Focus Groups

1
Focus Groups

• Definition
• A focus group exercise consists in a facilitated
  discussion on a focal topic among a small group
  of people.
• The aim is to gain insight into
• the groups norms, meanings, and values
• the underlying factors that may shape them
• and even engage the group with a participative
  research or policy process
• This technique has been widely used in marketing
  since the 70s just to elicit people preferences.
  Other variants are e-focus groups (via internet)
  and Integrated Assessment (IA)-focus groups, a
  more policy-oriented procedure

Procedure FG average size is 6-8 participants
(as a group) plus a facilitator, and last 11/2 -2
hours. The facilitator seeks a focused
interaction, which is audio/video recorded.
Ideally, a full range of viewpoints should be
raised within the group. Transcripts are
systematically analysed.
An example The EU-funded project PABE (Public
Perceptions of Agricultural Biotechnologies in
Europe) used two-rounds FGs as part of a
multi-method design including in-depth interviews
and national workshops with key actors. The main
purpose was to study underlying frameworks of
meaning and interconnections through which
members of the public in shape their views of
GMOs. The research reveals what usually remains
invisible or under-researched when using solely
quantitative methods like Eurobarometer (where
surface expressions of acceptance, for instance,
hides underlying concerns). The project shows
how wider social dimensions, such as lifestyle
orientations or institutional contexts are
entangled with risk perceptions. Institutional
behaviour appears to be a crucial factor. The
researchers found, unexpectedly, few differences
between the countries studied, since sharing a
similar institutional approach to GMOs at the
time.
Facilitator role At the difference of a
controller or an ethnographer, the facilitator
encourages and allows to the different positions
to express, and be clarified. The facilitator
promotes deeper exploration with the respondents
own categorisations. He/she should avoid
over-domination by particular individual members.
The facilitator introduces and debriefs also the
experience

• Rationale
• Opinions are frequently more complex than
  quantitative methods can reflect
  context-dependent, ambiguous, multi-layered
  Often, they are even shaped in the very act of
  thinking with others. Focus Groups (FG) allows to
  deal with this interactive nature of the process
  of opinion building and helps to articulate what
  is underlying or implicit to explore how people
  think and why they think as they do. Furthermore,
  since it is the very respondent who identifies
  the processes at work in independently driving
  interaction with peers, FG prevents against
  researchers artefacts.
• Documenting the processes through which groups
  meanings are shaped, elaborated and applied, as
  an alternative to ethnography
• Let room for unanticipated topics or arguments,
  and new research concepts
• Representativity as such cannot be claimed, but
  saturation by widening the diversity of
  participants and conducting additional FG may be
  envisioned
• Individual behaviour and groups deviances are
  more likely underreported than, for example, in
  in-depth interviews

Prompts serve as an ice-breaker, but mainly to
keep on focus open-ended questions, ranking
exercises, describing cards, comment on news or
other media support, vignette, photos
interpretation
An abridged version of the first-round FG
protocol of the PABE project Part 1
INTRODUCTION (10 minutes) 1.1 Introduction by
moderator 1.2 Warm-up question to participants
"Will you each introduce yourself and say a
little about who is responsible for buying and
preparing food in your household." Part 2 FOOD
(15-20 minutes) "Thinking about the changes that
have taken place in the way that food is
produced, would you each think of one way in
which food has changed for the better and one
aspect that you are not happy about or which has
caused you concern." (Go around the room) "What
do you feel has been gained and what has been
lost as a result of these changes?". "Where do
you see these changes heading? Where do you think
the food industry will be in ten years
time?" Part 3 GM CROPS AND FOODS (15
minutes) "What images or associations does the
term 'genetically modified food' raise for you?"
Make a list and probe to find out what
associations and meanings images have. Part 4
EXAMPLES OF GM FOODS (35-40 minutes) "Let's
look at some of the food products that might use
these genetically modified crops." Show examples
on display board and discussion Probe If
labelling not raised spontaneously move onto
labelling by asking Do you think such products
should be labelled? Why? Part 5 TRUST (20
minutes) "Now we are going to talk about
genetically modified maize again the type that
has been modified to be resistant to an insect
pest. This is how some people might talk about
the new product." General discussion Part 6
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND AGENCY (10 minutes) "Do
you feel that, at present, members of the public
have any role or influence in making decisions
about these new developments?" Part 7 FEEDBACK
AND CLOSE (5 minutes)

• Practicalities
• A pilot FG can be useful in order to pre-test
  the exercise and even to construct or refine the
  prompts
• FG are a rather time consuming and labour
  intensive procedure. A 90-minutes standard FG
  means 8 hours for audio-transcription and 100
  pages to be analysed. Think, therefore, to limit
  the number of groups and participants to the bare
  minimum. The more segmented the groups, the more
  groups will be necessary
• Payment at least an attendance allowance (25-40
  euro), and/or psychological incentives
• Reconvening exactly the same group may be
  difficult but later groups can also be informed
  by experiences in earlier ones and different
  groups can intervene and inform at different
  levels
• Deliberate overecruitment must be considered.
  Think also to reminders.

• Applicability
• FG are usually found in a multi-method design, to
  complement,
• prepare for, or extend other work. For example,
  in the following functions
• Exploratory to generate preliminary information
  on new or under-researched norms concepts and
  values
• Interpretative aid or test of survey findings
• Extended peer review, critical reappraisal
• Public perceptions of complex issues

To go further PABE http//www.lancs.ac.uk/depts
/ieppp/pabe/docs.html http//www.tc.umn.edu/rkru
eger/focus_analysis.html R. Barbour and J.
Kitzinger (eds.) (1999) Developing Focus Groups
Research Politics, Theory and Practice, London
Sage M. Bloor, J. Frankland, M. Thomas and K.
Robson (2001) Focus Groups in Social Research,
London Sage
Luis Aparicio, INRA-TSV Poster edited by Luis
Aparicio and Delphine Ducoulombier