of the data.
• Flexible not standardised
During the course of a two-hour session, we can see a natural conversation will be produced because individuals are allowed to laugh, tell personal stories, revisit earlier questions, disagree with other research, the moderator only needs to lead the conversation on track by applying his prepared interview guide. Actually, a well-designed guide encourages group members to relax, open up, think deeply, and consider alternatives.
• Warm not Hot
Focus groups do not produce reliable data on topics that produce extremely strong feelings (Krueger and Casey, 2000). Because conversation in some cultures are of a sensitive nature will not be discussed thoroughly.
• Words not Numbers
Focus groups rely upon words spoken by participants. A report based on focus groups will feature patterns formed by words, called themes or perspectives. Researchers must use specific methods to analyse patterns in spoken language (Creswell, 1998).
A focus group method isn’t meant to create generalisations of this type and its procedures offer none of the protections that would permit them to do so (Fern, 2001). Numerical analysis is not a preferred technique. In fact, it is inappropriate to report a result of focus groups by percentage.
________________________________________
Sources
Creswell, J. W. 1998. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Traditions. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.
Group plus. June 2003. retrieved April 5, 2006 from: http://www.groupsplus.com/pages/Respect3.htm
Fern, E.F. 2001. Advanced Focus Group Research. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage.
Krueger, R. A., and M. A. Casey 2000. Focus groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research (3rd edition.) Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.
The advantages of focus groups
The Authority Role of the Moderator
The face-to-face involvement of a qualified moderator can ensure that the conversation is always on track, and encourage participants’ engagement without one individual dominating the meeting.
The Ability of Group Participants to Interact With Each Other
When participate are stimulated to discuss, the group dynamics can generate new thinking about a topic which will result in a much more in-depth discussion.
The Dynamic Nature of the Methodology
Due to the dynamic environment the moderator can modify the topics, which are prepared before the session to make the topic more suitable for the purpose.
The Ability to Involve the Client Personnel in the Research Process
In traditional focus groups it is possible for the client personnel to watch the whole discussion behind a one-way mirror. The client personnel can provide their thinking to the moderator, which may help the moderator better handle the direction of discussion, and improve the quality of output.
The Capability to Utilise Non-Verbal Behaviour As A Research Input
The expression, attitude of individual, the intensity of the conversation etc. can be perceived by the researcher, which can modify the moderator’s decision and also can be counted in the research result.
The Level of Participant Involvement in the Research
Because every participant is under observation by the moderator and everybody knows the process has been videotaped, it is easy to make participants fully engage even during non-discussion time.
The Greater Security Associated With Traditional Focus Group Research
The possibility to screen each participant lets the researcher know who have been involved. This ensures that for example your competition is not involved.
________________________________________
The disadvantages of focus groups
Focus groups are not the optimal technique for all research situations, the criticisms below have been mentioned by people who promote some other qualitative research methods.
“Focus Groups tend to become influenced by one or two dominant people in the session thus making the output very biased”
The moderator plays an essential role in handling the situation, but if the moderator is not experienced enough, it is very easy for the whole discussion to be dominated by a few people.
“Focus Groups are not as effective as individual detailed interview’s when dealing with sensitive topics”
It is difficult to have the participants share their real feelings towards some sensitive topics publicly. This can in turn influence the output data.
“Focus Group output is not projectable”
If a great deal of consistency in the results from a series of focus groups have been identified, then it is very likely that the results from these sessions probably can represent a larger number of people. We can’t expect focus groups to be projectable in the same way as quantitative study findings can be.
Furthermore, traditional focus groups can only be held in a few cities, unlike some internet and telephone focus groups which could be organized in various situations without limitation of time and location. This also makes data from focus groups less representative of the total universe.
“Focus Groups are a very artificial environment which can influence the responses that are generated”
This is frequently the argument that ethnographers will use when recommending their methodology versus focus groups. Researchers using the ethnographic technique will situate themselves in the real environment, this is unreachable for focus groups. In focus groups people are collected in a meeting room, thus they might behave differently from how they behave when they are not watched and it will affect the quality of research results.
________________________________________
The special features of Focus Groups
In qualitative research, focus groups have some differences from other survey methodologies.
• Insight not Rules
Focus group can provide trustworthy naturalistic data that also lead to important insights about human behaviours by allowing all participants to say anything they would like in front of the whole group. Meanwhile, researchers listen not only for the content of discussions but observe something beyond talking, such as tone and emotions which help them to learn or confirm not just the facts but the meaning behind the facts.
• Social not Individual
In a focus group session, conversation among participants results in discussion data. In this way, focus groups elicit information that paints a portrait of combined local perspectives because the research may seek ways to fit all together. It is possible to gauge a groups’ overall reaction to educational materials, but not on an individual basis.
• Homogenous not Diverse
Focus group researchers select and invite 20-25 people with similar characteristics to a single session. The goal is to fill the room with a minimum of 10-12 participants that are similar (Krueger and Casey, 2000) which is supposed to increase the quality of the data.
• Flexible not standardised
During the course of a two-hour session, we can see a natural conversation will be produced because individuals are allowed to laugh, tell personal stories, revisit earlier questions, disagree with other research, the moderator only needs to lead the conversation on track by applying his prepared interview guide. Actually, a well-designed guide encourages group members to relax, open up, think deeply, and consider alternatives.
• Warm not Hot
Focus groups do not produce reliable data on topics that produce extremely strong feelings (Krueger and Casey, 2000). Because conversation in some cultures are of a sensitive nature will not be discussed thoroughly.
• Words not Numbers
Focus groups rely upon words spoken by participants. A report based on focus groups will feature patterns formed by words, called themes or perspectives. Researchers must use specific methods to analyse patterns in spoken language (Creswell, 1998).
A focus group method isn’t meant to create generalisations of this type and its procedures offer none of the protections that would permit them to do so (Fern, 2001). Numerical analysis is not a preferred technique. In fact, it is inappropriate to report a result of focus groups by percentage.
________________________________________
Sources
Creswell, J. W. 1998. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Traditions. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.
Group plus. June 2003. retrieved April 5, 2006 from: http://www.groupsplus.com/pages/Respect3.htm
Fern, E.F. 2001. Advanced Focus Group Research. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage.
Krueger, R. A., and M. A. Casey 2000. Focus groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research (3rd edition.) Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
