Advertisement

Qualitative Sociology

, Volume 7, Issue 3, pp 253–270 | Cite as

Focus groups: A new tool for qualitative research

  • David L. Morgan
  • Margaret T. Spanish
Articles

Abstract

Focus groups have received little attention from sociologists, although they are a commonly used qualitative technique in market research. The data collected in focus group sessions typically consist of tape-recorded group discussions among four to ten participants who share their thoughts and experiences on a set of topics selected by the researcher. We present a brief description of dimensions along which focus groups vary in their format and relate these dimensions to an example from our own focus groups, where the topic is how people think about the causes and prevention of heart attacks. We compare focus groups to informant interviews and participant observation, and we describe their application, either as a self-contained data collection strategy, or in conjunction with other qualitative and quantitative methods. We conclude with a discussion of the value of focus groups in triangulating data collection from several different methods.

Keywords

Data Collection Focus Group Social Psychology Qualitative Research Group Discussion 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Becker, Howard S. 1958 “Problems of inference and proof in participant observation.” American Sociological Review 23:652–660.Google Scholar
  2. Becker, Howard S. and Blanche Geer 1957 “Participant observation and interviewing: a comparison.” Human Organization 16:28–32.Google Scholar
  3. ———— 1958 “Participant observation and interviewing: a rejoinder.” Human Organization 17:39–40.Google Scholar
  4. Boyd, Harper W., Ralph Westfall, and Stanley F. Stasch 1981 Marketing Research: Text and Cases. Homewood, Illinois: Richard D. Irwin.Google Scholar
  5. Calder, Bobby J. 1977 “Focus groups and the nature of qualitative marketing research.” Journal of Marketing Research 14:353–64.Google Scholar
  6. Denzin, Norman K. 1978 The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  7. Epstein, Alexander 1969 “Gossip, norms, and social network.” Pp. 117–127 in J. Clyde Mitchell (ed.), Social Networks in Urban Situations. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Fern, Edward F. 1982 “The use of focus groups for idea generation: The effects of group size, acquaintanceship, and moderator on response quantity and quality.” Journal of Marketing Research 19:1–13.Google Scholar
  9. Glaser, Barney G. and Anselm L. Strauss 1967 The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
  10. Kaboolian, Linda and William A. Gamson 1983 “New strategies for the use of focus groups for social science and survey research.” Paper presented at American Association for Public Opinion Research meetings.Google Scholar
  11. Morgan, David L. and Margaret T. Spanish 1983 “Focus groups and health beliefs: Learning from others' heart attacks.” Paper presented at American Sociological Association meetings, Detroit.Google Scholar
  12. Smith, Joan M. 1972 Interviewing in Market and Social Research. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  13. Speedling, Edward 1982 Heart Attack. New York: Methuen.Google Scholar
  14. Taylor, Shelley E. and Susan T. Fiske 1981 “Getting inside the head: Methodologies for process analysis in attribution and social cognition.” Pp. 459–524 in Hohn H. Harvey, William Ickes, and Robert F. Kidd (eds.), New Directions in Attribution Research, Volume 3. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  15. Taylor, Shelley E., Joanne V. Wood, and Rosemary R. Lichtman 1983 “It could be worse: Selective evaluation as a response to victimization.” To appear in R. Janoff-Bulman and I. H. Frieze (eds.), Reactions to Victimization, Journal of Social Issues.Google Scholar
  16. Trow, Martin 1957 “Comment on ‘Participant observation and interviewing: a comparison.’” Human Organization 16:33–35.Google Scholar
  17. Webb, Eugene J., Donald T. Campbell, Richard D. Schwartz, Lee Sechrest, and Janet B. Grove 1981 Nonreactive Measures in the Social Sciences. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  18. Wells, William D. 1974 “Group interviewing.” Pp. 133–46 in Robert Ferber (ed.), Handbook of Marketing Research. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • David L. Morgan
    • 1
  • Margaret T. Spanish
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of SociologyUniversity of CaliforniaRiverside

Personalised recommendations