DB # 4 Students Post

Jansen,

Focus Groups

As a researcher, interviewing groups of individuals simultaneously (i.e., a focus group or unstructured interview) helps gather qualitative data by observing the group’s dynamics, perceptions, and reactions (Maxfield & Babbie, 2018, p. 272). Although rarely used as a stand-alone technique (Nyumba et al., 2018), focus groups can help generate a hypothesis, add support to existing findings, or merge with data gathering methods, such as exploratory studies, participant observations, or ethnographies (Maxfield & Babbie, 2018).

Well facilitated focus groups place participants at ease. The main reason why conversation focus-groups are more effective than interview guiding is that the moderator maintains the flexibility to move the discussion. Conversation focus-groups, rather than interview guiding, provide a collaborative research environment in which participants can freely raise and discuss issues of importance to them as related to the research study (Kristiansen & Grønkjær, 2018). Focus groups designed around casual conversation are more likely to generate the four principles that correlate with a successful group interview: interaction, informality, participation, and opinions (Bacigalupe, 2005). A knowledgeable mediator should use an informal and curious stance and incorporate a discursive approach to analyze and replicate what people do during conversations. Although the moderator’s stance is planned, the goal is for participants to utter words without being accountable. Accountability leads to justifications that prevent full participation and the expression of valuable opinions.

Discursive psychological approaches examine how language is used in daily formal and informal talk or discourse (Augoustinos & Goodman, 2017). Conversation analysis in discursive approaches examines ordinary conversation in everyday natural settings. In social interaction, people typically use social categories to describe a particular person, group, or event, which apply and imply an intended or unintended identity. During focus groups, this translates to how people orient to their motives and the motives of others. Therefore, moderators must take caution in transcribing conversations to avoid the social exclusion and marginalization of vulnerable populations and minorities while avoiding racism of all types.

Searching for Study Subjects

In identifying potential participants for the focus group, the moderator should seek 6-12 participants (Maxfield & Babbie, 2018, p. 272), usually 8, to meet to explore and discuss a topic. Although, after studying focus group discussions conducted between 1996 and 2017, Nyumba et al. (2018) advise that researchers used anywhere from 3 to 21 participants with a median of 10 participants. Further, more than half the research studies failed to report the sample size or the group size, weakening the effect of the focus group design choice in gathering qualitative data.

There are two basic types of focus groups. Natural focus group participants have an existing connection with the research topic, whereas the purpose of artificial groups is to avoid discussions affected by preexisting relationships. In artificial groups, homogeneous composition (e.g., gender, education, language) levels the playing field and reduces inhibitions among people who are strangers to each other. The moderator should decide which type of focus group would best serve the research design and then remember to overrecruit by 10-25% to obtain the desired number of participants (Nyumba et al., 2018).

The next stage in the process is to determine the location of the focus group, which could occur in person or through an online community. Online platforms allow researchers to reach participants who are otherwise difficult to reach, create groups with new and different compositions, and use online collaborative tools not readily available during in-person focus groups (Stewart & Shamdasani, 2016). Brown et al. (2021) mention the ethical, regulatory, and research considerations associated with online focus groups yet also suggest web-based focus groups should be considered especially when working with youth.

The next question a moderator must address is the number of focus groups that will be needed. Guest et al. (2016) suggest that three focus groups are adequate to identify all prevalent themes within a data set, with 80% of all themes discoverable using 2-3 focus groups and 90% of all themes discoverable within 3-6 focus groups. Although researchers historically have used an average of seven (Nyumba et al., 2018).

Groups of interest to me that could claim me as an insider include: (a) retired probation/parole officer, (b) probation personnel with direct knowledge of GPS technology used to monitor sex offenders, (c) female with job-required firearm certification, and (d) North Carolina probation/parole officers.

Christian Worldview

No one individual is superior to another as we all have the capability to embrace Christ as the center of our thoughts and actions. Humans, as social creatures, congregate, interact, and communicate, and that is how we reflect, form our opinions, and better acquaint ourselves with our true selves. Researchers must remember to remain unbiased in communicating all aspects of our research, especially that which uses humans as subjects. However, our time and energy should first be directed to developing a relationship with God. Then, when we inject our Christian worldview into our work, we align our actions with what we know pleases God – i.e., placing God first in our lives (Christian Standard Bible, 1769/2017, Matthew 6:33). The Bible reminds us to love the Lord with all our heart, soul, strength, and mind (Luke 10:27), as this is the greatest and most important command (Matthew 22:38).