what research design is a focus group

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• What Is a Focus Group? | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples

What is a Focus Group | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples

Published on December 10, 2021 by Tegan George . Revised on June 22, 2023.

A focus group is a research method that brings together a small group of people to answer questions in a moderated setting. The group is chosen due to predefined demographic traits, and the questions are designed to shed light on a topic of interest.

Table of contents

What is a focus group, step 1: choose your topic of interest, step 2: define your research scope and hypotheses, step 3: determine your focus group questions, step 4: select a moderator or co-moderator, step 5: recruit your participants, step 6: set up your focus group, step 7: host your focus group, step 8: analyze your data and report your results, advantages and disadvantages of focus groups, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about focus groups.

Focus groups are a type of qualitative research . Observations of the group’s dynamic, their answers to focus group questions, and even their body language can guide future research on consumer decisions, products and services, or controversial topics.

Focus groups are often used in marketing, library science, social science, and user research disciplines. They can provide more nuanced and natural feedback than individual interviews and are easier to organize than experiments or large-scale surveys .

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Focus groups are primarily considered a confirmatory research technique . In other words, their discussion-heavy setting is most useful for confirming or refuting preexisting beliefs. For this reason, they are great for conducting explanatory research , where you explore why something occurs when limited information is available.

A focus group may be a good choice for you if:

• You’re interested in real-time, unfiltered responses on a given topic or in the dynamics of a discussion between participants
• Your questions are rooted in feelings or perceptions , and cannot easily be answered with “yes” or “no”
• You’re confident that a relatively small number of responses will answer your question
• You’re seeking directional information that will help you uncover new questions or future research ideas
• Structured interviews : The questions are predetermined in both topic and order.
• Semi-structured interviews : A few questions are predetermined, but other questions aren’t planned.
• Unstructured interviews : None of the questions are predetermined.

Differences between types of interviews

Make sure to choose the type of interview that suits your research best. This table shows the most important differences between the four types.

Topics favorable to focus groups

As a rule of thumb, research topics related to thoughts, beliefs, and feelings work well in focus groups. If you are seeking direction, explanation, or in-depth dialogue, a focus group could be a good fit.

However, if your questions are dichotomous or if you need to reach a large audience quickly, a survey may be a better option. If your question hinges upon behavior but you are worried about influencing responses, consider an observational study .

• If you want to determine whether the student body would regularly consume vegan food, a survey would be a great way to gauge student preferences.

However, food is much more than just consumption and nourishment and can have emotional, cultural, and other implications on individuals.

• If you’re interested in something less concrete, such as students’ perceptions of vegan food or the interplay between their choices at the dining hall and their feelings of homesickness or loneliness, perhaps a focus group would be best.

Once you have determined that a focus group is the right choice for your topic, you can start thinking about what you expect the group discussion to yield.

Perhaps literature already exists on your subject or a sufficiently similar topic that you can use as a starting point. If the topic isn’t well studied, use your instincts to determine what you think is most worthy of study.

Setting your scope will help you formulate intriguing hypotheses , set clear questions, and recruit the right participants.

• Are you interested in a particular sector of the population, such as vegans or non-vegans?
• Are you interested in including vegetarians in your analysis?
• Perhaps not all students eat at the dining hall. Will your study exclude those who don’t?
• Are you only interested in students who have strong opinions on the subject?

A benefit of focus groups is that your hypotheses can be open-ended. You can be open to a wide variety of opinions, which can lead to unexpected conclusions.

The questions that you ask your focus group are crucially important to your analysis. Take your time formulating them, paying special attention to phrasing. Be careful to avoid leading questions , which can affect your responses.

Overall, your focus group questions should be:

• Open-ended and flexible
• Impossible to answer with “yes” or “no” (questions that start with “why” or “how” are often best)
• Unambiguous, getting straight to the point while still stimulating discussion
• Unbiased and neutral

If you are discussing a controversial topic, be careful that your questions do not cause social desirability bias . Here, your respondents may lie about their true beliefs to mask any socially unacceptable or unpopular opinions. This and other demand characteristics can hurt your analysis and lead to several types of reseach bias in your results, particularly if your participants react in a different way once knowing they’re being observed. These include self-selection bias , the Hawthorne effect , the Pygmalion effect , and recall bias .

• Engagement questions make your participants feel comfortable and at ease: “What is your favorite food at the dining hall?”
• Exploration questions drill down to the focus of your analysis: “What pros and cons of offering vegan options do you see?”
• Exit questions pick up on anything you may have previously missed in your discussion: “Is there anything you’d like to mention about vegan options in the dining hall that we haven’t discussed?”

It is important to have more than one moderator in the room. If you would like to take the lead asking questions, select a co-moderator who can coordinate the technology, take notes, and observe the behavior of the participants.

If your hypotheses have behavioral aspects, consider asking someone else to be lead moderator so that you are free to take a more observational role.

Depending on your topic, there are a few types of moderator roles that you can choose from.

• The most common is the dual-moderator , introduced above.
• Another common option is the dueling-moderator style . Here, you and your co-moderator take opposing sides on an issue to allow participants to see different perspectives and respond accordingly.

Depending on your research topic, there are a few sampling methods you can choose from to help you recruit and select participants.

• Voluntary response sampling , such as posting a flyer on campus and finding participants based on responses
• Convenience sampling of those who are most readily accessible to you, such as fellow students at your university
• Stratified sampling of a particular age, race, ethnicity, gender identity, or other characteristic of interest to you
• Judgment sampling of a specific set of participants that you already know you want to include

Beware of sampling bias and selection bias , which can occur when some members of the population are more likely to be included than others.

Number of participants

In most cases, one focus group will not be sufficient to answer your research question. It is likely that you will need to schedule three to four groups. A good rule of thumb is to stop when you’ve reached a saturation point (i.e., when you aren’t receiving new responses to your questions).

Most focus groups have 6–10 participants. It’s a good idea to over-recruit just in case someone doesn’t show up. As a rule of thumb, you shouldn’t have fewer than 6 or more than 12 participants, in order to get the most reliable results.

Lastly, it’s preferable for your participants not to know you or each other, as this can bias your results.

A focus group is not just a group of people coming together to discuss their opinions. While well-run focus groups have an enjoyable and relaxed atmosphere, they are backed up by rigorous methods to provide robust observations.

Confirm a time and date

Be sure to confirm a time and date with your participants well in advance. Focus groups usually meet for 45–90 minutes, but some can last longer. However, beware of the possibility of wandering attention spans. If you really think your session needs to last longer than 90 minutes, schedule a few breaks.

Confirm whether it will take place in person or online

You will also need to decide whether the group will meet in person or online. If you are hosting it in person, be sure to pick an appropriate location.

• An uncomfortable or awkward location may affect the mood or level of participation of your group members.
• Online sessions are convenient, as participants can join from home, but they can also lessen the connection between participants.

As a general rule, make sure you are in a noise-free environment that minimizes distractions and interruptions to your participants.

Consent and ethical considerations

It’s important to take into account ethical considerations and informed consent when conducting your research. Informed consent means that participants possess all the information they need to decide whether they want to participate in the research before it starts. This includes information about benefits, risks, funding, and institutional approval.

Participants should also sign a release form that states that they are comfortable with being audio- or video-recorded. While verbal consent may be sufficient, it is best to ask participants to sign a form.

A disadvantage of focus groups is that they are too small to provide true anonymity to participants. Make sure that your participants know this prior to participating.

There are a few things you can do to commit to keeping information private. You can secure confidentiality by removing all identifying information from your report or offer to pseudonymize the data later. Data pseudonymization entails replacing any identifying information about participants with pseudonymous or false identifiers.

Preparation prior to participation

If there is something you would like participants to read, study, or prepare beforehand, be sure to let them know well in advance. It’s also a good idea to call them the day before to ensure they will still be participating.

Consider conducting a tech check prior to the arrival of your participants, and note any environmental or external factors that could affect the mood of the group that day. Be sure that you are organized and ready, as a stressful atmosphere can be distracting and counterproductive.

Starting the focus group

Welcome individuals to the focus group by introducing the topic, yourself, and your co-moderator, and go over any ground rules or suggestions for a successful discussion. It’s important to make your participants feel at ease and forthcoming with their responses.

Consider starting out with an icebreaker, which will allow participants to relax and settle into the space a bit. Your icebreaker can be related to your study topic or not; it’s just an exercise to get participants talking.

Leading the discussion

Once you start asking your questions, try to keep response times equal between participants. Take note of the most and least talkative members of the group, as well as any participants with particularly strong or dominant personalities.

You can ask less talkative members questions directly to encourage them to participate or ask participants questions by name to even the playing field. Feel free to ask participants to elaborate on their answers or to give an example.

As a moderator, strive to remain neutral . Refrain from reacting to responses, and be aware of your body language (e.g., nodding, raising eyebrows) and the possibility for observer bias . Active listening skills, such as parroting back answers or asking for clarification, are good methods to encourage participation and signal that you’re listening.

Many focus groups offer a monetary incentive for participants. Depending on your research budget, this is a nice way to show appreciation for their time and commitment. To keep everyone feeling fresh, consider offering snacks or drinks as well.

After concluding your focus group, you and your co-moderator should debrief, recording initial impressions of the discussion as well as any highlights, issues, or immediate conclusions you’ve drawn.

The next step is to transcribe and clean your data . Assign each participant a number or pseudonym for organizational purposes. Transcribe the recordings and conduct content analysis to look for themes or categories of responses. The categories you choose can then form the basis for reporting your results.

Just like other research methods, focus groups come with advantages and disadvantages.

• They are fairly straightforward to organize and results have strong face validity .
• They are usually inexpensive, even if you compensate participant.
• A focus group is much less time-consuming than a survey or experiment , and you get immediate results.
• Focus group results are often more comprehensible and intuitive than raw data.

Disadvantages

• It can be difficult to assemble a truly representative sample. Focus groups are generally not considered externally valid due to their small sample sizes.
• Due to the small sample size, you cannot ensure the anonymity of respondents, which may influence their desire to speak freely.
• Depth of analysis can be a concern, as it can be challenging to get honest opinions on controversial topics.
• There is a lot of room for error in the data analysis and high potential for observer dependency in drawing conclusions. You have to be careful not to cherry-pick responses to fit a prior conclusion.

If you want to know more about statistics , methodology , or research bias , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• Student’s  t -distribution
• Normal distribution
• Null and Alternative Hypotheses
• Chi square tests
• Confidence interval
• Quartiles & Quantiles
• Cluster sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Data cleansing
• Reproducibility vs Replicability
• Peer review
• Prospective cohort study

Research bias

• Implicit bias
• Cognitive bias
• Placebo effect
• Hawthorne effect
• Hindsight bias
• Affect heuristic
• Social desirability bias

A focus group is a research method that brings together a small group of people to answer questions in a moderated setting. The group is chosen due to predefined demographic traits, and the questions are designed to shed light on a topic of interest. It is one of 4 types of interviews .

As a rule of thumb, questions related to thoughts, beliefs, and feelings work well in focus groups. Take your time formulating strong questions, paying special attention to phrasing. Be careful to avoid leading questions , which can bias your responses.

There are various approaches to qualitative data analysis , but they all share five steps in common:

• Prepare and organize your data.
• Review and explore your data.
• Develop a data coding system.
• Assign codes to the data.
• Identify recurring themes.

The specifics of each step depend on the focus of the analysis. Some common approaches include textual analysis , thematic analysis , and discourse analysis .

Every dataset requires different techniques to clean dirty data , but you need to address these issues in a systematic way. You focus on finding and resolving data points that don’t agree or fit with the rest of your dataset.

These data might be missing values, outliers, duplicate values, incorrectly formatted, or irrelevant. You’ll start with screening and diagnosing your data. Then, you’ll often standardize and accept or remove data to make your dataset consistent and valid.

The four most common types of interviews are:

• Structured interviews : The questions are predetermined in both topic and order. 
• Focus group interviews : The questions are presented to a group instead of one individual.

It’s impossible to completely avoid observer bias in studies where data collection is done or recorded manually, but you can take steps to reduce this type of bias in your research .

Scope of research is determined at the beginning of your research process , prior to the data collection stage. Sometimes called “scope of study,” your scope delineates what will and will not be covered in your project. It helps you focus your work and your time, ensuring that you’ll be able to achieve your goals and outcomes.

Defining a scope can be very useful in any research project, from a research proposal to a thesis or dissertation . A scope is needed for all types of research: quantitative , qualitative , and mixed methods .

To define your scope of research, consider the following:

• Budget constraints or any specifics of grant funding
• Your proposed timeline and duration
• Specifics about your population of study, your proposed sample size , and the research methodology you’ll pursue
• Any inclusion and exclusion criteria
• Any anticipated control , extraneous , or confounding variables that could bias your research if not accounted for properly.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

George, T. (2023, June 22). What is a Focus Group | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved August 23, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/focus-group/

Is this article helpful?

Tegan George

Other students also liked, what is qualitative research | methods & examples, explanatory research | definition, guide, & examples, data collection | definition, methods & examples, what is your plagiarism score.

• Privacy Policy

Home » Focus Groups – Steps, Examples and Guide

Focus Groups – Steps, Examples and Guide

Table of Contents

Focus Group

Definition:

A focus group is a qualitative research method used to gather in-depth insights and opinions from a group of individuals about a particular product, service, concept, or idea.

The focus group typically consists of 6-10 participants who are selected based on shared characteristics such as demographics, interests, or experiences. The discussion is moderated by a trained facilitator who asks open-ended questions to encourage participants to share their thoughts, feelings, and attitudes towards the topic.

Focus groups are an effective way to gather detailed information about consumer behavior, attitudes, and perceptions, and can provide valuable insights to inform decision-making in a range of fields including marketing, product development, and public policy.

Types of Focus Group

The following are some types or methods of Focus Groups:

Traditional Focus Group

This is the most common type of focus group, where a small group of people is brought together to discuss a particular topic. The discussion is typically led by a skilled facilitator who asks open-ended questions to encourage participants to share their thoughts and opinions.

Mini Focus Group

A mini-focus group involves a smaller group of participants, typically 3 to 5 people. This type of focus group is useful when the topic being discussed is particularly sensitive or when the participants are difficult to recruit.

Dual Moderator Focus Group

In a dual-moderator focus group, two facilitators are used to manage the discussion. This can help to ensure that the discussion stays on track and that all participants have an opportunity to share their opinions.

Teleconference or Online Focus Group

Teleconferences or online focus groups are conducted using video conferencing technology or online discussion forums. This allows participants to join the discussion from anywhere in the world, making it easier to recruit participants and reducing the cost of conducting the focus group.

Client-led Focus Group

In a client-led focus group, the client who is commissioning the research takes an active role in the discussion. This type of focus group is useful when the client has specific questions they want to ask or when they want to gain a deeper understanding of their customers.

The following Table can explain Focus Group types more clearly

How To Conduct a Focus Group

To conduct a focus group, follow these general steps:

Define the Research Question

Identify the key research question or objective that you want to explore through the focus group. Develop a discussion guide that outlines the topics and questions you want to cover during the session.

Recruit Participants

Identify the target audience for the focus group and recruit participants who meet the eligibility criteria. You can use various recruitment methods such as social media, online panels, or referrals from existing customers.

Select a Venue

Choose a location that is convenient for the participants and has the necessary facilities such as audio-visual equipment, seating, and refreshments.

Conduct the Session

During the focus group session, introduce the topic, and review the objectives of the research. Encourage participants to share their thoughts and opinions by asking open-ended questions and probing deeper into their responses. Ensure that the discussion remains on topic and that all participants have an opportunity to contribute.

Record the Session

Use audio or video recording equipment to capture the discussion. Note-taking is also essential to ensure that you capture all key points and insights.

Analyze the data

Once the focus group is complete, transcribe and analyze the data. Look for common themes, patterns, and insights that emerge from the discussion. Use this information to generate insights and recommendations that can be applied to the research question.

When to use Focus Group Method

The focus group method is typically used in the following situations:

Exploratory Research

When a researcher wants to explore a new or complex topic in-depth, focus groups can be used to generate ideas, opinions, and insights.

Product Development

Focus groups are often used to gather feedback from consumers about new products or product features to help identify potential areas for improvement.

Marketing Research

Focus groups can be used to test marketing concepts, messaging, or advertising campaigns to determine their effectiveness and appeal to different target audiences.

Customer Feedback

Focus groups can be used to gather feedback from customers about their experiences with a particular product or service, helping companies improve customer satisfaction and loyalty.

Public Policy Research

Focus groups can be used to gather public opinions and attitudes on social or political issues, helping policymakers make more informed decisions.

Examples of Focus Group

Here are some real-time examples of focus groups:

• A tech company wants to improve the user experience of their mobile app. They conduct a focus group with a diverse group of users to gather feedback on the app’s design, functionality, and features. The focus group consists of 8 participants who are selected based on their age, gender, ethnicity, and level of experience with the app. During the session, a trained facilitator asks open-ended questions to encourage participants to share their thoughts and opinions on the app. The facilitator also observes the participants’ behavior and reactions to the app’s features. After the focus group, the data is analyzed to identify common themes and issues raised by the participants. The insights gathered from the focus group are used to inform improvements to the app’s design and functionality, with the goal of creating a more user-friendly and engaging experience for all users.
• A car manufacturer wants to develop a new electric vehicle that appeals to a younger demographic. They conduct a focus group with millennials to gather their opinions on the design, features, and pricing of the vehicle.
• A political campaign team wants to develop effective messaging for their candidate’s campaign. They conduct a focus group with voters to gather their opinions on key issues and identify the most persuasive arguments and messages.
• A restaurant chain wants to develop a new menu that appeals to health-conscious customers. They conduct a focus group with fitness enthusiasts to gather their opinions on the types of food and drinks that they would like to see on the menu.
• A healthcare organization wants to develop a new wellness program for their employees. They conduct a focus group with employees to gather their opinions on the types of programs, incentives, and support that would be most effective in promoting healthy behaviors.
• A clothing retailer wants to develop a new line of sustainable and eco-friendly clothing. They conduct a focus group with environmentally conscious consumers to gather their opinions on the design, materials, and pricing of the clothing.

Purpose of Focus Group

The key objectives of a focus group include:

Generating New Ideas and insights

Focus groups are used to explore new or complex topics in-depth, generating new ideas and insights that may not have been previously considered.

Understanding Consumer Behavior

Focus groups can be used to gather information on consumer behavior, attitudes, and perceptions to inform marketing and product development strategies.

Testing Concepts and Ideas

Focus groups can be used to test marketing concepts, messaging, or product prototypes to determine their effectiveness and appeal to different target audiences.

Gathering Customer Feedback

Informing decision-making.

Focus groups can provide valuable insights to inform decision-making in a range of fields including marketing, product development, and public policy.

Advantages of Focus Group

The advantages of using focus groups are:

• In-depth insights: Focus groups provide in-depth insights into the attitudes, opinions, and behaviors of a target audience on a specific topic, allowing researchers to gain a deeper understanding of the issues being explored.
• Group dynamics: The group dynamics of focus groups can provide additional insights, as participants may build on each other’s ideas, share experiences, and debate different perspectives.
• Efficient data collection: Focus groups are an efficient way to collect data from multiple individuals at the same time, making them a cost-effective method of research.
• Flexibility : Focus groups can be adapted to suit a range of research objectives, from exploratory research to concept testing and customer feedback.
• Real-time feedback: Focus groups provide real-time feedback on new products or concepts, allowing researchers to make immediate adjustments and improvements based on participant feedback.
• Participant engagement: Focus groups can be a more engaging and interactive research method than surveys or other quantitative methods, as participants have the opportunity to express their opinions and interact with other participants.

Limitations of Focus Groups

While focus groups can provide valuable insights, there are also some limitations to using them.

• Small sample size: Focus groups typically involve a small number of participants, which may not be representative of the broader population being studied.
• Group dynamics : While group dynamics can be an advantage of focus groups, they can also be a limitation, as dominant personalities may sway the discussion or participants may not feel comfortable expressing their true opinions.
• Limited generalizability : Because focus groups involve a small sample size, the results may not be generalizable to the broader population.
• Limited depth of responses: Because focus groups are time-limited, participants may not have the opportunity to fully explore or elaborate on their opinions or experiences.
• Potential for bias: The facilitator of a focus group may inadvertently influence the discussion or the selection of participants may not be representative, leading to potential bias in the results.
• Difficulty in analysis : The qualitative data collected in focus groups can be difficult to analyze, as it is often subjective and requires a skilled researcher to interpret and identify themes.

Characteristics of Focus Group

• Small group size: Focus groups typically involve a small number of participants, ranging from 6 to 12 people. This allows for a more in-depth and focused discussion.
• Targeted participants: Participants in focus groups are selected based on specific criteria, such as age, gender, or experience with a particular product or service.
• Facilitated discussion: A skilled facilitator leads the discussion, asking open-ended questions and encouraging participants to share their thoughts and experiences.
• I nteractive and conversational: Focus groups are interactive and conversational, with participants building on each other’s ideas and responding to one another’s opinions.
• Qualitative data: The data collected in focus groups is qualitative, providing detailed insights into participants’ attitudes, opinions, and behaviors.
• Non-threatening environment: Participants are encouraged to share their thoughts and experiences in a non-threatening and supportive environment.
• Limited time frame: Focus groups are typically time-limited, lasting between 1 and 2 hours, to ensure that the discussion stays focused and productive.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Survey Research – Types, Methods, Examples

Correlational Research – Methods, Types and...

Research Methods – Types, Examples and Guide

Qualitative Research Methods

Applied Research – Types, Methods and Examples

Mixed Methods Research – Types & Analysis

What Is a Focus Group?

Saul McLeod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul McLeod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.

A focus group is a qualitative research method that involves facilitating a small group discussion with participants who share common characteristics or experiences that are relevant to the research topic. The goal is to gain insights through group conversation and observation of dynamics.

In a focus group:

• A moderator asks questions and leads a group of typically 6 to 12 pre-screened participants through a discussion focused on a particular topic.
• Group members are encouraged to talk with one another, exchange anecdotes, comment on each others’ experiences and points of view, and build on each others’ responses.
• The goal is to create a candid, natural conversation that provides insights into the participants’ perceptions, attitudes, beliefs, and opinions on the topic.
• Focus groups capitalize on group dynamics to elicit multiple perspectives in a social environment as participants are influenced by and influence others through open discussion.
• The interactive responses allow researchers to quickly gather more contextual, nuanced qualitative data compared to surveys or one-on-one interviews.

Focus groups allow researchers to gather perspectives from multiple people at once in an interactive group setting. This group dynamic surfaces richer responses as participants build on each other’s comments, discuss issues in-depth, and voice agreements or disagreements.

It is important that participants feel comfortable expressing diverse viewpoints rather than being pressured into a consensus.

Focus groups emerged as an alternative to questionnaires in the 1930s over concerns that surveys fostered passive responses or failed to capture people’s authentic perspectives.

During World War II, focus groups were used to evaluate military morale-boosting radio programs. By the 1950s focus groups became widely adopted in marketing research to test consumer preferences.

A key benefit K. Merton highlighted in 1956 was grouping participants with shared knowledge of a topic. This common grounding enables people to provide context to their experiences and allows contrasts between viewpoints to emerge across the group.

As a result, focus groups can elicit a wider range of perspectives than one-on-one interviews.

Step 1 : Clarify the Focus Group’s Purpose and Orientation

Clarify the purpose and orientation of the focus group (Tracy, 2013). Carefully consider whether a focus group or individual interviews will provide the type of qualitative data needed to address your research questions.

Determine if the interactive, fast-paced group discussion format is aligned with gathering perspectives vs. in-depth attitudes on a topic.

Consider incorporating special techniques like extended focus groups with pre-surveys, touchstones using creative imagery/metaphors to focus the topic, or bracketing through ongoing conceptual inspection.

For example

A touchstone in a focus group refers to using a shared experience, activity, metaphor, or other creative technique to provide a common reference point and orientation for grounding the discussion.

The purpose of Mulvale et al. (2021) was to understand the hospital experiences of youth after suicide attempts.

The researchers created a touchstone to focus the discussion specifically around the hospital visit. This provided a shared orientation for the vulnerable participants to open up about their emotional journeys.

In the example from Mulvale et al. (2021), the researchers designated the hospital visit following suicide attempts as the touchstone. This means:

• The visit served as a defining shared experience all youth participants could draw upon to guide the focus group discussion, since they unfortunately had this in common.
• Framing questions around recounting and making meaning out of the hospitalization focused the conversation to elicit rich details about interactions, emotions, challenges, supports needed, and more in relation to this watershed event.
• The hospital visit as a touchstone likely resonated profoundly across youth given the intensity and vulnerability surrounding their suicide attempts. This deepened their willingness to open up and established group rapport.

So in this case, the touchstone concentrated the dialogue around a common catalyst experience enabling youth to build understanding, voice difficulties, and potentially find healing through sharing their journey with empathetic peers who had endured the same trauma.

Step 2 : Select a Homogeneous Grouping Characteristic

Select a homogeneous grouping characteristic (Krueger & Casey, 2009) to recruit participants with a commonality, like shared roles, experiences, or demographics, to enable meaningful discussion.

A sample size of between 6 to 10 participants allows for adequate mingling (MacIntosh 1993).

More members may diminish the ability to capture all viewpoints. Fewer risks limited diversity of thought.

Balance recruitment across income, gender, age, and cultural factors to increase heterogeneity in perspectives. Consider screening criteria to qualify relevant participants.

Choosing focus group participants requires balancing homogeneity and diversity – too much variation across gender, class, profession, etc., can inhibit sharing, while over-similarity limits perspectives. Groups should feel mutual comfort and relevance of experience to enable open contributions while still representing a mix of viewpoints on the topic (Morgan 1988).

Mulvale et al. (2021) determined grouping by gender rather than age or ethnicity was more impactful for suicide attempt experiences.

They fostered difficult discussions by bringing together male and female youth separately based on the sensitive nature of topics like societal expectations around distress.

Step 3 : Designate a Moderator

Designate a skilled, neutral moderator (Crowe, 2003; Morgan, 1997) to steer productive dialogue given their expertise in guiding group interactions. Consider cultural insider moderators positioned to foster participant sharing by understanding community norms.

Define moderator responsibilities like directing discussion flow, monitoring air time across members, and capturing observational notes on behaviors/dynamics.

Choose whether the moderator also analyzes data or only facilitates the group.

Mulvale et al. (2021) designated a moderator experienced working with marginalized youth to encourage sharing by establishing an empathetic, non-judgmental environment through trust-building and active listening guidance.

Step 4 : Develop a Focus Group Guide

Develop an extensive focus group guide (Krueger & Casey, 2009). Include an introduction to set a relaxed tone, explain the study rationale, review confidentiality protection procedures, and facilitate a participant introduction activity.

Also include guidelines reiterating respect, listening, and sharing principles both verbally and in writing.

Group confidentiality agreement

The group context introduces distinct ethical demands around informed consent, participant expectations, confidentiality, and data treatment. Establishing guidelines at the outset helps address relevant issues.

Create a group confidentiality agreement (Berg, 2004) specifying that all comments made during the session must remain private, anonymous in data analysis, and not discussed outside the group without permission.

Have it signed, demonstrating a communal commitment to sustaining a safe, secure environment for honest sharing.

Berg (2004) recommends a formal signed agreement prohibiting participants from publicly talking about anything said in the focus group without permission. This reassures members their personal disclosures are safeguarded.

Develop questions starting general then funneling down to 10-12 key questions on critical topics. Integrate think/pair/share activities between question sets to encourage inclusion. Close with a conclusion to summarize key ideas voiced without endorsing consensus.

Krueger and Casey (2009) recommend structuring focus group questions in five stages:

Opening Questions:

• Start with easy, non-threatening questions to make participants comfortable, often related to their background and experience with the topic.
• Get everyone talking and open up initial dialogue.
• Example: “Let’s go around and have each person share how long you’ve lived in this city.”

Introductory Questions:

• Transition to the key focus group objectives and main topics of interest.
• Remain quite general to provide baseline understanding before drilling down.
• Example: “Thinking broadly, how would you describe the arts and cultural offerings in your community?”

Transition Questions:

• Serve as a logical link between introductory and key questions.
• Funnel participants toward critical topics guided by research aims.
• Example: “Specifically related to concerts and theatre performances, what venues in town have you attended events at over the past year?”

Key Questions:

• Drive at the heart of study goals, and issues under investigation.
• Ask 5-10 questions that foster organic, interactive discussion between participants.
• Example: “What enhances or detracts from the concert-going experience at these various venues?”

Ending Questions:

• Provide an opportunity for final thoughts or anything missed.
• Assess the degree of consensus on key topics.
• Example: “If you could improve just one thing about the concert and theatre options here, what would you prioritize?”

It is vital to extensively pilot test draft questions to hone the wording, flow, timing, tone and tackle any gaps to adequately cover research objectives through dynamic group discussion.

Step 5 : Prepare the focus group room

Prepare the focus group room (Krueger & Casey, 2009) attending to details like circular seating for eye contact, centralized recording equipment with backup power, name cards, and refreshments to create a welcoming, affirming environment critical for participants to feel valued, comfortable engaging in genuine dialogue as a collective.

Arrange seating comfortably in a circle to facilitate discussion flow and eye contact among members. Decide if space for breakout conversations or activities like role-playing is needed.

Refreshments

• Coordinate snacks or light refreshments to be available when focus group members arrive, especially for longer sessions. This contributes to a welcoming atmosphere.
• Even if no snacks are provided, consider making bottled water available throughout the session.
• Set out colorful pens and blank name tags for focus group members to write their preferred name or pseudonym when they arrive.
• Attaching name tags to clothing facilitates interaction and expedites learning names.
• If short on preparation time, prepare printed name tags in advance based on RSVPs, but blank name tags enable anonymity if preferred.

Krueger & Casey (2009) suggest welcoming focus group members with comfortable, inclusive seating arrangements in a circle to enable eye contact. Providing snacks and music sets a relaxed tone.

Step 6 : Conduct the focus group

Conduct the focus group utilizing moderation skills like conveying empathy, observing verbal and non-verbal cues, gently redirecting and probing overlooked members, and affirming the usefulness of knowledge sharing.

Use facilitation principles (Krueger & Casey, 2009; Tracy 2013) like ensuring psychological safety, mutual respect, equitable airtime, and eliciting an array of perspectives to expand group knowledge. Gain member buy-in through collaborative review.

Record discussions through detailed note-taking, audio/video recording, and seating charts tracking engaged participation.

The role of moderator

The moderator is critical in facilitating open, interactive discussion in the group. Their main responsibilities are:

• Providing clear explanations of the purpose and helping participants feel comfortable
• Promoting debate by asking open-ended questions
• Drawing out differences of opinion and a range of perspectives by challenging participants
• Probing for more details when needed or moving the conversation forward
• Keeping the discussion focused and on track
• Ensuring all participants get a chance to speak
• Remaining neutral and non-judgmental, without sharing personal opinions

Moderators need strong interpersonal abilities to build participant trust and comfort sharing. The degree of control and input from the moderator depends on the research goals and personal style.

With multiple moderators, roles, and responsibilities should be clear and consistent across groups. Careful preparation is key for effective moderation.

Mulvale et al. (2021) fostered psychological safety for youth to share intense emotions about suicide attempts without judgment. The moderator ensured equitable speaking opportunities within a compassionate climate.

Krueger & Casey (2009) advise moderators to handle displays of distress empathetically by offering a break and emotional support through active listening instead of ignoring reactions. This upholds ethical principles.

Advantages and disadvantages of focus groups

Focus groups efficiently provide interactive qualitative data that can yield useful insights into emerging themes. However, findings may be skewed by group behaviors and still require larger sample validation through added research methods. Careful planning is vital.

• Efficient way to gather a range of perspectives in participants’ own words in a short time
• Group dynamic encourages more complex responses as members build on others’ comments
• Can observe meaningful group interactions, consensus, or disagreements
• Flexibility for moderators to probe unanticipated insights during discussion
• Often feels more comfortable sharing as part of a group rather than one-on-one
• Helps participants recall and reflect by listening to others tell their stories

Disadvantages

• Small sample size makes findings difficult to generalize
• Groupthink: influential members may discourage dissenting views from being shared
• Social desirability bias: reluctance from participants to oppose perceived majority opinions
• Requires highly skilled moderators to foster inclusive participation and contain domineering members
• Confidentiality harder to ensure than with individual interviews
• Transcriptions may have overlapping talk that is difficult to capture accurately
• Group dynamics adds layers of complexity for analysis beyond just the content of responses

Goss, J. D., & Leinbach, T. R. (1996). Focus groups as alternative research practice: experience with transmigrants in Indonesia.  Area , 115-123.

Kitzinger, J. (1994). The methodology of focus groups: the importance of interaction between research participants .  Sociology of health & illness ,  16 (1), 103-121.

Kitzinger J. (1995). Introducing focus groups. British Medical Journal, 311 , 299-302.

Morgan D.L. (1988). Focus groups as qualitative research . London: Sage.

Mulvale, G., Green, J., Miatello, A., Cassidy, A. E., & Martens, T. (2021). Finding harmony within dissonance: engaging patients, family/caregivers and service providers in research to fundamentally restructure relationships through integrative dynamics .  Health Expectations ,  24 , 147-160.

Powell, R. A., Single, H. M., & Lloyd, K. R. (1996). Focus groups in mental health research: enhancing the validity of user and provider questionnaires .  International Journal of Social Psychiatry ,  42 (3), 193-206.

Puchta, C., & Potter, J. (2004). Focus group practice . Sage.

Redmond, R. A., & Curtis, E. A. (2009). Focus groups: principles and process.  Nurse researcher ,  16 (3).

Smith, J. A., Scammon, D. L., & Beck, S. L. (1995). Using patient focus groups for new patient services.  The Joint Commission Journal on Quality Improvement ,  21 (1), 22-31.

Smithson, J. (2008). Focus groups.  The Sage handbook of social research methods , 357-370.

White, G. E., & Thomson, A. N. (1995). Anonymized focus groups as a research tool for health professionals.  Qualitative Health Research ,  5 (2), 256-261.

Download PDF slides of the presentation ‘ Conducting Focus Groups – A Brief Overview ‘

Chapter 12. Focus Groups

Introduction.

Focus groups are a particular and special form of interviewing in which the interview asks focused questions of a group of persons, optimally between five and eight. This group can be close friends, family members, or complete strangers. They can have a lot in common or nothing in common. Unlike one-on-one interviews, which can probe deeply, focus group questions are narrowly tailored (“focused”) to a particular topic and issue and, with notable exceptions, operate at the shallow end of inquiry. For example, market researchers use focus groups to find out why groups of people choose one brand of product over another. Because focus groups are often used for commercial purposes, they sometimes have a bit of a stigma among researchers. This is unfortunate, as the focus group is a helpful addition to the qualitative researcher’s toolkit. Focus groups explicitly use group interaction to assist in the data collection. They are particularly useful as supplements to one-on-one interviews or in data triangulation. They are sometimes used to initiate areas of inquiry for later data collection methods. This chapter describes the main forms of focus groups, lays out some key differences among those forms, and provides guidance on how to manage focus group interviews.

Focus Groups: What Are They and When to Use Them

As interviews, focus groups can be helpfully distinguished from one-on-one interviews. The purpose of conducting a focus group is not to expand the number of people one interviews: the focus group is a different entity entirely. The focus is on the group and its interactions and evaluations rather than on the individuals in that group. If you want to know how individuals understand their lives and their individual experiences, it is best to ask them individually. If you want to find out how a group forms a collective opinion about something (whether a product or an event or an experience), then conducting a focus group is preferable. The power of focus groups resides in their being both focused and oriented to the group . They are best used when you are interested in the shared meanings of a group or how people discuss a topic publicly or when you want to observe the social formation of evaluations. The interaction of the group members is an asset in this method of data collection. If your questions would not benefit from group interaction, this is a good indicator that you should probably use individual interviews (chapter 11). Avoid using focus groups when you are interested in personal information or strive to uncover deeply buried beliefs or personal narratives. In general, you want to avoid using focus groups when the subject matter is polarizing, as people are less likely to be honest in a group setting. There are a few exceptions, such as when you are conducting focus groups with people who are not strangers and/or you are attempting to probe deeply into group beliefs and evaluations. But caution is warranted in these cases. [1]

As with interviewing in general, there are many forms of focus groups. Focus groups are widely used by nonresearchers, so it is important to distinguish these uses from the research focus group. Businesses routinely employ marketing focus groups to test out products or campaigns. Jury consultants employ “mock” jury focus groups, testing out legal case strategies in advance of actual trials. Organizations of various kinds use focus group interviews for program evaluation (e.g., to gauge the effectiveness of a diversity training workshop). The research focus group has many similarities with all these uses but is specifically tailored to a research (rather than applied) interest. The line between application and research use can be blurry, however. To take the case of evaluating the effectiveness of a diversity training workshop, the same interviewer may be conducting focus group interviews both to provide specific actionable feedback for the workshop leaders (this is the application aspect) and to learn more about how people respond to diversity training (an interesting research question with theoretically generalizable results).

When forming a focus group, there are two different strategies for inclusion. Diversity focus groups include people with diverse perspectives and experiences. This helps the researcher identify commonalities across this diversity and/or note interactions across differences. What kind of diversity to capture depends on the research question, but care should be taken to ensure that those participating are not set up for attack from other participants. This is why many warn against diversity focus groups, especially around politically sensitive topics. The other strategy is to build a convergence focus group , which includes people with similar perspectives and experiences. These are particularly helpful for identifying shared patterns and group consensus. The important thing is to closely consider who will be invited to participate and what the composition of the group will be in advance. Some review of sampling techniques (see chapter 5) may be helpful here.

Moderating a focus group can be a challenge (more on this below). For this reason, confining your group to no more than eight participants is recommended. You probably want at least four persons to capture group interaction. Fewer than four participants can also make it more difficult for participants to remain (relatively) anonymous—there is less of a group in which to hide. There are exceptions to these recommendations. You might want to conduct a focus group with a naturally occurring group, as in the case of a family of three, a social club of ten, or a program of fifteen. When the persons know one another, the problems of too few for anonymity don’t apply, and although ten to fifteen can be unwieldy to manage, there are strategies to make this possible. If you really are interested in this group’s dynamic (not just a set of random strangers’ dynamic), then you will want to include all its members or as many as are willing and able to participate.

There are many benefits to conducting focus groups, the first of which is their interactivity. Participants can make comparisons, can elaborate on what has been voiced by another, and can even check one another, leading to real-time reevaluations. This last benefit is one reason they are sometimes employed specifically for consciousness raising or building group cohesion. This form of data collection has an activist application when done carefully and appropriately. It can be fun, especially for the participants. Additionally, what does not come up in a focus group, especially when expected by the researcher, can be very illuminating.

Many of these benefits do incur costs, however. The multiplicity of voices in a good focus group interview can be overwhelming both to moderate and later to transcribe. Because of the focused nature, deep probing is not possible (or desirable). You might only get superficial thinking or what people are willing to put out there publicly. If that is what you are interested in, good. If you want deeper insight, you probably will not get that here. Relatedly, extreme views are often suppressed, and marginal viewpoints are unspoken or, if spoken, derided. You will get the majority group consensus and very little of minority viewpoints. Because people will be engaged with one another, there is the possibility of cut-off sentences, making it even more likely to hear broad brush themes and not detailed specifics. There really is very little opportunity for specific follow-up questions to individuals. Reading over a transcript, you may be frustrated by avenues of inquiry that were foreclosed early.

Some people expect that conducting focus groups is an efficient form of data collection. After all, you get to hear from eight people instead of just one in the same amount of time! But this is a serious misunderstanding. What you hear in a focus group is one single group interview or discussion. It is not the same thing at all as conducting eight single one-hour interviews. Each focus group counts as “one.” Most likely, you will need to conduct several focus groups, and you can design these as comparisons to one another. For example, the American Sociological Association (ASA) Task Force on First-Generation and Working-Class Persons in Sociology began its study of the impact of class in sociology by conducting five separate focus groups with different groups of sociologists: graduate students, faculty (in general), community college faculty, faculty of color, and a racially diverse group of students and faculty. Even though the total number of participants was close to forty, the “number” of cases was five. It is highly recommended that when employing focus groups, you plan on composing more than one and at least three. This allows you to take note of and potentially discount findings from a group with idiosyncratic dynamics, such as where a particularly dominant personality silences all other voices. In other words, putting all your eggs into a single focus group basket is not a good idea.

How to Conduct a Focus Group Interview/Discussion

Advance preparations.

Once you have selected your focus groups and set a date and time, there are a few things you will want to plan out before meeting.

As with interviews, you begin by creating an interview (or discussion) guide. Where a good one-on-one interview guide should include ten to twelve main topics with possible prompts and follow-ups (see the example provided in chapter 11), the focus group guide should be more narrowly tailored to a single focus or topic area. For example, a focus might be “How students coped with online learning during the pandemic,” and a series of possible questions would be drafted that would help prod participants to think about and discuss this topic. These questions or discussion prompts can be creative and may include stimulus materials (watching a video or hearing a story) or posing hypotheticals. For example, Cech ( 2021 ) has a great hypothetical, asking what a fictional character should do: keep his boring job in computers or follow his passion and open a restaurant. You can ask a focus group this question and see what results—how the group comes to define a “good job,” what questions they ask about the hypothetical (How boring is his job really? Does he hate getting up in the morning, or is it more of an everyday tedium? What kind of financial support will he have if he quits? Does he even know how to run a restaurant?), and how they reach a consensus or create clear patterns of disagreement are all interesting findings that can be generated through this technique.

As with the above example (“What should Joe do?”), it is best to keep the questions you ask simple and easily understood by everyone. Thinking about the sequence of the questions/prompts is important, just as it is in conducting any interviews.

Avoid embarrassing questions. Always leave an out for the “I have a friend who X” response rather than pushing people to divulge personal information. Asking “How do you think students coped?” is better than “How did you cope?” Chances are, some participants will begin talking about themselves without you directly asking them to do so, but allowing impersonal responses here is good. The group itself will determine how deep and how personal it wants to go. This is not the time or place to push anyone out of their comfort zone!

Of course, people have different levels of comfort talking publicly about certain topics. You will have provided detailed information to your focus group participants beforehand and secured consent. But even so, the conversation may take a turn that makes someone uncomfortable. Be on the lookout for this, and remind everyone of their ability to opt out—to stay silent or to leave if necessary. Rather than call attention to anyone in this way, you also want to let everyone know they are free to walk around—to get up and get coffee (more on this below) or use the restroom or just step out of the room to take a call. Of course, you don’t really want anyone to do any of these things, and chances are everyone will stay seated during the hour, but you should leave this “out” for those who need it.

Have copies of consent forms and any supplemental questionnaire (e.g., demographic information) you are using prepared in advance. Ask a friend or colleague to assist you on the day of the focus group. They can be responsible for making sure the recording equipment is functioning and may even take some notes on body language while you are moderating the discussion. Order food (coffee or snacks) for the group. This is important! Having refreshments will be appreciated by your participants and really damps down the anxiety level. Bring name tags and pens. Find a quiet welcoming space to convene. Often this is a classroom where you move chairs into a circle, but public libraries often have meeting rooms that are ideal places for community members to meet. Be sure that the space allows for food.

Researcher Note

When I was designing my research plan for studying activist groups, I consulted one of the best qualitative researchers I knew, my late friend Raphael Ezekiel, author of The Racist Mind . He looked at my plan to hand people demographic surveys at the end of the meetings I planned to observe and said, “This methodology is missing one crucial thing.” “What?” I asked breathlessly, anticipating some technical insider tip. “Chocolate!” he answered. “They’ll be tired, ready to leave when you ask them to fill something out. Offer an incentive, and they will stick around.” It worked! As the meetings began to wind down, I would whip some bags of chocolate candies out of my bag. Everyone would stare, and I’d say they were my thank-you gift to anyone who filled out my survey. Once I learned to include some sugar-free candies for diabetics, my typical response rate was 100 percent. (And it gave me an additional class-culture data point by noticing who chose which brand; sure enough, Lindt balls went faster at majority professional-middle-class groups, and Hershey’s minibars went faster at majority working-class groups.)

—Betsy Leondar-Wright, author of Missing Class , coauthor of The Color of Wealth , associate professor of sociology at Lasell University, and coordinator of staffing at the Mission Project for Class Action

During the Focus Group

As people arrive, greet them warmly, and make sure you get a signed consent form (if not in advance). If you are using name tags, ask them to fill one out and wear it. Let them get food and find a seat and do a little chatting, as they might wish. Once seated, many focus group moderators begin with a relevant icebreaker. This could be simple introductions that have some meaning or connection to the focus. In the case of the ASA task force focus groups discussed above, we asked people to introduce themselves and where they were working/studying (“Hi, I’m Allison, and I am a professor at Oregon State University”). You will also want to introduce yourself and the study in simple terms. They’ve already read the consent form, but you would be surprised at how many people ignore the details there or don’t remember them. Briefly talking about the study and then letting people ask any follow-up questions lays a good foundation for a successful discussion, as it reminds everyone what the point of the event is.

Focus groups should convene for between forty-five and ninety minutes. Of course, you must tell the participants the time you have chosen in advance, and you must promptly end at the time allotted. Do not make anyone nervous by extending the time. Let them know at the outset that you will adhere to this timeline. This should reduce the nervous checking of phones and watches and wall clocks as the end time draws near.

Set ground rules and expectations for the group discussion. My preference is to begin with a general question and let whoever wants to answer it do so, but other moderators expect each person to answer most questions. Explain how much cross-talk you will permit (or encourage). Again, my preference is to allow the group to pick up the ball and run with it, so I will sometimes keep my head purposefully down so that they engage with one another rather than me, but I have seen other moderators take a much more engaged position. Just be clear at the outset about what your expectations are. You may or may not want to explain how the group should deal with those who would dominate the conversation. Sometimes, simply stating at the outset that all voices should be heard is enough to create a more egalitarian discourse. Other times, you will have to actively step in to manage (moderate) the exchange to allow more voices to be heard. Finally, let people know they are free to get up to get more coffee or leave the room as they need (if you are OK with this). You may ask people to refrain from using their phones during the duration of the discussion. That is up to you too.

Either before or after the introductions (your call), begin recording the discussion with their collective permission and knowledge . If you have brought a friend or colleague to assist you (as you should), have them attend to the recording. Explain the role of your colleague to the group (e.g., they will monitor the recording and will take short notes throughout to help you when you read the transcript later; they will be a silent observer).

Once the focus group gets going, it may be difficult to keep up. You will need to make a lot of quick decisions during the discussion about whether to intervene or let it go unguided. Only you really care about the research question or topic, so only you will really know when the discussion is truly off topic. However you handle this, keep your “participation” to a minimum. According to Lune and Berg ( 2018:95 ), the moderator’s voice should show up in the transcript no more than 10 percent of the time. By the way, you should also ask your research assistant to take special note of the “intensity” of the conversation, as this may be lost in a transcript. If there are people looking overly excited or tapping their feet with impatience or nodding their heads in unison, you want some record of this for future analysis.

I’m not sure why this stuck with me, but I thought it would be interesting to share. When I was reviewing my plan for conducting focus groups with one of my committee members, he suggested that I give the participants their gift cards first. The incentive for participating in the study was a gift card of their choice, and typical processes dictate that participants must complete the study in order to receive their gift card. However, my committee member (who is Native himself) suggested I give it at the beginning. As a qualitative researcher, you build trust with the people you engage with. You are asking them to share their stories with you, their intimate moments, their vulnerabilities, their time. Not to mention that Native people are familiar with being academia’s subjects of interest with little to no benefit to be returned to them. To show my appreciation, one of the things I could do was to give their gifts at the beginning, regardless of whether or not they completed participating.

—Susanna Y. Park, PhD, mixed-methods researcher in public health and author of “How Native Women Seek Support as Survivors of Intimate Partner Violence: A Mixed-Methods Study”

After the Focus Group

Your “data” will be either fieldnotes taken during the focus group or, more desirably, transcripts of the recorded exchange. If you do not have permission to record the focus group discussion, make sure you take very clear notes during the exchange and then spend a few hours afterward filling them in as much as possible, creating a rich memo to yourself about what you saw and heard and experienced, including any notes about body language and interactions. Ideally, however, you will have recorded the discussion. It is still a good idea to spend some time immediately after the conclusion of the discussion to write a memo to yourself with all the things that may not make it into the written record (e.g., body language and interactions). This is also a good time to journal about or create a memo with your initial researcher reactions to what you saw, noting anything of particular interest that you want to come back to later on (e.g., “It was interesting that no one thought Joe should quit his job, but in the other focus group, half of the group did. I wonder if this has something to do with the fact that all the participants were first-generation college students. I should pay attention to class background here.”).

Please thank each of your participants in a follow-up email or text. Let them know you appreciated their time and invite follow-up questions or comments.

One of the difficult things about focus group transcripts is keeping speakers distinct. Eventually, you are going to be using pseudonyms for any publication, but for now, you probably want to know who said what. You can assign speaker numbers (“Speaker 1,” “Speaker 2”) and connect those identifications with particular demographic information in a separate document. Remember to clearly separate actual identifications (as with consent forms) to prevent breaches of anonymity. If you cannot identify a speaker when transcribing, you can write, “Unidentified Speaker.” Once you have your transcript(s) and memos and fieldnotes, you can begin analyzing the data (chapters 18 and 19).

Advanced: Focus Groups on Sensitive Topics

Throughout this chapter, I have recommended against raising sensitive topics in focus group discussions. As an introvert myself, I find the idea of discussing personal topics in a group disturbing, and I tend to avoid conducting these kinds of focus groups. And yet I have actually participated in focus groups that do discuss personal information and consequently have been of great value to me as a participant (and researcher) because of this. There are even some researchers who believe this is the best use of focus groups ( de Oliveira 2011 ). For example, Jordan et al. ( 2007 ) argue that focus groups should be considered most useful for illuminating locally sanctioned ways of talking about sensitive issues. So although I do not recommend the beginning qualitative researcher dive into deep waters before they can swim, this section will provide some guidelines for conducting focus groups on sensitive topics. To my mind, these are a minimum set of guidelines to follow when dealing with sensitive topics.

First, be transparent about the place of sensitive topics in your focus group. If the whole point of your focus group is to discuss something sensitive, such as how women gain support after traumatic sexual assault events, make this abundantly clear in your consent form and recruiting materials. It is never appropriate to blindside participants with sensitive or threatening topics .

Second, create a confidentiality form (figure 12.2) for each participant to sign. These forms carry no legal weight, but they do create an expectation of confidentiality for group members.

In order to respect the privacy of all participants in [insert name of study here], all parties are asked to read and sign the statement below. If you have any reason not to sign, please discuss this with [insert your name], the researcher of this study, I, ________________________, agree to maintain the confidentiality of the information discussed by all participants and researchers during the focus group discussion.

Signature: _____________________________ Date: _____________________

Researcher’s Signature:___________________ Date:______________________

Figure 12.2 Confidentiality Agreement of Focus Group Participants

Third, provide abundant space for opting out of the discussion. Participants are, of course, always permitted to refrain from answering a question or to ask for the recording to be stopped. It is important that focus group members know they have these rights during the group discussion as well. And if you see a person who is looking uncomfortable or like they want to hide, you need to step in affirmatively and remind everyone of these rights.

Finally, if things go “off the rails,” permit yourself the ability to end the focus group. Debrief with each member as necessary.

Further Readings

Barbour, Rosaline. 2018. Doing Focus Groups . 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Written by a medical sociologist based in the UK, this is a good how-to guide for conducting focus groups.

Gibson, Faith. 2007. “Conducting Focus Groups with Children and Young People: Strategies for Success.” Journal of Research in Nursing 12(5):473–483. As the title suggests, this article discusses both methodological and practical concerns when conducting focus groups with children and young people and offers some tips and strategies for doing so effectively.

Hopkins, Peter E. 2007. “Thinking Critically and Creatively about Focus Groups.” Area 39(4):528–535. Written from the perspective of critical/human geography, Hopkins draws on examples from his own work conducting focus groups with Muslim men. Useful for thinking about positionality.

Jordan, Joanne, Una Lynch, Marianne Moutray, Marie-Therese O’Hagan, Jean Orr, Sandra Peake, and John Power. 2007. “Using Focus Groups to Research Sensitive Issues: Insights from Group Interviews on Nursing in the Northern Ireland ‘Troubles.’” International Journal of Qualitative Methods 6(4), 1–19. A great example of using focus groups productively around emotional or sensitive topics. The authors suggest that focus groups should be considered most useful for illuminating locally sanctioned ways of talking about sensitive issues.

Merton, Robert K., Marjorie Fiske, and Patricia L. Kendall. 1956. The Focused Interview: A Manual of Problems and Procedures . New York: Free Press. This is one of the first classic texts on conducting interviews, including an entire chapter devoted to the “group interview” (chapter 6).

Morgan, David L. 1986. “Focus Groups.” Annual Review of Sociology 22:129–152. An excellent sociological review of the use of focus groups, comparing and contrasting to both surveys and interviews, with some suggestions for improving their use and developing greater rigor when utilizing them.

de Oliveira, Dorca Lucia. 2011. “The Use of Focus Groups to Investigate Sensitive Topics: An Example Taken from Research on Adolescent Girls’ Perceptions about Sexual Risks.” Cien Saude Colet 16(7):3093–3102. Another example of discussing sensitive topics in focus groups. Here, the author explores using focus groups with teenage girls to discuss AIDS, risk, and sexuality as a matter of public health interest.

Peek, Lori, and Alice Fothergill. 2009. “Using Focus Groups: Lessons from Studying Daycare Centers, 9/11, and Hurricane Katrina.” Qualitative Research 9(1):31–59. An examination of the efficacy and value of focus groups by comparing three separate projects: a study of teachers, parents, and children at two urban daycare centers; a study of the responses of second-generation Muslim Americans to the events of September 11; and a collaborative project on the experiences of children and youth following Hurricane Katrina. Throughout, the authors stress the strength of focus groups with marginalized, stigmatized, or vulnerable individuals.

Wilson, Valerie. 1997. “Focus Groups: A Useful Qualitative Method for Educational Research?” British Educational Research Journal 23(2):209–224. A basic description of how focus groups work using an example from a study intended to inform initiatives in health education and promotion in Scotland.

• Note that I have included a few examples of conducting focus groups with sensitive issues in the “ Further Readings ” section and have included an “ Advanced: Focus Groups on Sensitive Topics ” section on this area. ↵

A focus group interview is an interview with a small group of people on a specific topic.  “The power of focus groups resides in their being focused” (Patton 2002:388).  These are sometimes framed as “discussions” rather than interviews, with a discussion “moderator.”  Alternatively, the focus group is “a form of data collection whereby the researcher convenes a small group of people having similar attributes, experiences, or ‘focus’ and leads the group in a nondirective manner.  The objective is to surface the perspectives of the people in the group with as minimal influence by the researcher as possible” (Yin 2016:336).  See also diversity focus group and convergence focus group.

A form of focus group construction in which people with diverse perspectives and experiences are chosen for inclusion.  This helps the researcher identify commonalities across this diversity and/or note interactions across differences.  Contrast with a convergence focus group

A form of focus group construction in which people with similar perspectives and experiences are included.  These are particularly helpful for identifying shared patterns and group consensus.  Contrast with a diversity focus group .

Introduction to Qualitative Research Methods Copyright © 2023 by Allison Hurst is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

The Ultimate Guide to Qualitative Research - Part 1: The Basics

• Introduction and overview
• What is qualitative research?
• What is qualitative data?
• Examples of qualitative data
• Qualitative vs. quantitative research
• Mixed methods
• Qualitative research preparation
• Theoretical perspective
• Theoretical framework
• Literature reviews
• Research question
• Conceptual framework
• Conceptual vs. theoretical framework
• Data collection
• Qualitative research methods

What is a focus group in research?

Why are focus groups effective in research, what are some research examples of focus groups, planning and conducting focus groups, challenges and limitations of focus groups.

• Observational research
• Case studies
• Ethnographical research
• Ethical considerations

Confidentiality and privacy

• Power dynamics
• Reflexivity

Focus groups

Focus groups are a widely used qualitative research method in which a small group of participants engage in guided discussions on a specific topic. You might think of a focus group as a group interview because it can gather information on people's experiences, opinions, and feelings in a natural and interactive setting. However, the group dynamic of a focus group discussion can also be especially useful for observing how people construct meaning together, practice body language, and interact with each other.

In this section, we'll discuss the focus group method, compare it to interview research, and explore what researchers can do with focus group data.

Focus groups are characterized by their collaborative, interactive nature, with discussions guided by a facilitator or moderator. These qualities raise some similarities with and differences from qualities found in interview research .

What is the purpose of a focus group?

Like interviews, focus groups are often used to elicit opinions and perspectives about a topic, product, or service. Market research often employs focus group discussions to test out something new before it is introduced to the larger public. However, a focus group can also illuminate social behavior by allowing researchers to observe how people interact with each other in a way that wouldn't be possible with interviews or observations .

How many people form a focus group?

One key characteristic is the number of focus group participants involved. In this type of research, a moderator will typically work with a small group of 6 to 10 focus group members. This range is considered optimal because it is small enough to allow everyone a chance to share their thoughts and large enough to ensure a diversity of perspectives. Too few participants can limit the richness of the discussion, while too many can make the discussion difficult to manage and may prevent some participants from expressing their views.

What does a focus group do?

In general, a focus group consists of posing questions to a group of people and inviting then to discuss the question or topic. Focus group discussions are typically guided by a set of open-ended questions prepared in advance by the researcher. Ideally, focus group questions serve as prompts to stimulate discussion and to ensure that all relevant topics are covered.

The nature of these questions varies depending on the research objectives. Still, they are generally broad and non-directive, allowing participants the freedom to express their views and experiences in their own words. The role of the moderator is to use these questions to guide the discussion, to probe deeper when necessary, and to ensure that all participants have the opportunity to contribute.

The interaction among group members is the defining characteristic that sets focus groups apart from other qualitative research methods like individual interviews. They allow researchers to observe how opinions are formed and influenced within a social context. Through these interactions, researchers can gain insights into not only individual attitudes and beliefs but also the group dynamics that shape these attitudes and beliefs.

The interaction among participants can stimulate new thoughts and ideas, reveal points of agreement or disagreement, and highlight the process of consensus-building or negotiation that occurs in a group setting. The moderator plays a crucial role in facilitating these interactions, encouraging participation, managing conflicts, and maintaining a constructive and respectful discussion environment.

Focus groups are used in a variety of research settings, from market research to social science studies, due to their versatility in collecting qualitative data . They provide a rich source of information as they capture not only what people think but also how they think and why they think the way they do. Let's look at some of the potential applications of focus groups in research.

Exploratory research

Focus groups are particularly valuable in exploratory research, which is often the first step in investigating a new or complex issue. Exploratory research aims to gain a general understanding of a problem, and focus groups are well-suited for this task due to their interactive and dynamic nature. They can help researchers identify key themes , generate propositions, and develop a deeper understanding of the research context. By encouraging open-ended discussion, these group interactions can reveal a breadth of perspectives and experiences and uncover issues and insights that researchers may not have anticipated.

Idea generation

The group dynamics of focus groups can stimulate creative thinking and the generation of new ideas. This can be particularly beneficial in fields such as product development, policy making, and program design. In these settings, focus groups can help researchers or practitioners gather a range of ideas about a new product, policy, or program, which can then be further refined and evaluated.

Language and terminology

Focus groups can also provide valuable insights into the language and terms that participants use to discuss a certain topic. This is particularly important in qualitative research, where the goal is often to understand the meanings and interpretations that people attach to their experiences. The language used in focus group discussions can reveal these meanings and interpretations and help researchers develop a more nuanced understanding of the topic under study. This understanding can also be particularly useful when developing survey instruments or interpreting other qualitative data.

Assessing concepts and prototypes

Focus groups can also be used to assess concepts and prototypes. For example, in marketing research, a focus group might be used to gather feedback on a new product design or to understand how potential users interact with a prototype. In social science research, focus groups might be used to refine and verify concepts or theories that are relevant to group behavior. This kind of feedback can help researchers and practitioners hone their ideas based on the social interactions of the focus group.

Observing social interaction online

The advent of digital technologies has expanded the possibilities for observing social interaction through the use of online focus groups. Online focus groups, conducted via video conferencing platforms, chat rooms, or discussion forums, offer similar benefits to their in-person counterparts but with added flexibility. They allow participants from diverse geographical locations to engage in discussion, and they can be more convenient and less intimidating for some participants.

Moreover, online focus groups can provide a written or recorded transcript of the discussion, which can be useful for analysis. However, they also present unique challenges, such as managing group dynamics in a virtual environment and ensuring access and comfort with the necessary technology among participants.

Unlock key insights from your data with ATLAS.ti

Download a free trial of ATLAS.ti to see what it can do for your qualitative research project.

Many different fields use focus groups both as a means to collect honest opinions about key research topics or to observe human behavior and interaction. Let's look at some of the many fields that employ a focus group format in research.

Consumer behavior: In market research, focus groups are often used to understand consumer preferences and attitudes toward products or services. For instance, a company might use a focus group to gauge consumer reactions to a new product concept or to understand the reasons behind purchasing decisions.

Healthcare: In healthcare research, focus groups have been used to explore patients' experiences and perceptions of healthcare services or to understand the attitudes and beliefs of healthcare providers. For example, a study might conduct focus groups with patients to gain insights into the barriers and facilitators to medication adherence.

Education: In educational research, focus groups can be used to understand student experiences, attitudes, and beliefs. For instance, a university might use focus groups to explore students' perceptions of campus safety, or a school district might conduct focus group discussions with teachers to understand the challenges they face in implementing a new curriculum.

Public policy: Focus groups can provide valuable insights into the formulation and evaluation of public policies. They can be used to understand public perceptions and attitudes toward policy proposals or to gather feedback on existing policies. For example, a local government might use focus groups to explore residents' views on a proposed transportation policy.

As with interviews, conducting a focus group isn't simply a matter of having people in the same place and talking to them. Focus group research methods call for intentional planning and organization. Here are some considerations to keep in mind when thinking about focus groups.

Selecting participants

The selection of participants is a crucial step in planning a focus group. Participants should be chosen based on their relevance to the research question. They might share a common characteristic (e.g., they are users of a particular service, or they belong to a specific age group), or they may represent a diversity of perspectives on the topic under discussion.

The group should be small enough to manage (typically 6-10 participants) but large enough to ensure a variety of views. In some cases, researchers might choose to conduct multiple focus groups to compare and contrast different groups’ views.

Developing a discussion guide

A discussion guide outlines the topics to be discussed during the focus group. It typically includes a list of open-ended questions and prompts that are designed to stimulate discussion on the research topic.

The questions should be thoughtfully constructed and sequenced, starting with broader questions to warm up the group and progressively focusing on more specific areas of interest. While the discussion guide serves as a roadmap for the session, the moderator should be flexible and responsive to the flow of the discussion, probing for deeper insights and following up on interesting or unexpected comments.

Role of the moderator

The role of the moderator is central to the success of a focus group. A skilled moderator facilitates the discussion, encourages participation, manages group dynamics, and ensures that all topics in the discussion guide are covered. The moderator needs to ensure each participant gets a chance to express their views, and it is also helpful to keep participants from speaking over one another so that everyone can be heard, both during the discussion and for subsequent transcription.

The moderator needs to create an environment where participants feel comfortable sharing their views while also ensuring that the discussion remains focused and productive. This requires a balance of active listening, gentle steering, and tactful intervention when necessary.

Managing group dynamics

Managing group dynamics is a key challenge in focus groups. The interaction among participants can stimulate rich and insightful discussions, but it can also lead to issues such as dominance by a few participants, groupthink, or conflicts. As a result, the moderator plays a crucial role in managing these dynamics, encouraging quieter participants to speak, respectfully managing more dominant participants, and facilitating a constructive and respectful discussion environment.

However, the extent to which the moderator controls the discussion may depend on the research inquiry driving the focus group, particularly if the study is concerned with observing a particular behavior or group dynamic. A fruitful focus group discussion often consists of participants speaking with each other, as opposed to each participant simply answering the moderator one by one.

Focus group question examples

Designing focus group questions is an art in itself, with a focus on sparking discussion and interaction among participants. Here are some example questions that are particularly suited for focus groups:

• "How do others here feel about what [participant's name] just said?" This question can encourage participants to respond to each other's views, fostering a more interactive discussion.
• "Can anyone provide a different perspective on this issue?" This prompt invites diversity of opinion and encourages quieter participants to contribute.
• "Why do you think people might have different opinions about this topic?" This question can stimulate discussion about the reasons behind varying perspectives.
• "Can you help me understand why this is important to you?" By asking for elaboration, this question can lead to deeper, more nuanced discussions.
• "Has anyone had a different experience?" This question can bring out a range of experiences and perspectives within the group.
• "How do you think others outside of this group might view this issue?" This question encourages participants to consider perspectives beyond their own, fostering empathy and understanding.

By crafting questions that prompt group interaction and discussion, researchers can harness the full potential of the focus group method.

At first glance, a focus group is a great way to quickly capture the perspectives of multiple participants. That said, meeting this goal has its challenges. Let's discuss some of them briefly.

Recruitment and participation

One of the key challenges in conducting focus groups is recruiting and retaining an appropriate group of participants. Given the group-based nature of this method, a single participant dropping out can significantly impact the dynamics and the effectiveness of the session. Ensuring a diversity of views while also creating a comfortable environment for open discussion can be a delicate balance to strike. Additionally, scheduling a time that is convenient for all participants can be logistically challenging, particularly when dealing with busy or hard-to-reach populations.

Interpreting group dynamics

While the interaction in focus groups can generate rich insights, it can also complicate the interpretation of the data. The dynamics of the group discussion can influence individual responses, with dominant personalities potentially skewing the discussion or quieter participants holding back their views. It can be challenging for researchers to discern whether the views expressed represent the individual's true beliefs, the influence of the group dynamic, or a combination of both.

Depth of individual perspectives

Unlike other research methods , focus groups can provide a broad overview of group opinions and norms. However, they may not allow for the depth of understanding of individual experiences and perspectives that can be achieved through other qualitative methods, like one-on-one interviews. Time constraints and the need to ensure all participants have a chance to speak can limit the depth of exploration into individual views and experiences.

Transcription and data analysis

Other methods, such as surveys and interviews , generate data that is relatively easier to organize. Survey data is often divided into records, each representing a particular individual, while each and every interview has its own separate raw audio and corresponding transcript. A focus group has multiple participants who may contribute spontaneously to a discussion and even talk over each other. Transcribing these interactions for the purposes of coding and data analysis can be time-consuming as the researcher needs to discern between different voices and adequately represent these voices for empirical analysis.

Ethical considerations for focus groups

As with all other qualitative research methods, ethical issues such as informed consent and vulnerable populations are relevant to focus group discussions. However, there are also ethical considerations that are unique to focus groups that are worth thinking about.

Potential for unintended disclosure

In a focus group, there's a distinct possibility that participants may disclose more personal or sensitive information than they intended due to the dynamics of the group conversation. This presents an ethical challenge for researchers, as they have a responsibility to protect participants from potential harm, including emotional distress that might result from such disclosures. Researchers should be prepared to manage these situations by providing immediate support if necessary, reminding participants about the voluntary nature of their participation and their right to pass on any question, and following up with participants after the session if appropriate.

Protecting the confidentiality and privacy of participants is another key ethical consideration. In focus groups, this can be more challenging than in one-on-one interviews because there are multiple participants. Researchers should ensure that participants understand the importance of confidentiality, which includes not disclosing any information revealed during the discussion with people outside the focus group. The researcher should also take steps to protect participants' privacy in the research report, such as by using pseudonyms or other de-identifying methods. Online focus groups present additional privacy considerations, such as data security and the potential for participants to be identified through their online profiles.

Managing sensitive topics

Focus group discussions can sometimes involve sensitive topics that may cause discomfort or distress for participants. Researchers need to be prepared to manage these situations with ethical awareness and sensitivity. This includes being aware of potential triggers, providing support or referrals to support services if necessary, and ensuring that the discussion remains respectful and safe for all participants.

Respect for diversity

Given the group nature of focus groups, respect for diversity is an important ethical consideration. This includes being sensitive to and respectful of differences in culture, age, gender, socioeconomic status, and other factors among participants. Researchers should foster an inclusive and respectful discussion environment and should be mindful of potential power dynamics or biases that could influence the discussion.

Organize and analyze your data with ATLAS.ti

Intuitive and powerful tools to analyze interviews and focus groups at your fingertips, starting witha free trial.

Skip navigation

World Leaders in Research-Based User Experience

Focus Groups 101

July 31, 2022 2022-07-31

• Email article
• Share on LinkedIn
• Share on Twitter

It is no secret that the field of user experience often favors objective, observational research methods over subjective, attitudinal methods. After all, when something is observed, with proof that it has actually happened, it can be hard to argue against it. However, it takes more than observational research to truly empathize and understand the full complexity of a person’s experience, which includes emotional experiences, mindsets, values, and belief systems. Since there is no other way to gather this data (at the writing of this article, mind reading with neural implants is not possible) researchers must use attitudinal methods to solicit the thoughts and opinions of target customers. A focus group is one of these methods.

In This Article:

What is a focus group, limitations and risks of focus groups, benefits of focus groups, you can run an effective focus group.

Definition: A focus group is a qualitative, attitudinal research method in which a facilitator conducts a meeting or workshop (typically about 1–2 hours long) with a group of 6–9 people to discuss issues and concerns about their experiences with a product or service. The term “focus” relates to the role of the facilitator, who maintains the group’s focus on certain topics during discussions.

Traditionally, focus groups have been a market-research method, used to get a sense of some aspect of a product, service, or concept. In these settings, the focus would typically be on certain words, graphics, videos, or other noninteractive media. All participants are presented with the media as a group and then prompted to provide their thoughts to the facilitator and the rest of the group.

Generally speaking, focus groups can provide useful information about your customers’ overall opinions and their impressions of a product or service.

Focus groups are notoriously problematic and often improperly used. Here are some of their limitations:

• They do not provide detailed insights on usability. People will comment on what is shown or remembered and offer opinions, so, by their nature, focus groups cannot provide any objective information on behavior when using a product or service. Thus, they cannot provide detailed usability insights, which would be best found with a usability test or field study . Even if there are some usability insights uncovered when presenting a design, products are almost never used by a whole committee; they’re used individually.
• People don’t always know what they will do or what will MOST benefit them in the future. In many focus groups, participants are asked whether they would use a particular product. But users do not always do what they say they will do. So, while it’s helpful to listen to customers’ concerns, preferences, or requests for features or product offerings — especially to uncover unmet user needs — the requests themselves are not always going to be the best solutions to address customers’ needs in a systematic and prioritized way.
• Negativity bias often results in people more readily recalling what was bad about an experience (particularly if it was not a great one), which can skew the discussion negatively for everyone else.
• The peak-end rule can cause people to overly focus on the most memorable and most recent moments, at the expense of other possibly more-meaningful ones.
• Priming can cause participants to overemphasize an aspect of their experience, because it so happened that someone else mentioned it and made them remember it.
• Group dynamics may impact how much (or how little) people share.  Strong personalities in the group may affect what and how much is shared. Depending on the focus group’s format, it may disproportionately represent the opinions of those who are more talkative or quick to answer. Groupthink is also more likely to occur in these settings if only verbal contributions are given attention. To paraphrase my colleague Sarah Gibbons : a poorly run focus group can be a great way to pay 9 people for the opinions of three.

Given these limitations, focus groups should NOT be utilized in the following contexts:

• Evaluating a design’s usability 
• Evaluating workflows
• Creating a list of design requirements
• Determining a UI’s impact on emotions
• Quantifying satisfaction or other sentiments 

Despite these shortcomings, there are some good reasons to consider a focus group:

• Participants with similar goals or perspectives can build on each other’s responses or recall experiences in greater detail. Sometimes during interviews, a participant might have trouble recalling all the details of an experience. However, hearing another participant mention something related may trigger the recollection of an important detail, which would otherwise get skimmed over in an interview.
• They can help teams clarify users’ mental models and language (vocabulary) around the problem space during discovery phases , before conducting further research. While you should generally run a pilot study for most research studies anyway, a focus group can help researchers rework a research plan or facilitator guide with language that could be more user-centered.
• They are a time-efficient method for the researcher. Rather than dedicate 9–12 hours interviewing 6–9 individual participants, a researcher can dedicate 1–2 hours to gather the perspectives of 6–9 people at the same time. It can be a quick way to learn from many people and perspectives (and certainly a 100% improvement to conducting no research at all). These can be especially time-efficient if the researcher is facilitating the focus group online rather than in person.
• When run properly, they can yield rich qualitative insights due to a format similar to semistructured interviews . Unlike questionnaires — which can sometimes limit the level of detail covered — focus groups give facilitators the flexibility to explore topics in which the participants are interested. This format is especially useful if the team is still in early stages of product development and trying to discover new information about the problem space.

Given these benefits, focus groups are BEST utilized in the following contexts:

• Early discovery research to gauge customer familiarity or interest in a concept and initial impressions
• Understanding users’ mental models and expectations
• Cocreation workshops with sponsored customers

It’s fair to say that focus groups are often unfairly maligned, considering the many benefits they can yield with relatively less time commitment compared to other methods. The key to reaping these benefits and mitigating limitations is to use a combination of other research methods (like other behavioral or attitudinal methods), and having a strong research plan.

Here are the key things to consider when planning your focus group:

1. Recruit participants that are representative of your target audience(s).

Who do you want to learn about? What specific segment of users are you interested in? Even if your user is “everybody,” use personas , archetypes , or jobs-to-be-done to identify key recruiting criteria . Recruiting is a tricky balance of finding similar user motivations and goals (not demographics) while inviting a mix of backgrounds to reduce bias from other sources — such as having an overly westernized sample when studying a global offering.

2. Note potential sources of bias from the focus group’s structure.

Note who is not included, and why, for consideration during analysis and when strategizing future research.  Is it a different segment that’s intentionally excluded? Lack of response? Lack of interest/trust? Bias is difficult to totally eliminate, but awareness of sources of bias can help during analysis and might inform future research. For example:

• With online focus groups, there may be potential participants who are excluded from participating (be it due to a poor internet connection, lack of a desktop device, or low literacy in certain digital tools). Thus, they may not be able join a video chat or, if they do join, they may be less likely to participate when using an unfamiliar online-meeting tool or whiteboard platform for the first time.
• With in-person focus groups, it’s fair to assume that the study will only involve participants from the immediate commutable vicinity (i.e., within the city or state), especially if travel is not funded by the study or if insufficient notice is provided for those commuting from further distances.
• Is your focus group accessible? This is relevant for both in-person and online focus groups. Can disabled participants get into the facility and participate readily? Can nonverbal participants contribute?

3. Treat your focus group like a workshop . Make participants comfortable with participating, verbally or nonverbally.

As you plan your agenda for the focus group, remember that most of your participants likely do not know each other and will be asked to speak honestly, potentially revealing information that may make them feel vulnerable or unlike others. Some people may do it, others may not. Consider having the following in your focus group:

• It gives a structured way for participants to build rapport with the facilitator and with each other.
• It builds participants’ confidence, in themselves and in the format (particularly if you’re using online-meeting tools or digital whiteboards). Note: Do not “break the ice” with highly personal or sensitive topics, which will likely cause participants to withdraw instead. (In fact, those types of answers are probably not going to come easily in a focus-group format, even with the most “warmed up” group. These types of questions are better suited to 1:1 interviews).
• Both written and verbal participation opportunities As with any other UX workshop , offer multiple methods of engagement (verbal and nonverbal) to encourage maximum participation and contribution. This ensures that less vocal or nonnative speakers feel comfortable contributing. You can also use the diverge–converge technique to maximize participation while decreasing bias potential. Note:  If covering sensitive topics, offer an anonymous way to contribute (or, again, consider a different, more-private method altogether).

4. Have a (written) plan and guide.

Construct your prompts in advance to avoid leading or biasing participants.  As with semistructured interviews, focus-group questions should use the funnel technique : be open-ended and broad at the beginning and progressively build detail and specificity with concepts as the conversation progresses. On a related note: remember to frame followup questions both positively and negatively to avoid leading participants, particularly when the conversation may naturally skew in one of these directions.

Focus groups don’t accurately predict future behavior. However, they can help gauge attitudes and guide future exploration, thus avoiding wasted research time. Still, they should be considered a starting point to further research, rather than a validation step. The good news? If your focus-group participants are willing, not only will you have their input to guide your further research, you may also have a group of customers willing and able to test what you create to further guide your design.

Related Courses

User research methods: from strategy to requirements to design.

Pick the best UX research method for each stage in the design process

User Interviews

Uncover in-depth, accurate insights about your users

ResearchOps: Scaling User Research

Orchestrate and optimize research to amplify its impact

Related Topics

• Research Methods Research Methods

Learn More:

Please accept marketing cookies to view the embedded video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9nZRMN49J0

Frequency ≠ Importance in Qualitative Data

Tanner Kohler · 3 min

Deductively Analyzing Qualitative Data

Analyzing Qualitative User Data in a Spreadsheet to Show Themes

Kim Salazar · 4 min

Related Articles:

Obtaining Consent for User Research

Therese Fessenden · 8 min

Data Is More than Numbers: Why Qualitative Data Isn’t Just Opinions

Page Laubheimer · 9 min

6 Mistakes When Crafting Interview Questions

Maria Rosala · 5 min

Should You Run a Survey?

Maddie Brown · 6 min

Why 5 Participants Are Okay in a Qualitative Study, but Not in a Quantitative One

Raluca Budiu · 7 min

How Many Participants for a UX Interview?

Maria Rosala · 6 min

• - Google Chrome

Intended for healthcare professionals

• My email alerts
• BMA member login
• Username * Password * Forgot your log in details? Need to activate BMA Member Log In Log in via OpenAthens Log in via your institution

Search form

• Advanced search
• Search responses
• Search blogs
• Qualitative Research:...

Qualitative Research: Introducing focus groups

• Related content
• Peer review
• Jenny Kitzinger , research fellow a
• a Glasgow University Media Group, Department of Sociology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8LF

This paper introduces focus group methodology, gives advice on group composition, running the groups, and analysing the results. Focus groups have advantages for researchers in the field of health and medicine: they do not discriminate against people who cannot read or write and they can encourage participation from people reluctant to be interviewed on their own or who feel they have nothing to say.

This is the fifth in a series of seven articles describing non-quantitative techniques and showing their value in health research

**FIGURE OMITTED**

Rationale and uses of focus groups

Focus groups are a form of group interview that capitalises on communication between research participants in order to generate data. Although group interviews are often used simply as a quick and convenient way to collect data from several people simultaneously, focus groups explicitly use group interaction as part of the method. This means that instead of the researcher asking each person to respond to a question in turn, people are encouraged to talk to one another: asking questions, exchanging anecdotes and commenting on each other's experiences and points of view. 1 The method is particularly useful for exploring people's knowledge and experiences and can be used to examine not only what people think but how they think and why they think that way.

Focus groups were originally used within communication studies to explore the effects of films and television programmes, 2 and are a popular method for assessing health education messages and examining public understandings of illness and of health behaviours. 3 4 5 6 7 They are widely used to examine people's experiences of disease and of health services. 8 9 and are an effective technique for exploring the attitudes and needs of staff. 10 11

The idea behind the focus group method is that group processes can help people to explore and …

Log in using your username and password

BMA Member Log In

If you have a subscription to The BMJ, log in:

• Need to activate
• Log in via institution
• Log in via OpenAthens

Log in through your institution

Subscribe from £184 *.

Subscribe and get access to all BMJ articles, and much more.

* For online subscription

Access this article for 1 day for: £50 / $60/ €56 ( excludes VAT )

You can download a PDF version for your personal record.

Buy this article

Focus Group Method

Doing Research Inclusively and Supporting Social Inclusion

• Living reference work entry
• First Online: 30 December 2020
• Cite this living reference work entry

• Melanie Nind 2 ,
• Alex Kaley 3 &
• Edward Hall 4  

220 Accesses

This chapter relates to the inclusive or democratic turn in social science research. Increasingly, researchers are seeking to shift the dynamics of research production away from doing research on people, mining them for information, and towards researching with participants and recognizing that research needs to be purposeful and beneficial for participants. One important way of doing this is by creating vibrant interactive spaces in which best use can be made of participants’ potential not just to contribute, but to learn from each other’s contributions and come to know themselves and their own situation a little better. Focus groups can create these spaces, especially when the researcher is alert to their inclusive and transformative potential and open to the idea of hybrids of focus groups and other methods. Taking a Freirean approach to the focus group method, the authors have been using focus groups to support participants’ power in the research process. This comes through embracing the praxis of defining their focus collaboratively and by embedding the research authority in the interactive space between individuals. The chapter shows how focus groups can be political or playful as a means of co-production. This will be illustrated using data from studies involving people with intellectual disabilities, where the mutual support among those in dialogue is evident. The authors argue that the experience of taking part in focus groups enhances the social inclusion of those involved.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Setting the Scene for a New Era of Focus Group Research

Focus groups in triangulation contexts.

Aldridge, J. (2006). Picture this: The use of participatory photographic research methods with people with learning disabilities. Disability & Society, 22 (1), 1–17.

Article   Google Scholar  

Ayrton, R. (2018). The micro-dynamics of power and performance in focus groups: An example from discussions on national identity with the south Sudanese diaspora in the UK. Qualitative Research, 19 (3), 323–339.

Bagnoli, A., & Clark, A. (2010). Focus groups with young people: A participatory approach to research planning. Journal of Youth Studies, 13 (1), 101–119.

Barbour, R. R. (2012). Focus groups. In I. Bourgeault, R. Dingwall, & R. De Vries (Eds.), The sage handbook of qualitative methods in health research . London: Sage.

Google Scholar  

Barbour, R. R. (2017). Setting the scene for a new era of focus group research. In R. S. Barbour & D. L. Morgan (Eds.), A new era in focus group research: Challenges, innovation and practice . London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Bergold, J., & Thomas, S. (2012). Participatory research methods: A methodological approach in motion. Qualitative Social Research, 13 (1), 30.

Blühdorn, I., & Butzlaff, F. (2020). Democratization beyond the post-democratic turn: Towards a research agenda on new conceptions of citizen participation. Democratization, 27 (3), 369–388.

Bollard, M. (2008). Going to the doctor’s: The findings from a focus group with people with learning difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 7 (2), 156–164.

Bourke, L. (2009). Reflections on doing participatory research in health: Participation, method and power. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 12 (5), 457–474.

Bradbury-Jones, C., & Taylor, J. (2015). Engaging with children as co-researchers: Challenges, counterchallenges and solutions. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 18 (2), 161–173.

Caretta, M. A., & Vacchelli, E. (2015). Re-thinking the boundaries of the focus group: A reflexive analysis on the use and legitimacy of group methodologies in qualitative research. Sociological Research Online, 20 (4), 13.

Chae-Young, K., Sheehy, K., & Kerawalla, L. (2017). Developing children as researchers: A practical guide to help children conduct social research . Abingdon: Routledge.

Chown, N., Robinson, J., Beardon, L., Downing, J., Hughes, L., Leatherland, J., Fox, K., Hickman, L., & MacGregor, D. (2017). Improving research about us, with us: A draft framework for inclusive autism research. Disability & Society, 32 (5), 720–734.

Clayton, J., & Vickers, T. (2019). The contingent challenges of purposeful co-production: Researching new migrant employment experiences in the north east of England. Area, 51 , 396–404.

Colucci, E. (2007). “Focus groups can be fun”: The use of activity-orientated questions in focus group discussions. Qualitative Health Research, 17 (10), 1422–1433.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Darbyshire, P. (2000). Guest editorial: From research on children to research with children. Neonatal, Paediatric and Child Health Nursing, 3 (1), 2–3.

Darbyshire, P., MacDougall, C., & Schiller, W. (2005). Multiple methods in qualitative research with children: More insight or just more? Qualitative Research, 5 (4), 417–436.

Dixon, J., Trathen, A., Wittenberg, R., Mays, N., Wistow, G., & Knapp, M. (2019). Funding and planning for social care in later life: A deliberative focus group study. Health & Social Care in the Community, 27 (5), 687–696.

Dodson, L., Piatelli, D., & Schmalzbauer, L. (2007). Researching inequality through interpretive collaborations: Shifting power and the unspoken contract. Qualitative Inquiry, 13 (6), 821–843.

Ferrera, M. J., Feinstein, R. T., & Walker, J. (2016). Embedded mistrust then and now: Findings of a focus group study on African American perspectives on breast cancer and its treatment. Critical Public Health, 26 (4), 455–465.

Frankena, T. K., Naaldenberg, J., Cardol, M., Garcia Iriarte, E., Buchner, T., Brooker, K., Embregts, P., Joosa, E., Crowther, F., Fudge Schormans, A., Schippers, A., Walmsley, J., O’Brien, P., Linehan, C., Northway, R., van Schrojenstein Lantman-de Valk, H., & Leusink, G. (2019). A consensus statement on how to conduct inclusive health research. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 63 (1), 1–11.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed . New York: Continuum.

Gates, B., & Waight, M. (2007). Reflections on conducting focus groups with people with learning disabilities: Theoretical and practical issues. Journal of Research in Nursing, 12 (2), 111–126.

Gilligan, C., Spencer, R., Weinberg, M. K., & Bertsch, T. (2003). On the listening guide: A voice-centered relational method. In P. M. Camic, J. E. Rhodes, & L. Yardley (Eds.), Qualitative research in psychology: Expanding perspectives in methodology and design (pp. 157–172). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Glynos, J., & Speed, E. (2012). Varieties of co-production in public services: Time banks in a UK health policy context. Critical Policy Studies, 6 (4), 402–433.

Hart, R. (1992). Children’s participation: From tokenism to citizenship . Florence: UNICEF.

Hennink, M. M. (2017). Cross-cultural focus group discussions. In R. S. Barbour & D. L. Morgan (Eds.), A new era in focus group research: Challenges, innovation and practice . London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Hesse-Biber, S., & Leavy, P. (2011). The practice of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Hinkes, C. (2020). Conducting focus groups in a global pandemic. https://ijsrm.org/2020/08/10/conducting-focus-groups-in-global-pandemic/

Holland, S., Renold, E., Ros, N., & Hillman, A. (2008). Rights, ‘Right On’ or the right thing to do? A critical exploration of young people’s engagement in participative social work research, NCRM working paper series 07/08, http://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/460/1/0708%2520critical%2520exploration.pdf

Holt, L., Jeffries, J., Hall, E., & Power, A. (2019). Geographies of co-production: Learning from inclusive research approaches at the margins. Area, 51 (3), 390–395.

Kamberelis, G., & Dimitriadis, G. (2005). Focus groups: Strategic articulations of pedagogy, politics and inquiry. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 887–907). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Kellett, M., Forrest, R., Dent, M., & Ward, S. (2004). ‘Just teach us the skills please, we’ll do the rest’: Empowering ten-year-olds as active researchers. Children and Society, 18 (5), 329–343.

Kesby, M. (1999) Beyond the representational impasse? Retheorising power, empowerment and spatiality in PRA praxis, unpublished working paper, University of St Andrews, http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/∼mgk

Kiernan, C. (1999). Participation in research by people with learning disabilities: Origins and issues. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27 , 43–47.

Kitzinger, J. (1994). The methodology of focus groups: The importance of interaction between research participants. Sociology of Health & Illness, 16 (1), 103–121.

Krueger, R. (1998). Focus group: A practical guide for applied research . London: Sage.

LeHoux, P., Poland, B., & Daudelin, G. (2006). Focus group research and “the patient’s view”. Social Science and Medicine, 63 , 2091–2104.

Lijadi, A. A., & Schalkwyk, G. J. (2015). Online Facebook focus group research of hard-to-reach participants. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 14 (5), 1–9.

Lobe, B. (2017). Best practices for synchronous online focus groups. In R. S. Barbour & D. L. Morgan (Eds.), A new era in focus group research: Challenges, innovation and practice . London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Madriz, E. (2000). Focus groups in feminist research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 835–850). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Milner, P., & Frawley, P. (2019). From ‘on’ to ‘with’ to ‘by:’ People with a learning disability creating a space for the third wave of inclusive research. Qualitative Research, 19 (4), 382–398.

Morgan, D. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research (Qualitative research methods series) (Vol. 16, 2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Book   Google Scholar  

Morgan, D. L. (2010). Reconsidering the role of interaction in analysing and reporting focus groups. Qualitative Health Research, 20 (5), 718–722.

Morgan, D. L. (2012). Focus groups and social interaction. In J. F. Gubrium, J. A. Holstein, A. B. Marvasti, & K. D. McKinney (Eds.), The Sage handbook of interview research: The complexity of the craft (2nd ed., pp. 161–176). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Morgan, D. L. (2017). Conclusions: A call for further innovations in focus groups. In R. S. Barbour & D. L. Morgan (Eds.), A new era in focus group research: Challenges, innovation and practice . London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Morgan, D., Fellows, C., & Guevara, H. (2008). Emergent approaches to focus groups research. In N. S. Hesse-Biber & P. Leavy (Eds.), Handbook of emergent methods (pp. 189–205). New York: Guilford Press.

Nind, M. (2014). What is inclusive research? London: Bloomsbury.

Nind, M., & Lewthwaite, S. (2018). Methods that teach: Developing pedagogic research methods, developing pedagogy. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 41 (4), 398–410.

Nind, M., & Vinha, H. (2014). Doing research inclusively: Bridges to multiple possibilities in inclusive research. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42 (2), 102–109.

Nind, M., & Vinha, H. (2016). Creative interactions with data: Using visual and metaphorical devices in repeated focus groups. Qualitative Research, 16 (1), 9–26.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Nind, M., Kilburn, D., & Wiles, R. (2015). Using video and dialogue to generate pedagogic knowledge: Teachers, learners and researchers reflecting together on the pedagogy of social research methods. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 18 (5), 561–576.

Nind, M., Curtin, A., & Hall, K. (2016). Research methods for pedagogy . London: Bloomsbury Academic.

Oliver, M. (1997). Emancipatory research: Realistic goal or impossible dream? In C. Barnes & G. Mercer (Eds.), Doing disability research (pp. 15–31). Leeds: Disability Press.

Pain, R., Kesby, M., & Askins, K. (2011). Geographies of impact: Power, participation and potential. Area, 43 (2), 183–188.

Pink, S. (2001). Doing visual ethnography . London: Sage.

Power, A., & Bartlett, R. (2018). Self-building safe havens in a post-service landscape: How adults with learning disabilities are reclaiming the welcoming communities agenda. Social & Cultural Geography, 19 , 336–356.

Prades, A., Espluga, J., & Horlick-Jones, T. (2017). Hybrid focus groups as a means to investigate practical reasoning, learning processes and indigenous activities. In R. S. Barbour & D. L. Morgan (Eds.), A new era in focus group research: Challenges, innovation and practice . London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Puigvert, L., Christou, M., & Holford, J. (2012). Critical communicative methodology: Including vulnerable voices in research through dialogue. Cambridge Journal of Education, 42 (4), 513–526.

Ripat, J., Woodgate, R. L., & Bennett, L. (2020). Attitudes faced by young adults using assistive technology as depicted through photovoice. Disability and rehabilitation: Assistive technology, 15 (3), 314–321.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Rothwell, E., Anderson, R., & Botkin, J. R. (2015). Deliberative discussion focus groups. Qualitative Health Research, 26 (6), 734–740.

Seaton, E. E. (2017). A kaleidoscope of voices: Using focus group in a study of rural adolescent girls. In R. S. Barbour & D. L. Morgan (Eds.), A new era in focus group research: Challenges, innovation and practice . London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Sharp, B. (2017). Stress as experienced by people with dementia: An interpretative phenomenological analysis. Dementia, 18 (4), 1427–1445.

Thompson, C., Lewis, D. J., & Taylor, S. J. C. (2017). The use of video recording in longitudinal focus groups research. In R. S. Barbou & D. L. Morgan (Eds.), A new era in focus group research: Challenges, innovation and practice . London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Thomson, F. (2007). Are methodologies for children keeping them in their place? Children’s Geographies, 5 (3), 207–218.

Thomson, P., & Gunter, H. (2007). The methodology of students-as-researchers: Valuing and using experience and expertise to develop methods. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 28 (3), 327–342.

Treseder, P. (1997). Empowering children and Young people . London: Save the Children.

Walmsley, J., & Johnson, K. (2003). Inclusive research with people with learning disabilities past, present and futures . London: Jessica Kingsley.

Wang, C., & Burris, M. A. (1994). Empowerment through photo Novella: Portraits of participation. Health Education Quarterly, 21 , 171–186.

Whitaker, G. (1980). Coproduction: Citizen participation in service delivery. Public Administration Review, 40 (3), 240–246.

Wilkinson, S. (1999). Focus groups: A feminist method. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 23 (2), 221–244.

Woodyatt, C. R., Finneran, C. A., & Stephenson, R. (2016). In-person versus online focus group discussions: A comparative analysis of data quality. Quality Health Research, 26 (6), 741–749.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Education School, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK

Melanie Nind

Division of Health Research, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK

School of Social Sciences, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK

Edward Hall

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Melanie Nind .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

School of Health Sciences, Western Sydney University, Penrith, NSW, Australia

Pranee Liamputtong

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Nind, M., Kaley, A., Hall, E. (2021). Focus Group Method. In: Liamputtong, P. (eds) Handbook of Social Inclusion. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48277-0_57-1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48277-0_57-1

Received : 19 August 2020

Accepted : 19 August 2020

Published : 30 December 2020

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-48277-0

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-48277-0

eBook Packages : Springer Reference Medicine Reference Module Medicine

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Qualitative study design: Focus groups

• Qualitative study design
• Phenomenology
• Grounded theory
• Ethnography
• Narrative inquiry
• Action research
• Case Studies
• Field research
• Focus groups
• Observation
• Surveys & questionnaires
• Study Designs Home

Focus Groups

Focus groups bring individuals from the study population together in a specific setting in order to discuss an issue as a group. The discussion generates research data.

Focus groups typically have these features:

• Four to ten participants meeting for up to two hours
• A facilitator or facilitators to guide discussion using open-ended questions
• An emphasis on the group talking among itself rather than to the facilitator
• Discussion is recorded and then transcribed for analysis by researchers

Researchers conduct several individual focus group meetings to produce a series. The number of focus groups in the series depends on the study’s aim, methods and resources.

Focus groups use a group setting to generate data different to that obtained in a one-to-one interview. The group context may allow for better examination of beliefs, attitudes, values, perspectives, knowledge and ideas.

Focus groups can be useful in action research methodology and other study designs which seek to empower research participants. Focus groups are also useful in multimethod studies utilising different forms of data collection.

• Quick way to collect data from several people 
• Produces data unique to group setting (e.g. teasing, arguing and non-verbal behaviour) due to the interaction between participants. This is a unique feature of focus groups. 
• Unlike written questionnaires, focus groups don’t rely on participant literacy to generate data 
• Can encourage participation from marginalised groups 
• Can facilitate discussion of stigmatised or counter-cultural topics due to feeling of mutual support among focus group participants 
• Can generate more critical comments than individual interviews. This is valuable for research aimed at improving products or services. 
• Can be used to validate findings from quantitative research methods by providing a deeper understanding that statistics cannot.

Limitations

• Individual perspectives that dissent from the focus group’s majority may remain hidden due to overriding behavioural or cultural norms, or a desire to be seen as conforming. 
• Confidentiality of individual responses is compromised due to the existence of the group 
• Only applicable when the population of interest has shared social and cultural experience or share common areas of concern. 
• Group discussion does not provide enough depth for researchers to understand experiences, especially in comparison to in-depth interviews. 
• Data is representative of the range of views in a population, not the prevalence of such views. 
• The facilitator has a strong effect on the focus groups behaviour and can therefore influence the extent to which issues or views are explored. 
• Data analysis is usually very time consuming due to the quantity produced.

Example questions

• What are the experiences, needs and wishes of mothers who received midwifery care at tertiary hospitals in Victoria, Australia?
• How useful is the patient perspective for the creation of an information information booklet for patients with liver cancer?
• What factors influence nursing students' development of end-of-life communication skills?

Example studies

Harrison, M., Ryan, T., Gardiner, C., & Jones, A. (2017). Psychological and emotional needs, assessment, and support post-stroke: a multi-perspective qualitative study . Top Stroke Rehabil, 24 (2), 119-125. doi: 10.1080/10749357.2016.1196908

Shilubane, H. N., Ruiter, R. A., Bos, A. E., Reddy, P. S., & van den Borne, B. (2014). High school students' knowledge and experience with a peer who committed or attempted suicide: a focus group study . BMC Public Health, 14 , 1081. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-1081

Wiles, J. L., Leibing, A., Guberman, N., Reeve, J., & Allen, R. E. (2012). The meaning of "aging in place" to older people . Gerontologist , 52(3), 357-366. doi: 10.1093/geront/gnr098 

Kitzinger, J. (1995). Qualitative research: introducing focus groups . BMJ, 311 (7000), 299. doi: 10.1136/bmj.311.7000.299 

Rice, P. L., & Ezzy, D. (1999). Qualitative research methods: a health focus . South Melbourne, Australia: Oxford University Press.  

• << Previous: Methods
• Next: Observation >>
• Last Updated: Jul 3, 2024 11:46 AM
• URL: https://deakin.libguides.com/qualitative-study-designs

What is a Focus Group and How to Conduct It? (+ Examples)

Appinio Research · 14.09.2023 · 19min read

Have you ever wondered how businesses gain deep insights into consumer behavior, preferences, and opinions? Introducing focus groups—a powerful tool that unlocks the authentic voices of participants and reveals invaluable qualitative data. In this guide, we'll walk you through every step of the focus group process, from meticulous planning and skillful moderation to insightful analysis and actionable recommendations. Whether you're a researcher, marketer, or decision-maker, this guide equips you with the knowledge and strategies to harness the potential of focus groups and make informed, impactful decisions.

What is a Focus Group?

At its core, a focus group is a structured conversation involving a small group of individuals who share their thoughts, feelings, and experiences regarding a particular subject. The primary purpose of a focus group is to uncover nuanced insights that might not emerge through other research methods . You're essentially providing a platform for participants to express themselves freely, leading to a richer, more holistic understanding of the topic.

Why are Focus Groups Important in Market Research?

Focus groups play a pivotal role in market research . They allow you to delve into consumers' motivations, desires, and pain points, helping businesses tailor their products and services to better meet customer needs. Unlike quantitative data, focus groups provide qualitative context, shedding light on "why" people feel the way they do.

Focus groups serve as invaluable tools for gaining insights into people's opinions, attitudes, and perceptions. They bring together a diverse group of participants to engage in open discussions on a specific topic, offering qualitative data that goes beyond quantitative surveys. 

Benefits of Conducting Focus Groups

Conducting focus groups offers a range of benefits that contribute to informed decision-making and improved outcomes:

• Rich Insights: Focus groups elicit detailed responses, offering a deeper understanding of participants' perspectives.
• Real-time Interaction: Observing participants' interactions in real-time provides valuable non-verbal cues that text-based surveys can't capture.
• Group Dynamics: Group discussions can stimulate new ideas as participants bounce thoughts off each other.
• Uncovering Unconscious Factors: Focus groups can reveal subconscious opinions or emotions that participants might not even be aware of.
• Flexible Approach: The open-ended nature of focus groups allows for unexpected insights to emerge.

How to Set Up a Focus Group?

Before you embark on your focus group journey, thorough planning and meticulous preparation are crucial to ensuring the success of your sessions. Let's delve deeper into each step of this vital phase.

1. Identify Research Objectives

Research objectives serve as the compass guiding your focus group sessions. Clearly define what you aim to achieve through these discussions. Are you seeking insights into customer preferences, testing a new product concept, or exploring perceptions of a brand? Align your objectives with the overarching goals of your research to maintain focus and relevance.

2. Select Participant Demographics

Choosing the right participants is instrumental in obtaining diverse and representative insights. Consider the characteristics that are relevant to your research objectives. These may include:

• Income level

By selecting participants who mirror your target audience, you enhance the accuracy and applicability of your findings.

3. Recruit Participants

Effective participant recruitment is crucial for the success of your focus groups. Utilize various channels such as social media, online forums, email lists, and professional networks. Craft clear and compelling recruitment messages that communicate the focus group's purpose and participation benefits. Ensure that participants are genuinely interested, reliable, and willing to engage in open discussions.

4. Create Discussion Guidelines

Discussion guidelines provide structure to your focus group sessions while allowing for spontaneous conversations. Clearly outline the scope of the discussion, the key topics you intend to cover, and any specific areas of interest. Having a flexible framework ensures that discussions remain on track while permitting organic exploration of the subject matter.

5. Choose a Skilled Moderator

The role of the moderator is pivotal in shaping the dynamics and outcomes of your focus group. Opt for a skilled moderator who possesses strong facilitation and interpersonal skills. The moderator should be capable of guiding discussions, managing group dynamics, and ensuring that all participants have an equal opportunity to contribute. A skilled moderator can navigate unexpected twists in the conversation and encourage deeper insights.

How to Design a Focus Group?

Designing your focus group sessions requires thoughtful consideration of various elements to create an environment conducive to rich discussions.

1. Determine Group Size

The size of your focus group impacts the quality of interactions and the depth of insights. Aim for a balance between having a sufficiently diverse group and maintaining a manageable discussion. Generally, a group of 6 to 10 participants is optimal, allowing for a variety of viewpoints without overwhelming the conversation.

2. Select the Location

The choice of location plays a significant role, particularly for in-person focus groups. Select a comfortable and neutral venue that minimizes distractions and fosters open dialogue. If virtual sessions are more practical, ensure that the online platform is user-friendly and accessible to all participants, regardless of their technical proficiency.

3. Set the Duration

The duration of your focus group session impacts participant engagement and the quality of insights. Sessions typically last between 1 to 2 hours, striking a balance between allowing participants to delve into the topic without exhausting their attention spans. Longer sessions may lead to participant fatigue, which can hinder the quality of responses.

4. Prepare Stimuli (if applicable)

If your research involves presenting stimuli such as visuals, prototypes, or samples, careful preparation is essential. Ensure that your material is ready and relevant to the discussion topics. Stimuli can serve as conversation starters and tangible references for participants, enriching the depth of their responses.

5. Develop Open-Ended Questions

Crafting open-ended questions is an art that drives meaningful conversations. These questions encourage participants to openly share their thoughts, feelings, and experiences. Avoid closed-ended or leading questions, as they limit the scope of responses. Developing thoughtful and open-ended prompts creates opportunities for participants to express themselves authentically.

As you move forward with your focus group journey, remember that every aspect of planning and designing contributes to the quality of insights you'll gain. Your meticulous preparation sets the stage for rich, valuable discussions that uncover nuances and perspectives that quantitative data alone can't provide.

How to Conduct a Focus Group?

With your meticulous planning in place, it's time to bring your focus group to life. Conducting a focus group involves skillful facilitation, attentive moderation, and the ability to navigate diverse perspectives.

Let's explore the intricacies of this process and how to ensure a successful session.

Icebreaker Activities

Begin your focus group session with engaging icebreaker activities. Icebreakers serve multiple purposes, from easing participants into the conversation to creating a comfortable atmosphere for open sharing.

Some common icebreaker activities include:

• Introduction Round: Have each participant introduce themselves, sharing their name, background, and a fun fact related to the topic.
• "Two Truths and a Lie": Participants share two factual statements and one false statement about themselves, prompting discussion as others guess the lie.

Establishing Group Norms

Setting clear group norms from the outset creates a respectful and productive discussion environment. Norms ensure participants feel valued, heard, and safe sharing their viewpoints.

• Active Listening: Encourage attentive listening by asking participants to refrain from interrupting while others speak.
• Respectful Interaction: Emphasize the importance of respectful disagreement and constructive feedback.
• Confidentiality: Stress that participants should keep the discussion content confidential, fostering an environment of trust.
• Equal Participation: Encourage balanced participation by ensuring everyone has a chance to share their thoughts.

Moderator's Role and Techniques

The role of the moderator is pivotal in guiding discussions while maintaining a balanced and focused conversation. A skilled moderator employs various techniques to facilitate meaningful interactions:

• Active Listening: The moderator listens attentively to participants' responses, demonstrating that their opinions are valued.
• Probing: The moderator asks follow-up questions to dig deeper into participants' responses and uncover underlying motivations.
• Reflection: Summarizing participants' contributions shows that their thoughts are being accurately captured.
• Redirecting: If discussions veer off-topic, the moderator gently guides the conversation back to the main subject.

Encouraging Balanced Participation

Balanced involvement ensures that all participants have the opportunity to contribute. Some individuals naturally dominate discussions, while others might hesitate to speak up.

Techniques to encourage balanced participation include:

• Direct Questions: Address specific questions to participants who haven't spoken much, inviting their input.
• Round-Robin Sharing: Go around the group, giving each participant a chance to share their thoughts on a particular topic.
• Thought Pairing: Ask participants to pair up and share their perspectives with a partner before sharing with the larger group.

Probing for Deeper Insights

As discussions progress, employing probing techniques helps uncover deeper insights beneath surface-level responses. Probing involves asking follow-up questions that encourage participants to elaborate on their thoughts and feelings:

• "Why" Questions: Ask participants to explain the reasoning behind their opinions. For example, "Why do you think this approach would be effective?"
• "Tell Me More" Prompt: Encourage participants to elaborate by simply asking them to share more details about a specific point they made.
• Hypothetical Scenarios: Present hypothetical scenarios related to the topic and ask participants how they would respond, leading to more nuanced insights.

By skillfully employing these techniques, you can create an environment where participants feel comfortable expressing their opinions and where discussions naturally flow, leading to in-depth insights that you can later analyze.

How to Collect Focus Group Data?

With your focus group sessions successfully conducted, the next phase involves extracting meaningful insights from the rich discussions. We'll look at popular data collection and analysis methods to ensure that your findings are both accurate and actionable.

Recording and Transcribing Sessions

Recording focus group sessions is essential to capture participants' responses in their own words and preserve the nuances of the conversation.

• Recording: Use audio or video recording equipment to capture the entire discussion. Ensure that participants are comfortable with being recorded and understand the purpose of the recording.
• Transcribing: Transcribe the recorded sessions verbatim. Transcriptions provide a textual version of the discussions, which is easier to review and analyze.

Identifying Key Themes and Patterns

As you review the transcribed discussions, focus on identifying emerging themes and patterns. Themes are recurring topics or ideas that participants discuss, while patterns involve the connections between these themes. Look for insights that align with your research objectives.

• Open Coding: Start with open coding, where you assign preliminary labels to sections of the text corresponding to certain themes.
• Axial Coding: Organize the open codes into broader categories or themes, establishing relationships between them.
• Selective Coding: Refine the codes further, focusing on the most significant themes and their connections.

Coding and Categorizing Responses

Coding and categorization involve systematically organizing participants' responses based on identified themes and patterns. This process allows you to aggregate and compare the data, making it easier to draw conclusions.

• Codebook Development: Create a codebook that outlines the themes, definitions, and examples for each code.
• Applying Codes: Read through the transcribed data and apply the relevant codes to sections corresponding to each theme.
• Categorization: Group similar codes together to form categories that encapsulate broader concepts.

Using Qualitative Analysis Software

Qualitative analysis software can streamline the process of coding, categorization, and data management. Platforms like Appinio offer features that enhance the efficiency and accuracy of your analysis:

• Code Management: Software allows you to easily create, apply, and modify codes.
• Search and Retrieval: Quickly search for specific keywords or themes within the transcribed data.
• Visualization: Some tools provide visual representations of the data, making it easier to identify patterns and trends.

Extracting Actionable Insights

From the coded and categorized data, you can extract actionable insights that inform decision-making. These insights are drawn from the participants' perspectives and can lead to improvements in products, services, or strategies:

• Quoting Participant Responses: Use direct quotes from participants to illustrate key points and provide authenticity to your findings.
• Patterns and Trends: Identify overarching patterns and trends that provide a holistic understanding of participants' opinions.
• Identify Opportunities: Look for opportunities for innovation, improvements, or addressing pain points that participants highlight.

By meticulously analyzing the transcribed data and extracting meaningful insights, you bridge the gap between raw conversation and actionable recommendations that can drive positive change.

How to Analyze Focus Group Data?

As you move into the interpretation and reporting phase of your focus group research, you'll synthesize the gathered insights into a coherent narrative. Here's how you can effectively interpret and communicate your findings to various stakeholders.

1. Summarize Findings

Summarizing the key findings of your focus group sessions provides a concise overview of the insights gathered. Focus on the most salient themes, patterns, and opinions that emerged during the discussions. This summary sets the stage for more in-depth exploration in the subsequent sections.

2. Relate Findings to Research Objectives

Connect the dots between your findings and the initial research objectives you established. Highlight how each identified theme or pattern addresses specific research goals. This linkage reinforces the relevance of your insights and underscores the value of your focus group research.

3. Provide Rich Descriptions

Enrich your report with detailed descriptions of participants' responses. These descriptions add depth and context to your findings, helping stakeholders understand the nuances of participants' opinions and perspectives. Paint a vivid picture of the discussions to ensure your audience gains a comprehensive understanding.

4. Incorporate Participant Quotes

Incorporating direct quotes from participants adds authenticity and humanizes your findings. Quotes allow stakeholders to hear participants' voices firsthand, making the insights more relatable. Select quotes that encapsulate key points, emotions, or unique perspectives shared during the focus group discussions.

5. Make Data-Driven Recommendations

Formulate actionable recommendations based on the insights extracted from your focus group data. These recommendations should be grounded in the participants' perspectives and aligned with your research objectives. Whether refining a marketing strategy, modifying a product feature, or enhancing customer service, your recommendations should be informed and practical.

How to Lead a Focus Group?

Conducting focus groups comes with its own set of challenges. By adhering to best practices, you can navigate these challenges effectively and ensure the integrity of your research.

• Ensure Objectivity and Impartiality: Maintain objectivity throughout your focus group research. As the moderator, your role is facilitating discussions, not influencing outcomes. Avoid expressing personal opinions or steering the conversation in a particular direction.
• Minimize Groupthink and Bias: Be vigilant about group dynamics that might lead to groupthink, where participants conform to the majority opinion. Encourage diverse viewpoints and foster an environment where participants feel comfortable expressing dissenting views.
• Deal with Dominant Participants: In some focus groups, specific individuals may dominate the conversation. Gently redirect the discussion to ensure all participants have an equal contribution opportunity. Use techniques like directly addressing quieter participants for their input.
• Address Sensitive Topics: When discussing sensitive topics, create a supportive and nonjudgmental environment. Approach these discussions with empathy and use considerate language. Clearly communicate that participants are free to share their thoughts without fear of judgment.
• Adapt to Virtual Focus Groups: Virtual focus groups offer convenience but present unique challenges. Ensure participants are comfortable with the technology and provide clear instructions for joining the virtual session. Be prepared to troubleshoot technical issues that may arise.

Navigating these best practices and challenges ensures that your focus group research is conducted ethically, rigorously, and effectively.

Focus Group Examples

Let's explore how focus groups can be applied across various domains to extract valuable insights and drive informed decisions.

Example 1: SaaS Product Development

Imagine a SaaS company aiming to enhance its project management software. To gather insights for improvements, they conduct a focus group with current users:

• Planning: The company identifies research objectives, including user experience enhancement and feature preferences.
• Participants: They recruit a diverse group of existing users, ranging from freelancers to project managers.
• Discussion: The focus group discusses pain points, desired features, and overall user satisfaction.
• Analysis: The company analyzes transcribed discussions, identifying recurring themes like seamless collaboration and customizable dashboards.
• Insights: These insights lead to data-driven decisions, resulting in feature updates like improved collaboration tools and a user-customizable interface.

Example 2: Business Strategy Alignment

A retail chain considers expanding its product offerings. To align their business strategy with customer preferences, they conduct a focus group:

• Planning: The company defines research objectives to understand customer preferences and potential demand.
• Participants: They select a mix of loyal and potential new customers from various demographics.
• Discussion: The focus group explores participants' shopping habits, preferences, and thoughts on the proposed products.
• Analysis: The company identifies patterns, discovering that participants value eco-friendly products and unique offerings.
• Insights: Equipped with insights, the retail chain refines its expansion strategy to include sustainable products and innovative offerings, resonating with customer expectations.

Example 3: Academic Research

An academic researcher is exploring attitudes toward online learning. They decide to use focus groups to delve into students' perspectives:

• Planning: The researcher outlines research objectives centered around understanding students' experiences with online learning.
• Participants: A mix of online and in-person students with varying academic backgrounds and preferences.
• Discussion: The focus group conversations revolve around challenges, advantages, and suggestions for enhancing online education.
• Analysis: The researcher uncovers recurring themes, such as the importance of interactive content and effective communication.
• Insights: The researcher contributes to developing more engaging online courses, prioritizing interactive elements and clear communication channels.

These examples showcase the versatility of focus groups in capturing nuanced insights across diverse domains. Whether it's shaping software features, refining business strategies, or informing academic research, focus groups provide a platform to tap into authentic participant perspectives, resulting in well-informed decisions and strategies.

Focus groups are not just discussions—they're windows into understanding, catalysts for improvement, and sources of innovation. Following the steps outlined in this guide, you've gained the tools to orchestrate meaningful conversations, extract nuanced insights, and translate those insights into actionable recommendations. Remember, each participant's voice adds a unique brushstroke to the canvas of insights, and your role as a skilled moderator brings those brushstrokes to life.

As you venture into focus groups, approach each session with curiosity and openness. Listen actively, probe gently, and navigate group dynamics with finesse. Whether you're fine-tuning a marketing campaign, shaping the next product iteration, or charting the course for your organization's future, the authentic perspectives gathered through focus groups will guide your way. Embrace the art of facilitation, savor the richness of discussion, and let the insights gained propel you toward confident decisions and successful outcomes. Your commitment to the power of dialogue ensures that participants' voices continue to shape meaningful change.

How to Conduct a Focus Group online in Minutes?

Discover the revolutionary way to conduct focus groups and gain invaluable insights in just minutes. Appinio , a dynamic real-time market research platform, empowers companies to tap into consumer perspectives swiftly and effectively.

By handling the research and technology complexities, Appinio frees you to focus on what truly matters – swift, data-driven decision-making. Uncover the excitement of seamless integration, intuitive processes, and lightning-fast answers to fuel your business success.

Why Appinio?

• Transformative Speed: From questions to insights in minutes, Appinio ensures rapid access to the consumer pulse.
• Seamless Integration: Integrate real-time consumer insights seamlessly into everyday decision-making.
• Empower Your Choices: Embrace the power of data-driven decisions without the hassle of traditional research methods.

Join the loop 💌

Be the first to hear about new updates, product news, and data insights. We'll send it all straight to your inbox.

Get the latest market research news straight to your inbox! 💌

Wait, there's more

20.08.2024 | 30min read

What is Employee Experience (EX) and How to Improve It?

19.08.2024 | 14min read

Revolutionizing Brand Health with Mental Availability: Key Takeaways

15.08.2024 | 31min read

360-Degree Feedback: Survey, Process, Software, Examples

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Published: 05 October 2018

Interviews and focus groups in qualitative research: an update for the digital age

• P. Gill 1 &
• J. Baillie 2  

British Dental Journal volume  225 ,  pages 668–672 ( 2018 ) Cite this article

32k Accesses

61 Citations

20 Altmetric

Metrics details

Highlights that qualitative research is used increasingly in dentistry. Interviews and focus groups remain the most common qualitative methods of data collection.

Suggests the advent of digital technologies has transformed how qualitative research can now be undertaken.

Suggests interviews and focus groups can offer significant, meaningful insight into participants' experiences, beliefs and perspectives, which can help to inform developments in dental practice.

Qualitative research is used increasingly in dentistry, due to its potential to provide meaningful, in-depth insights into participants' experiences, perspectives, beliefs and behaviours. These insights can subsequently help to inform developments in dental practice and further related research. The most common methods of data collection used in qualitative research are interviews and focus groups. While these are primarily conducted face-to-face, the ongoing evolution of digital technologies, such as video chat and online forums, has further transformed these methods of data collection. This paper therefore discusses interviews and focus groups in detail, outlines how they can be used in practice, how digital technologies can further inform the data collection process, and what these methods can offer dentistry.

You have full access to this article via your institution.

Similar content being viewed by others

Interviews in the social sciences

Professionalism in dentistry: deconstructing common terminology

A review of technical and quality assessment considerations of audio-visual and web-conferencing focus groups in qualitative health research, introduction.

Traditionally, research in dentistry has primarily been quantitative in nature. 1 However, in recent years, there has been a growing interest in qualitative research within the profession, due to its potential to further inform developments in practice, policy, education and training. Consequently, in 2008, the British Dental Journal (BDJ) published a four paper qualitative research series, 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 to help increase awareness and understanding of this particular methodological approach.

Since the papers were originally published, two scoping reviews have demonstrated the ongoing proliferation in the use of qualitative research within the field of oral healthcare. 1 , 6 To date, the original four paper series continue to be well cited and two of the main papers remain widely accessed among the BDJ readership. 2 , 3 The potential value of well-conducted qualitative research to evidence-based practice is now also widely recognised by service providers, policy makers, funding bodies and those who commission, support and use healthcare research.

Besides increasing standalone use, qualitative methods are now also routinely incorporated into larger mixed method study designs, such as clinical trials, as they can offer additional, meaningful insights into complex problems that simply could not be provided by quantitative methods alone. Qualitative methods can also be used to further facilitate in-depth understanding of important aspects of clinical trial processes, such as recruitment. For example, Ellis et al . investigated why edentulous older patients, dissatisfied with conventional dentures, decline implant treatment, despite its established efficacy, and frequently refuse to participate in related randomised clinical trials, even when financial constraints are removed. 7 Through the use of focus groups in Canada and the UK, the authors found that fears of pain and potential complications, along with perceived embarrassment, exacerbated by age, are common reasons why older patients typically refuse dental implants. 7

The last decade has also seen further developments in qualitative research, due to the ongoing evolution of digital technologies. These developments have transformed how researchers can access and share information, communicate and collaborate, recruit and engage participants, collect and analyse data and disseminate and translate research findings. 8 Where appropriate, such technologies are therefore capable of extending and enhancing how qualitative research is undertaken. 9 For example, it is now possible to collect qualitative data via instant messaging, email or online/video chat, using appropriate online platforms.

These innovative approaches to research are therefore cost-effective, convenient, reduce geographical constraints and are often useful for accessing 'hard to reach' participants (for example, those who are immobile or socially isolated). 8 , 9 However, digital technologies are still relatively new and constantly evolving and therefore present a variety of pragmatic and methodological challenges. Furthermore, given their very nature, their use in many qualitative studies and/or with certain participant groups may be inappropriate and should therefore always be carefully considered. While it is beyond the scope of this paper to provide a detailed explication regarding the use of digital technologies in qualitative research, insight is provided into how such technologies can be used to facilitate the data collection process in interviews and focus groups.

In light of such developments, it is perhaps therefore timely to update the main paper 3 of the original BDJ series. As with the previous publications, this paper has been purposely written in an accessible style, to enhance readability, particularly for those who are new to qualitative research. While the focus remains on the most common qualitative methods of data collection – interviews and focus groups – appropriate revisions have been made to provide a novel perspective, and should therefore be helpful to those who would like to know more about qualitative research. This paper specifically focuses on undertaking qualitative research with adult participants only.

Overview of qualitative research

Qualitative research is an approach that focuses on people and their experiences, behaviours and opinions. 10 , 11 The qualitative researcher seeks to answer questions of 'how' and 'why', providing detailed insight and understanding, 11 which quantitative methods cannot reach. 12 Within qualitative research, there are distinct methodologies influencing how the researcher approaches the research question, data collection and data analysis. 13 For example, phenomenological studies focus on the lived experience of individuals, explored through their description of the phenomenon. Ethnographic studies explore the culture of a group and typically involve the use of multiple methods to uncover the issues. 14

While methodology is the 'thinking tool', the methods are the 'doing tools'; 13 the ways in which data are collected and analysed. There are multiple qualitative data collection methods, including interviews, focus groups, observations, documentary analysis, participant diaries, photography and videography. Two of the most commonly used qualitative methods are interviews and focus groups, which are explored in this article. The data generated through these methods can be analysed in one of many ways, according to the methodological approach chosen. A common approach is thematic data analysis, involving the identification of themes and subthemes across the data set. Further information on approaches to qualitative data analysis has been discussed elsewhere. 1

Qualitative research is an evolving and adaptable approach, used by different disciplines for different purposes. Traditionally, qualitative data, specifically interviews, focus groups and observations, have been collected face-to-face with participants. In more recent years, digital technologies have contributed to the ongoing evolution of qualitative research. Digital technologies offer researchers different ways of recruiting participants and collecting data, and offer participants opportunities to be involved in research that is not necessarily face-to-face.

Research interviews are a fundamental qualitative research method 15 and are utilised across methodological approaches. Interviews enable the researcher to learn in depth about the perspectives, experiences, beliefs and motivations of the participant. 3 , 16 Examples include, exploring patients' perspectives of fear/anxiety triggers in dental treatment, 17 patients' experiences of oral health and diabetes, 18 and dental students' motivations for their choice of career. 19

Interviews may be structured, semi-structured or unstructured, 3 according to the purpose of the study, with less structured interviews facilitating a more in depth and flexible interviewing approach. 20 Structured interviews are similar to verbal questionnaires and are used if the researcher requires clarification on a topic; however they produce less in-depth data about a participant's experience. 3 Unstructured interviews may be used when little is known about a topic and involves the researcher asking an opening question; 3 the participant then leads the discussion. 20 Semi-structured interviews are commonly used in healthcare research, enabling the researcher to ask predetermined questions, 20 while ensuring the participant discusses issues they feel are important.

Interviews can be undertaken face-to-face or using digital methods when the researcher and participant are in different locations. Audio-recording the interview, with the consent of the participant, is essential for all interviews regardless of the medium as it enables accurate transcription; the process of turning the audio file into a word-for-word transcript. This transcript is the data, which the researcher then analyses according to the chosen approach.

Types of interview

Qualitative studies often utilise one-to-one, face-to-face interviews with research participants. This involves arranging a mutually convenient time and place to meet the participant, signing a consent form and audio-recording the interview. However, digital technologies have expanded the potential for interviews in research, enabling individuals to participate in qualitative research regardless of location.

Telephone interviews can be a useful alternative to face-to-face interviews and are commonly used in qualitative research. They enable participants from different geographical areas to participate and may be less onerous for participants than meeting a researcher in person. 15 A qualitative study explored patients' perspectives of dental implants and utilised telephone interviews due to the quality of the data that could be yielded. 21 The researcher needs to consider how they will audio record the interview, which can be facilitated by purchasing a recorder that connects directly to the telephone. One potential disadvantage of telephone interviews is the inability of the interviewer and researcher to see each other. This is resolved using software for audio and video calls online – such as Skype – to conduct interviews with participants in qualitative studies. Advantages of this approach include being able to see the participant if video calls are used, enabling observation of non-verbal communication, and the software can be free to use. However, participants are required to have a device and internet connection, as well as being computer literate, potentially limiting who can participate in the study. One qualitative study explored the role of dental hygienists in reducing oral health disparities in Canada. 22 The researcher conducted interviews using Skype, which enabled dental hygienists from across Canada to be interviewed within the research budget, accommodating the participants' schedules. 22

A less commonly used approach to qualitative interviews is the use of social virtual worlds. A qualitative study accessed a social virtual world – Second Life – to explore the health literacy skills of individuals who use social virtual worlds to access health information. 23 The researcher created an avatar and interview room, and undertook interviews with participants using voice and text methods. 23 This approach to recruitment and data collection enables individuals from diverse geographical locations to participate, while remaining anonymous if they wish. Furthermore, for interviews conducted using text methods, transcription of the interview is not required as the researcher can save the written conversation with the participant, with the participant's consent. However, the researcher and participant need to be familiar with how the social virtual world works to engage in an interview this way.

Conducting an interview

Ensuring informed consent before any interview is a fundamental aspect of the research process. Participants in research must be afforded autonomy and respect; consent should be informed and voluntary. 24 Individuals should have the opportunity to read an information sheet about the study, ask questions, understand how their data will be stored and used, and know that they are free to withdraw at any point without reprisal. The qualitative researcher should take written consent before undertaking the interview. In a face-to-face interview, this is straightforward: the researcher and participant both sign copies of the consent form, keeping one each. However, this approach is less straightforward when the researcher and participant do not meet in person. A recent protocol paper outlined an approach for taking consent for telephone interviews, which involved: audio recording the participant agreeing to each point on the consent form; the researcher signing the consent form and keeping a copy; and posting a copy to the participant. 25 This process could be replicated in other interview studies using digital methods.

There are advantages and disadvantages of using face-to-face and digital methods for research interviews. Ultimately, for both approaches, the quality of the interview is determined by the researcher. 16 Appropriate training and preparation are thus required. Healthcare professionals can use their interpersonal communication skills when undertaking a research interview, particularly questioning, listening and conversing. 3 However, the purpose of an interview is to gain information about the study topic, 26 rather than offering help and advice. 3 The researcher therefore needs to listen attentively to participants, enabling them to describe their experience without interruption. 3 The use of active listening skills also help to facilitate the interview. 14 Spradley outlined elements and strategies for research interviews, 27 which are a useful guide for qualitative researchers:

Greeting and explaining the project/interview

Asking descriptive (broad), structural (explore response to descriptive) and contrast (difference between) questions

Asymmetry between the researcher and participant talking

Expressing interest and cultural ignorance

Repeating, restating and incorporating the participant's words when asking questions

Creating hypothetical situations

Asking friendly questions

Knowing when to leave.

For semi-structured interviews, a topic guide (also called an interview schedule) is used to guide the content of the interview – an example of a topic guide is outlined in Box 1 . The topic guide, usually based on the research questions, existing literature and, for healthcare professionals, their clinical experience, is developed by the research team. The topic guide should include open ended questions that elicit in-depth information, and offer participants the opportunity to talk about issues important to them. This is vital in qualitative research where the researcher is interested in exploring the experiences and perspectives of participants. It can be useful for qualitative researchers to pilot the topic guide with the first participants, 10 to ensure the questions are relevant and understandable, and amending the questions if required.

Regardless of the medium of interview, the researcher must consider the setting of the interview. For face-to-face interviews, this could be in the participant's home, in an office or another mutually convenient location. A quiet location is preferable to promote confidentiality, enable the researcher and participant to concentrate on the conversation, and to facilitate accurate audio-recording of the interview. For interviews using digital methods the same principles apply: a quiet, private space where the researcher and participant feel comfortable and confident to participate in an interview.

Box 1: Example of a topic guide

Study focus: Parents' experiences of brushing their child's (aged 0–5) teeth

1. Can you tell me about your experience of cleaning your child's teeth?

How old was your child when you started cleaning their teeth?

Why did you start cleaning their teeth at that point?

How often do you brush their teeth?

What do you use to brush their teeth and why?

2. Could you explain how you find cleaning your child's teeth?

Do you find anything difficult?

What makes cleaning their teeth easier for you?

3. How has your experience of cleaning your child's teeth changed over time?

Has it become easier or harder?

Have you changed how often and how you clean their teeth? If so, why?

4. Could you describe how your child finds having their teeth cleaned?

What do they enjoy about having their teeth cleaned?

Is there anything they find upsetting about having their teeth cleaned?

5. Where do you look for information/advice about cleaning your child's teeth?

What did your health visitor tell you about cleaning your child's teeth? (If anything)

What has the dentist told you about caring for your child's teeth? (If visited)

Have any family members given you advice about how to clean your child's teeth? If so, what did they tell you? Did you follow their advice?

6. Is there anything else you would like to discuss about this?

Focus groups

A focus group is a moderated group discussion on a pre-defined topic, for research purposes. 28 , 29 While not aligned to a particular qualitative methodology (for example, grounded theory or phenomenology) as such, focus groups are used increasingly in healthcare research, as they are useful for exploring collective perspectives, attitudes, behaviours and experiences. Consequently, they can yield rich, in-depth data and illuminate agreement and inconsistencies 28 within and, where appropriate, between groups. Examples include public perceptions of dental implants and subsequent impact on help-seeking and decision making, 30 and general dental practitioners' views on patient safety in dentistry. 31

Focus groups can be used alone or in conjunction with other methods, such as interviews or observations, and can therefore help to confirm, extend or enrich understanding and provide alternative insights. 28 The social interaction between participants often results in lively discussion and can therefore facilitate the collection of rich, meaningful data. However, they are complex to organise and manage, due to the number of participants, and may also be inappropriate for exploring particularly sensitive issues that many participants may feel uncomfortable about discussing in a group environment.

Focus groups are primarily undertaken face-to-face but can now also be undertaken online, using appropriate technologies such as email, bulletin boards, online research communities, chat rooms, discussion forums, social media and video conferencing. 32 Using such technologies, data collection can also be synchronous (for example, online discussions in 'real time') or, unlike traditional face-to-face focus groups, asynchronous (for example, online/email discussions in 'non-real time'). While many of the fundamental principles of focus group research are the same, regardless of how they are conducted, a number of subtle nuances are associated with the online medium. 32 Some of which are discussed further in the following sections.

Focus group considerations

Some key considerations associated with face-to-face focus groups are: how many participants are required; should participants within each group know each other (or not) and how many focus groups are needed within a single study? These issues are much debated and there is no definitive answer. However, the number of focus groups required will largely depend on the topic area, the depth and breadth of data needed, the desired level of participation required 29 and the necessity (or not) for data saturation.

The optimum group size is around six to eight participants (excluding researchers) but can work effectively with between three and 14 participants. 3 If the group is too small, it may limit discussion, but if it is too large, it may become disorganised and difficult to manage. It is, however, prudent to over-recruit for a focus group by approximately two to three participants, to allow for potential non-attenders. For many researchers, particularly novice researchers, group size may also be informed by pragmatic considerations, such as the type of study, resources available and moderator experience. 28 Similar size and mix considerations exist for online focus groups. Typically, synchronous online focus groups will have around three to eight participants but, as the discussion does not happen simultaneously, asynchronous groups may have as many as 10–30 participants. 33

The topic area and potential group interaction should guide group composition considerations. Pre-existing groups, where participants know each other (for example, work colleagues) may be easier to recruit, have shared experiences and may enjoy a familiarity, which facilitates discussion and/or the ability to challenge each other courteously. 3 However, if there is a potential power imbalance within the group or if existing group norms and hierarchies may adversely affect the ability of participants to speak freely, then 'stranger groups' (that is, where participants do not already know each other) may be more appropriate. 34 , 35

Focus group management

Face-to-face focus groups should normally be conducted by two researchers; a moderator and an observer. 28 The moderator facilitates group discussion, while the observer typically monitors group dynamics, behaviours, non-verbal cues, seating arrangements and speaking order, which is essential for transcription and analysis. The same principles of informed consent, as discussed in the interview section, also apply to focus groups, regardless of medium. However, the consent process for online discussions will probably be managed somewhat differently. For example, while an appropriate participant information leaflet (and consent form) would still be required, the process is likely to be managed electronically (for example, via email) and would need to specifically address issues relating to technology (for example, anonymity and use, storage and access to online data). 32

The venue in which a face to face focus group is conducted should be of a suitable size, private, quiet, free from distractions and in a collectively convenient location. It should also be conducted at a time appropriate for participants, 28 as this is likely to promote attendance. As with interviews, the same ethical considerations apply (as discussed earlier). However, online focus groups may present additional ethical challenges associated with issues such as informed consent, appropriate access and secure data storage. Further guidance can be found elsewhere. 8 , 32

Before the focus group commences, the researchers should establish rapport with participants, as this will help to put them at ease and result in a more meaningful discussion. Consequently, researchers should introduce themselves, provide further clarity about the study and how the process will work in practice and outline the 'ground rules'. Ground rules are designed to assist, not hinder, group discussion and typically include: 3 , 28 , 29

Discussions within the group are confidential to the group

Only one person can speak at a time

All participants should have sufficient opportunity to contribute

There should be no unnecessary interruptions while someone is speaking

Everyone can be expected to be listened to and their views respected

Challenging contrary opinions is appropriate, but ridiculing is not.

Moderating a focus group requires considered management and good interpersonal skills to help guide the discussion and, where appropriate, keep it sufficiently focused. Avoid, therefore, participating, leading, expressing personal opinions or correcting participants' knowledge 3 , 28 as this may bias the process. A relaxed, interested demeanour will also help participants to feel comfortable and promote candid discourse. Moderators should also prevent the discussion being dominated by any one person, ensure differences of opinions are discussed fairly and, if required, encourage reticent participants to contribute. 3 Asking open questions, reflecting on significant issues, inviting further debate, probing responses accordingly, and seeking further clarification, as and where appropriate, will help to obtain sufficient depth and insight into the topic area.

Moderating online focus groups requires comparable skills, particularly if the discussion is synchronous, as the discussion may be dominated by those who can type proficiently. 36 It is therefore important that sufficient time and respect is accorded to those who may not be able to type as quickly. Asynchronous discussions are usually less problematic in this respect, as interactions are less instant. However, moderating an asynchronous discussion presents additional challenges, particularly if participants are geographically dispersed, as they may be online at different times. Consequently, the moderator will not always be present and the discussion may therefore need to occur over several days, which can be difficult to manage and facilitate and invariably requires considerable flexibility. 32 It is also worth recognising that establishing rapport with participants via online medium is often more challenging than via face-to-face and may therefore require additional time, skills, effort and consideration.

As with research interviews, focus groups should be guided by an appropriate interview schedule, as discussed earlier in the paper. For example, the schedule will usually be informed by the review of the literature and study aims, and will merely provide a topic guide to help inform subsequent discussions. To provide a verbatim account of the discussion, focus groups must be recorded, using an audio-recorder with a good quality multi-directional microphone. While videotaping is possible, some participants may find it obtrusive, 3 which may adversely affect group dynamics. The use (or not) of a video recorder, should therefore be carefully considered.

At the end of the focus group, a few minutes should be spent rounding up and reflecting on the discussion. 28 Depending on the topic area, it is possible that some participants may have revealed deeply personal issues and may therefore require further help and support, such as a constructive debrief or possibly even referral on to a relevant third party. It is also possible that some participants may feel that the discussion did not adequately reflect their views and, consequently, may no longer wish to be associated with the study. 28 Such occurrences are likely to be uncommon, but should they arise, it is important to further discuss any concerns and, if appropriate, offer them the opportunity to withdraw (including any data relating to them) from the study. Immediately after the discussion, researchers should compile notes regarding thoughts and ideas about the focus group, which can assist with data analysis and, if appropriate, any further data collection.

Qualitative research is increasingly being utilised within dental research to explore the experiences, perspectives, motivations and beliefs of participants. The contributions of qualitative research to evidence-based practice are increasingly being recognised, both as standalone research and as part of larger mixed-method studies, including clinical trials. Interviews and focus groups remain commonly used data collection methods in qualitative research, and with the advent of digital technologies, their utilisation continues to evolve. However, digital methods of qualitative data collection present additional methodological, ethical and practical considerations, but also potentially offer considerable flexibility to participants and researchers. Consequently, regardless of format, qualitative methods have significant potential to inform important areas of dental practice, policy and further related research.

Gussy M, Dickson-Swift V, Adams J . A scoping review of qualitative research in peer-reviewed dental publications. Int J Dent Hygiene 2013; 11 : 174–179.

Article   Google Scholar  

Burnard P, Gill P, Stewart K, Treasure E, Chadwick B . Analysing and presenting qualitative data. Br Dent J 2008; 204 : 429–432.

Gill P, Stewart K, Treasure E, Chadwick B . Methods of data collection in qualitative research: interviews and focus groups. Br Dent J 2008; 204 : 291–295.

Gill P, Stewart K, Treasure E, Chadwick B . Conducting qualitative interviews with school children in dental research. Br Dent J 2008; 204 : 371–374.

Stewart K, Gill P, Chadwick B, Treasure E . Qualitative research in dentistry. Br Dent J 2008; 204 : 235–239.

Masood M, Thaliath E, Bower E, Newton J . An appraisal of the quality of published qualitative dental research. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2011; 39 : 193–203.

Ellis J, Levine A, Bedos C et al. Refusal of implant supported mandibular overdentures by elderly patients. Gerodontology 2011; 28 : 62–68.

Macfarlane S, Bucknall T . Digital Technologies in Research. In Gerrish K, Lathlean J (editors) The Research Process in Nursing . 7th edition. pp. 71–86. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell; 2015.

Google Scholar  

Lee R, Fielding N, Blank G . Online Research Methods in the Social Sciences: An Editorial Introduction. In Fielding N, Lee R, Blank G (editors) The Sage Handbook of Online Research Methods . pp. 3–16. London: Sage Publications; 2016.

Creswell J . Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five designs . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1998.

Guest G, Namey E, Mitchell M . Qualitative research: Defining and designing In Guest G, Namey E, Mitchell M (editors) Collecting Qualitative Data: A Field Manual For Applied Research . pp. 1–40. London: Sage Publications, 2013.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Pope C, Mays N . Qualitative research: Reaching the parts other methods cannot reach: an introduction to qualitative methods in health and health services research. BMJ 1995; 311 : 42–45.

Giddings L, Grant B . A Trojan Horse for positivism? A critique of mixed methods research. Adv Nurs Sci 2007; 30 : 52–60.

Hammersley M, Atkinson P . Ethnography: Principles in Practice . London: Routledge, 1995.

Oltmann S . Qualitative interviews: A methodological discussion of the interviewer and respondent contexts Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research. 2016; 17 : Art. 15.

Patton M . Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2002.

Wang M, Vinall-Collier K, Csikar J, Douglas G . A qualitative study of patients' views of techniques to reduce dental anxiety. J Dent 2017; 66 : 45–51.

Lindenmeyer A, Bowyer V, Roscoe J, Dale J, Sutcliffe P . Oral health awareness and care preferences in patients with diabetes: a qualitative study. Fam Pract 2013; 30 : 113–118.

Gallagher J, Clarke W, Wilson N . Understanding the motivation: a qualitative study of dental students' choice of professional career. Eur J Dent Educ 2008; 12 : 89–98.

Tod A . Interviewing. In Gerrish K, Lacey A (editors) The Research Process in Nursing . Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2006.

Grey E, Harcourt D, O'Sullivan D, Buchanan H, Kipatrick N . A qualitative study of patients' motivations and expectations for dental implants. Br Dent J 2013; 214 : 10.1038/sj.bdj.2012.1178.

Farmer J, Peressini S, Lawrence H . Exploring the role of the dental hygienist in reducing oral health disparities in Canada: A qualitative study. Int J Dent Hygiene 2017; 10.1111/idh.12276.

McElhinney E, Cheater F, Kidd L . Undertaking qualitative health research in social virtual worlds. J Adv Nurs 2013; 70 : 1267–1275.

Health Research Authority. UK Policy Framework for Health and Social Care Research. Available at https://www.hra.nhs.uk/planning-and-improving-research/policies-standards-legislation/uk-policy-framework-health-social-care-research/ (accessed September 2017).

Baillie J, Gill P, Courtenay P . Knowledge, understanding and experiences of peritonitis among patients, and their families, undertaking peritoneal dialysis: A mixed methods study protocol. J Adv Nurs 2017; 10.1111/jan.13400.

Kvale S . Interviews . Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage, 1996.

Spradley J . The Ethnographic Interview . New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1979.

Goodman C, Evans C . Focus Groups. In Gerrish K, Lathlean J (editors) The Research Process in Nursing . pp. 401–412. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell, 2015.

Shaha M, Wenzell J, Hill E . Planning and conducting focus group research with nurses. Nurse Res 2011; 18 : 77–87.

Wang G, Gao X, Edward C . Public perception of dental implants: a qualitative study. J Dent 2015; 43 : 798–805.

Bailey E . Contemporary views of dental practitioners' on patient safety. Br Dent J 2015; 219 : 535–540.

Abrams K, Gaiser T . Online Focus Groups. In Field N, Lee R, Blank G (editors) The Sage Handbook of Online Research Methods . pp. 435–450. London: Sage Publications, 2016.

Poynter R . The Handbook of Online and Social Media Research . West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons, 2010.

Kevern J, Webb C . Focus groups as a tool for critical social research in nurse education. Nurse Educ Today 2001; 21 : 323–333.

Kitzinger J, Barbour R . Introduction: The Challenge and Promise of Focus Groups. In Barbour R S K J (editor) Developing Focus Group Research . pp. 1–20. London: Sage Publications, 1999.

Krueger R, Casey M . Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE; 2009.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Senior Lecturer (Adult Nursing), School of Healthcare Sciences, Cardiff University,

Lecturer (Adult Nursing) and RCBC Wales Postdoctoral Research Fellow, School of Healthcare Sciences, Cardiff University,

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. Gill .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Gill, P., Baillie, J. Interviews and focus groups in qualitative research: an update for the digital age. Br Dent J 225 , 668–672 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2018.815

Download citation

Accepted : 02 July 2018

Published : 05 October 2018

Issue Date : 12 October 2018

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2018.815

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Assessment of women’s needs and wishes regarding interprofessional guidance on oral health in pregnancy – a qualitative study.

• Merle Ebinghaus
• Caroline Johanna Agricola
• Birgit-Christiane Zyriax

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth (2024)

Translating brand reputation into equity from the stakeholder’s theory: an approach to value creation based on consumer’s perception & interactions

• Olukorede Adewole

International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility (2024)

Perceptions and beliefs of community gatekeepers about genomic risk information in African cleft research

• Abimbola M. Oladayo
• Oluwakemi Odukoya
• Azeez Butali

BMC Public Health (2024)

Assessment of women’s needs, wishes and preferences regarding interprofessional guidance on nutrition in pregnancy – a qualitative study

‘baby mamas’ in urban ghana: an exploratory qualitative study on the factors influencing serial fathering among men in accra, ghana.

• Rosemond Akpene Hiadzi
• Jemima Akweley Agyeman
• Godwin Banafo Akrong

Reproductive Health (2023)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

What is a focus group?

• Home > What We Do > Research Methods > FAQ > What is a focus group?

A focus group is a research technique used to collect data through group interaction. The group comprises a small number of carefully selected people who discuss a given topic. Focus groups are used to identify and explore how people think and behave, and they throw light on why, what and how questions.

Contact Us >  

If you would like to find out more about focus groups

Explanation of a focus group

They can be used in three ways in the research design:

• Stand alone – where the focus groups are the sole data collection method and they serve as the principal source of data
• Supplementary – used to enhance alternative means of data collection. Typically this would be as a precursor to a quantitative stage – determining the issues to be covered in the structured interviewing and giving insights into the problems or opportunities that are being researched
• As part of a multi method design – where studies use several sources of data collection and no one method determines the use of the others

When focus groups are used as the sole source of data, the objectives will be explorative and diagnostic – what is the problem, how can we solve it, and how will the market react? When it is important to also get a fix on the number of people that think or behave one way or the other, a multi method design will be required with a quantitative stage to follow.

Group discussions are especially useful for researching new products, testing new concepts or determining “what would happen if?” They work because delegates can digest the points raised by other members and, as they consider the implications of issues raised, further ideas may be sparked off which would remain untapped in a personal interview.

Typical applications for focus groups are:

• To unravel complex processes from the basics e.g. a complicated buying process
• To identify customer needs i.e. where there is a complex interaction of factors influencing motives
• To identify how products are used
• To test new products i.e. where something needs showing to people
• To explore a concept, perhaps with stimulus aids so that people can visualize what it would look like
• To explore and identify issues of satisfaction (or dissatisfaction) for customers, staff or suppliers
• To explore perceptions of brand and service elements associated with the brand

Privacy Overview

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Methodology
• What Is a Focus Group? | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples

What Is a Focus Group? | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples

Published on 4 May 2022 by Tegan George . Revised on 6 February 2023.

Table of contents

What is a focus group, step 1: choose your topic of interest, step 2: define your research scope and hypotheses, step 3: determine your focus group questions, step 4: select a moderator or co-moderator, step 5: recruit your participants, step 6: set up your focus group, step 7: host your focus group, step 8: analyse your data and report your results, advantages and disadvantages of focus groups, frequently asked questions about focus groups.

Focus groups are a type of qualitative research . Observations of the group’s dynamic, their answers to focus group questions, and even their body language can guide future research on consumer decisions, products and services, or controversial topics.

Focus groups are often used in marketing, library science, social science, and user research disciplines. They can provide more nuanced and natural feedback than individual interviews and are easier to organise than experiments or large-scale surveys .

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Focus groups are primarily considered a confirmatory research technique . In other words, their discussion-heavy setting is most useful for confirming or refuting preexisting beliefs. For this reason, they are great for conducting explanatory research , where you explore why something occurs when limited information is available.

A focus group may be a good choice for you if:

• You’re interested in real-time, unfiltered responses on a given topic or in the dynamics of a discussion between participants
• Your questions are rooted in feelings or perceptions , and cannot easily be answered with ‘yes’ or ‘no’
• You’re confident that a relatively small number of responses will answer your question
• You’re seeking directional information that will help you uncover new questions or future research ideas
• Structured interviews : The questions are predetermined in both topic and order.
• Semi-structured interviews : A few questions are predetermined, but other questions aren’t planned.
• Unstructured interviews : None of the questions are predetermined.

Differences between types of interviews

Make sure to choose the type of interview that suits your research best. This table shows the most important differences between the four types.

Topics favorable to focus groups

As a rule of thumb, research topics related to thoughts, beliefs, and feelings work well in focus groups. If you are seeking direction, explanation, or in-depth dialogue, a focus group could be a good fit.

However, if your questions are dichotomous or if you need to reach a large audience quickly, a survey may be a better option. If your question hinges upon behaviour but you are worried about influencing responses, consider an observational study .

• If you want to determine whether the student body would regularly consume vegan food, a survey would be a great way to gauge student preferences.

However, food is much more than just consumption and nourishment and can have emotional, cultural, and other implications on individuals.

• If you’re interested in something less concrete, such as students’ perceptions of vegan food or the interplay between their choices at the dining hall and their feelings of homesickness or loneliness, perhaps a focus group would be best.

Once you have determined that a focus group is the right choice for your topic, you can start thinking about what you expect the group discussion to yield.

Perhaps literature already exists on your subject or a sufficiently similar topic that you can use as a starting point. If the topic isn’t well studied, use your instincts to determine what you think is most worthy of study.

Setting your scope will help you formulate intriguing hypotheses , set clear questions, and recruit the right participants.

• Are you interested in a particular sector of the population, such as vegans or non-vegans?
• Are you interested in including vegetarians in your analysis?
• Perhaps not all students eat at the dining hall. Will your study exclude those who don’t?
• Are you only interested in students who have strong opinions on the subject?

A benefit of focus groups is that your hypotheses can be open-ended. You can be open to a wide variety of opinions, which can lead to unexpected conclusions.

The questions that you ask your focus group are crucially important to your analysis. Take your time formulating them, paying special attention to phrasing. Be careful to avoid leading questions , which can affect your responses.

Overall, your focus group questions should be:

• Open-ended and flexible
• Impossible to answer with ‘yes’ or ‘no’ (questions that start with ‘why’ or ‘how’ are often best)
• Unambiguous, getting straight to the point while still stimulating discussion
• Unbiased and neutral

If you are discussing a controversial topic, be careful that your questions do not cause social desirability bias . Here, your respondents may lie about their true beliefs to mask any socially unacceptable or unpopular opinions. This and other demand characteristics can hurt your analysis and bias your results.

• Engagement questions make your participants feel comfortable and at ease: ‘What is your favourite food at the dining hall?’
• Exploration questions drill down to the focus of your analysis: ‘What pros and cons of offering vegan options do you see?’
• Exit questions pick up on anything you may have previously missed in your discussion: ‘Is there anything you’d like to mention about vegan options in the dining hall that we haven’t discussed?’

It is important to have more than one moderator in the room. If you would like to take the lead asking questions, select a co-moderator who can coordinate the technology, take notes, and observe the behaviour of the participants.

If your hypotheses have behavioural aspects, consider asking someone else to be lead moderator so that you are free to take a more observational role.

Depending on your topic, there are a few types of moderator roles that you can choose from.

• The most common is the dual-moderator , introduced above.
• Another common option is the dueling-moderator style . Here, you and your co-moderator take opposing sides on an issue to allow participants to see different perspectives and respond accordingly.

Depending on your research topic, there are a few sampling methods you can choose from to help you recruit and select participants.

• Voluntary response sampling , such as posting a flyer on campus and finding participants based on responses
• Convenience sampling of those who are most readily accessible to you, such as fellow students at your university
• Stratified sampling of a particular age, race, ethnicity, gender identity, or other characteristic of interest to you
• Judgement sampling of a specific set of participants that you already know you want to include

Beware of sampling bias , which can occur when some members of the population are more likely to be included than others.

Number of participants

In most cases, one focus group will not be sufficient to answer your research question. It is likely that you will need to schedule three to four groups. A good rule of thumb is to stop when you’ve reached a saturation point (i.e., when you aren’t receiving new responses to your questions).

Most focus groups have 6–10 participants. It’s a good idea to over-recruit just in case someone doesn’t show up. As a rule of thumb, you shouldn’t have fewer than 6 or more than 12 participants, in order to get the most reliable results.

Lastly, it’s preferable for your participants not to know you or each other, as this can bias your results.

A focus group is not just a group of people coming together to discuss their opinions. While well-run focus groups have an enjoyable and relaxed atmosphere, they are backed up by rigorous methods to provide robust observations.

Confirm a time and date

Be sure to confirm a time and date with your participants well in advance. Focus groups usually meet for 45–90 minutes, but some can last longer. However, beware of the possibility of wandering attention spans. If you really think your session needs to last longer than 90 minutes, schedule a few breaks.

Confirm whether it will take place in person or online

You will also need to decide whether the group will meet in person or online. If you are hosting it in person, be sure to pick an appropriate location.

• An uncomfortable or awkward location may affect the mood or level of participation of your group members.
• Online sessions are convenient, as participants can join from home, but they can also lessen the connection between participants.

As a general rule, make sure you are in a noise-free environment that minimises distractions and interruptions to your participants.

Consent and ethical considerations

It’s important to take into account ethical considerations and informed consent when conducting your research. Informed consent means that participants possess all the information they need to decide whether they want to participate in the research before it starts. This includes information about benefits, risks, funding, and institutional approval.

Participants should also sign a release form that states that they are comfortable with being audio- or video-recorded. While verbal consent may be sufficient, it is best to ask participants to sign a form.

A disadvantage of focus groups is that they are too small to provide true anonymity to participants. Make sure that your participants know this prior to participating.

There are a few things you can do to commit to keeping information private. You can secure confidentiality by removing all identifying information from your report or offer to pseudonymise the data later. Data pseudonymisation entails replacing any identifying information about participants with pseudonymous or false identifiers.

Preparation prior to participation

If there is something you would like participants to read, study, or prepare beforehand, be sure to let them know well in advance. It’s also a good idea to call them the day before to ensure they will still be participating.

Consider conducting a tech check prior to the arrival of your participants, and note any environmental or external factors that could affect the mood of the group that day. Be sure that you are organised and ready, as a stressful atmosphere can be distracting and counterproductive.

Starting the focus group

Welcome individuals to the focus group by introducing the topic, yourself, and your co-moderator, and go over any ground rules or suggestions for a successful discussion. It’s important to make your participants feel at ease and forthcoming with their responses.

Consider starting out with an icebreaker, which will allow participants to relax and settle into the space a bit. Your icebreaker can be related to your study topic or not; it’s just an exercise to get participants talking.

Leading the discussion

Once you start asking your questions, try to keep response times equal between participants. Take note of the most and least talkative members of the group, as well as any participants with particularly strong or dominant personalities.

You can ask less talkative members questions directly to encourage them to participate or ask participants questions by name to even the playing field. Feel free to ask participants to elaborate on their answers or to give an example.

As a moderator, strive to remain neutral. Refrain from reacting to responses, and be aware of your body language (e.g., nodding, raising eyebrows). Active listening skills, such as parroting back answers or asking for clarification, are good methods to encourage participation and signal that you’re listening.

Many focus groups offer a monetary incentive for participants. Depending on your research budget, this is a nice way to show appreciation for their time and commitment. To keep everyone feeling fresh, consider offering snacks or drinks as well.

After concluding your focus group, you and your co-moderator should debrief, recording initial impressions of the discussion as well as any highlights, issues, or immediate conclusions you’ve drawn.

The next step is to transcribe and clean your data . Assign each participant a number or pseudonym for organisational purposes. Transcribe the recordings and conduct content analysis to look for themes or categories of responses. The categories you choose can then form the basis for reporting your results.

Just like other research methods, focus groups come with advantages and disadvantages.

• They are fairly straightforward to organise and results have strong face validity .
• They are usually inexpensive, even if you compensate participant.
• A focus group is much less time-consuming than a survey or experiment , and you get immediate results.
• Focus group results are often more comprehensible and intuitive than raw data.

Disadvantages

• It can be difficult to assemble a truly representative sample. Focus groups are generally not considered externally valid due to their small sample sizes.
• Due to the small sample size, you cannot ensure the anonymity of respondents, which may influence their desire to speak freely.
• Depth of analysis can be a concern, as it can be challenging to get honest opinions on controversial topics.
• There is a lot of room for error in the data analysis and high potential for observer dependency in drawing conclusions. You have to be careful not to cherry-pick responses to fit a prior conclusion.

A focus group is a research method that brings together a small group of people to answer questions in a moderated setting. The group is chosen due to predefined demographic traits, and the questions are designed to shed light on a topic of interest. It is one of four types of interviews .

As a rule of thumb, questions related to thoughts, beliefs, and feelings work well in focus groups . Take your time formulating strong questions, paying special attention to phrasing. Be careful to avoid leading questions , which can bias your responses.

The four most common types of interviews are:

• Focus group interviews : The questions are presented to a group instead of one individual.

Social desirability bias is the tendency for interview participants to give responses that will be viewed favourably by the interviewer or other participants. It occurs in all types of interviews and surveys , but is most common in semi-structured interviews , unstructured interviews , and focus groups .

Social desirability bias can be mitigated by ensuring participants feel at ease and comfortable sharing their views. Make sure to pay attention to your own body language and any physical or verbal cues, such as nodding or widening your eyes.

This type of bias in research can also occur in observations if the participants know they’re being observed. They might alter their behaviour accordingly.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the ‘Cite this Scribbr article’ button to automatically add the citation to our free Reference Generator.

George, T. (2023, February 06). What Is a Focus Group? | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 21 August 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/focus-groups/

Is this article helpful?

Tegan George

Other students also liked, structured interview | definition, guide & examples, semi-structured interview | definition, guide & examples, unstructured interview | definition, guide & examples.

How to... Conduct a focus group

Read about focus groups, what they're good for, how to run them, and how to avoid common challenges.

On this page

What is a focus group & for what is it suitable, how to facilitate a focus group, design issues of focus groups, focus groups as a qualitative technique.

Focus groups are a data gathering technique used in qualitative and ethnographic research, and as such they share many of the latter's assumptions and call for many of its skills.

The ethnographic approach to research is one where the researcher studies research subjects in their natural setting, observing behaviour and tapping into shared knowledge.

It is most appropriate for studying processes which have a strong social element, such as those which depend on group interaction, and where it is important to take account of diverse views and perspectives. It is used to obtain a rich and detailed view of a reasonably small area as opposed to a wide range of fairly objective data covering a large area: depth, rather than breadth.

It is based on an interpretivist theoretical perspective, which sees positivism as being inappropriate to any study which describes humans, their behaviour and attitudes.

The role of the researcher is as a participant, either active or passive, and he or she is less "objective" than with quantitative research. The researcher is an observer, and needs strong skills of communication, able to tease out the nuances of meaning and hear messages that are not being verbalised, of interpretation, with the ability to unpack messages, and discern patterns.

The most commonly used qualitative settings are participant observation, and the interview. The interview may be either one to one, or within a group.

Key features of focus groups

"The group interview is essentially a data gathering technique ... that relies upon the systematic questioning of several individuals simultaneously in a formal or informal setting." (Fontana, A. and Frey, J.H., 2000, "The interview: from structured questions to negotiated text", in Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds),  Handbook of Qualitative Research , 2nd ed., Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA)

"Qualitative groups (Dick, 1999) are generally defined as groups of people brought together to participate in the discussion of an area of interest. In market research this would be for example, to discuss a product, brand or advertisement for the purposes of clarifying an area of concern for a client. In social research it could be to discuss an area of social concern." (Boddy, C., 2005, " A rose by any other name may smell as sweet but 'group discussion' is not another name for a 'focus group' nor should it be ",  Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal , Vol. 8 No. 3, quoting Dick, B., 1999,  Rigour without Numbers: The Potential of Dialectic Processes as Qualitative Research Tools , 3rd ed., Interchange, Chapel Hill, NC)

A focus group is always directed by a moderator/facilitator, with varying degrees of control depending on whether it is:

• Structured , where the facilitator is more directive, having a set agenda and not letting the group deviate from it. The reason for having a structured focus group is that the researcher has a fairly good idea what the issues are and wants to spend time exploring them.
• Unstructured , where the group discussion is more free flowing. This type of focus group may be used in product research, or for an exploration of general issues, such as how employees feel about a new pay scheme. A varient of the unstructured focus group is the nominal group, where participants are physically isolated, but views are gathered for comment with a possible later meeting, and the Delphi technique, where the idea is to reach a consensus.

As stated in the introduction to this piece, the terms "focus group" and "group interview" are used interchangeably. In his article " A rose by any other name may smell as sweet but 'group discussion' is not another name for a 'focus group' nor should it be " ( Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal , Vol. 8 No. 3), Clive Boddy suggests the adoption of two terms, focus group interview and focus group discussion, the one structured and the other unstructured, as defined above.

The focus group can also either take place in a formal setting, designated by the researcher and where participants come in response to invitations, or in an informal setting, such as on a street corner, shopping mall etc. There is a benefit in having the group in a familiar setting, which can reduce the sense of "otherness".

The defining quality of the focus group is its collectivist nature: in concentrating on the group, it allows for expression of a variety of different perspectives (thereby aligning it to a non positivist, interpretivist approach which allows for multiple perspectives). Not only is it possible to gain access to the experiences of many different individuals, but also because individuals interact with one another, data is enriched as group members spark each other off, enabling views to be reformulated through exchange, nuances of meaning teased out, recall strengthened, and shy members given confidence. Data are enhanced as they are drawn from a social context, and interaction is horizontal – between participants – as well as vertical – interviewer/interviewee.

Another advantage of the focus group, and one that is especially relevant with a clearly defined research population, is that it is an efficient way to interview more people in a shorter amount of time than is possible with a one to one interview.

As a technique, the focus group has elements of both participant observation and the individual interview, calling for both a questioning style and the observation of group processes. Whether the researcher chooses the individual or group approach for interviews will depend upon a number of factors.

Individual interviews are good:

• when you need to focus on an individual's personal circumstances or history
• when the subject-matter is very complex, for example when you are talking about complex systems or processes
• when confidentiality is required
• when coming to a particular location may inhibit, and it is therefore better to interview on subject's home ground.

Group interviews are good:

• when interaction between participants will illuminate the research issue
• when issues are abstract or conceptual, or are concerned with attitudes or views
• when interviewees are likely to be intimitated by a one to one setting.

Of course, the two methods can be combined as when a focus group is followed up by a series of one to one interviews with selected participants. Knowing how to combine them is a matter of knowing how their particular strengths and weaknesses will fit into your research design.

The following examples show uses of focus groups in both structured and unstructured settings:

• " Patients’ perceptions of quality in a Northern Ireland hospital trust: a focus group study " ( International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance , Vol. 10 No. 1), where Eileen Evason describes her use of more structured focus groups.
• " Focus group exploration of firm-employee relationship strength " (Carmel Herington  et al., Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal , Vol. 8 No. 3) discusses some of the benefits of focus groups.
• " Consumer acceptance of online banking: an extension of the technology acceptance model " (Tero Pikkarainen  et al. ,  Internet Research , Vol. 14 No. 3) describes exploratory use of focus groups.
• " Evaluating an undergraduate unit using a focus group " (Ann Wall,  Quality Assurance in Education , Vol. 9 No. 1) gives a number of reasons for using this technique, including group interaction, and the type of data required.

History of focus groups

The focus group as a technique was first developed in the 1920s, mainly to help develop survey questionnaires, although also for other purposes of social research.

In the 1940s, Robert Merton and Paul Lazarfield used the technique for group interviewing people about their reactions to wartime radio programmes (see Merton, R., 1987, "Focused interviews and focus groups: continuities and discontinuities",  Public Opinion Quarterly , No. 511, pp. 550-566). From that time until the 1970s, focus groups were mainly used in market research, for such matters as brand images, packaging and product choice.

By the late 1980s, however, the focus group had become recognised as a social science method in its own right, partly in reaction to perceived limitations of other methods: the individual interview was seen as liable to be influenced by the interviewer, and the closed questions of surveys too limited in terms of depth of data. As against this, quantitative methods have – particularly in the USA – dominated both the social sciences and management sciences, although there is currently much interest in qualitative methods on both sides of the Atlantic, so it seems likely that the popularity of the focus group will continue.

Advantages and disadvantages of focus groups

K. Denise Threlfall (in " Using focus groups as a consumer research tool ",  Journal of Marketing Practice: Applied Marketing Science , Vol. 5 No. 4) provides a good summary of the advantages and disadvantages of the focus group:

Advantages:

• The researcher has less control over the subject, which means that more weight can be given to the data.
• It allows for the observation of social interaction, which can enrich the data, correct the individualistic bias inherent in the one-to-one interview and take account of the social construction of meaning.
• The participants can take control of the discussion process, moving the conversation to topics that are of relevance to them.
• It is particularly suited to research amongst populations which may perceive their views to be devalued, for example socially excluded groups, or in an organisation where a particular group of workers may feel that their opinions are ignored by management.
• It can act as a change agent as participants become aware of the limitations of their situation and produce an agenda for change.
• As compared with a questionnaire, participants have more control in that they are able to respond to questions in greater depth, and probe awkward and sensitive issues.
• It is relatively inexpensive to conduct, and less expensive and time-consuming than individual interviews.
• It is good for researching attitudes, convictions and beliefs. 

Disadvantages:

• May be subject to groupthink, where the predominant group view may dominate individual expression.
• May be dominated by particular members while others may be shy.
• Personal opinions may distort the result.
• Cannot generalise the findings of one focus group.
• A focus group is not a normal way of interacting socially, therefore the advantages drawn from observation of social interaction may be limited.
• As compared with participant observation, the behavioural information is limited to verbal communication, body language, facial expression etc.
• The presence of the facilitator may be restricting.
• Because of the dynamic nature of the group process, greater skill in interviewing is called for.
• Difficult for sensitive or intimate topics or if confidentiality is involved.
• Difficult if for any reason participants don't feel comfortable with one another, as for example in a work situation where supervisors and supervisees are brought together.
• Some populations may find it difficult to travel to a particular venue.
• Difficult to control number as invitees may not turn up.

Uses of the focus group

Focus groups are used widely in the following areas:

• social research, often to explore issues surrounding the delivery of services
• marketing, to look at the effectiveness of an advertising campaign, or the likely reception of a particular product
• politics, by political parties to explore voter concerns, for which they have received a certain notoriety as some would see their use as merely window dressing, while others criticise an over-readiness to generalise from the particular
• in a range of academic disciplines such as anthropology, communication, education, marketing, political science, sociology, psychology, nursing and public health.

" Using focus groups to evaluate health promotion interventions " (Kirsten Mitchell and Patrick Branigan,  Health Education , Vol. 100 No. 6) describes how to use focus groups in health promotion.

" Using focus groups as a consumer research tool " (K. Denise Threlfall,  Journal of Marketing Practice: Applied Marketing Science , Vol. 5 No. 4) looks at its use in marketing research.

" Using focus groups to explore children’s perceptions of smoking: reflections on practice " (Lorna Porcellato  et al. ,  Health Education , Vol. 102 No. 6) discusses the use of focus groups with children.

Focus groups are also used widely with the following applications:

• exploratory research, to define a research problem 
• to generate a hypothesis
• to carry out a needs assessment, for example if you are developing a training or educational product and you want to know what people need
• to identify key informants who can later be interviewed
• as a precursor to a survey, to help determine both the type of questions and their wording, the latter through listening to the type of language used by participants
• to obtain rich accounts of particular events
• to explore attitudes, for example towards new work practices, changes in a company
• to triangulate with other research findings, and where you want to explore findings in greater depth.

Skills required

We shall be looking further down this page at the tasks of steering a focus group and framing questions, but in general terms the group leader needs to:

• be objective, remembering that this is a research exercise and he or she should encourage equally material which does and does not support the hypothesis
• be flexible, allowing free flowing discussion but ensuring that there is enough structure to cover key topics, and knowing the right point to intervene if someone is too domineering, or if the group is straying off the topic
• be empathic and a good listener, able to put people at ease, and with the right social skills to be able to draw in someone who is shy, perhaps by looking at that person in an encouraging way
• possess a combination of tact and assertiveness, able to project him or herself onto the group without dominating
• possess the courage to stay with a silence if that silence can engender further thoughtful contribution.

Whether or not the researcher and the facilitator are the same person will depend on the project, but if they are it is all the more important to remember the above skills, and in particular to be objective.

The stages of group process

Like any group, focus groups are subject to certain collective behaviours. Drawing on research done on small groups, Helen Finch and Jane Lewis ("Focus groups" in Ritchie, J and Lewis, J. (Eds), 2003,  Qualitative Research Practice , Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA) describe five stages of the group process:

• Forming . At this stage, everyone is relatively tense and guarded, and concerned with inclusion.
• Storming . Relatively early on, tensions and disagreements begin to emerge. Data from this stage of the group discussion will not be very reliable.
• Norming . The group begins to settle down, observe ground rules, and cooperate.
• Performing . Here, the group's discussion is at its best and most interactive, the researcher can relax and let the group conduct itself.
• Adjourning . The group works towards an ending. Sometimes, there is also  mourning , when people seem reluctant to leave.

The stages of a focus group

The facilitator needs to be aware of the different stages the focus group should go through, and how to conduct each stage.

Setting the scene and laying ground rules

As participants arrive, the facilitator should welcome them and thank them for coming. Once everybody is present and seated, the facilitator should provide a brief introduction outlining the purpose of research, laying ground rules (one person to talk at a time, all views welcome, confidentiality) and to stress that there is no hidden agenda, and that all views will be treated in confidence.

Next, each participant introduces themselves, giving name and a brief bit of background. The facilitator should make a spatial note of where people are sitting, which will serve as a useful aide memoire when looking at the session notes or listening to the recording.

The opening topic

The facilitator introduces the opening topic/question, which should be fairly general, and capable of generating discussion. Attempts should be made to make everyone contribute as a way of breaking into the group. It may be necessary for the facilitator to intervene quite a bit by asking questions, and generally keeping the discussion going.

When the discussion gets under way, the facilitator will need to tread a fine line between ensuring that all points are covered, attending to particular details and noting the odd interesting piece of data that emerges independent of the official questions, and promoting group discussion, between heeding thoughtful pauses and making sure that the discussion does not dry up. Active listening is very important, and they may need to probe at particular points.

Ending the discussion

It's very important to end the discussion on a positive note, especially if difficult material has been raised, and also to thank people for coming.

Framing questions

The facilitator will have prepared a guide with a list of topics/questions to be covered, the amount of detail and specificity of which will depend upon the degree of structure desired of the group. It is advisable however to have memorised this schedule in advance, as to read from questions will look forced and inhibit discussion.

Questions should be:

• sufficiently stimulating and keep the discussion going
• relevant to participants
• capable of providing concrete data
• open, so as to lead to in-depth responses and rich data
• clear, avoiding ambiguity
• couched in language that participants understand
• sensitively worded if they explore (particularly difficult) feelings.

They should not:

• be worded in such a way as to influence or "lead" the answer
• cover more than one topic per question.

The number of questions and their detail will vary depending on how structured the focus group is to be, but in general five to eight questions is considered a good number, and these should move from the general to the particular.

Janice Dreachslin, in " Focus groups as a quality improvement technique: a case example from health administration education " ( Quality Assurance in Education , Vol. 7 No. 4) quotes Krueger (1994) as recommending the following format for questions:

• An opening question which is factual in nature and establishes the participants’ commonality.
• A series of introductory questions that acquaint participants with the topic and initiate conversation.
• Transition questions that move discussion to the focus group’s central topics
• Two to five key questions that are central to the analysis.

An ending question to accomplish one of the following objectives:

• encourage participants to state their final position on key topics
• give participants the opportunity to comment on the accuracy of a facilitator-generated summary of the key input generated by the group
• enable participants to offer any additional comments relevant to the group’s key purpose.

Dreachslin also discusses the pros and cons of focus groups.

See also Krueger, R.A. and Casey, M.A., 2000,  Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research , Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.

The Appendix of " Using focus groups to assess student needs " (Britt Anna Fagerheim and Sandra J. Weingart,  Library Review , Vol. 54 No. 9) contains an example of focus group questions.

" Using focus groups to explore children’s perceptions of smoking: reflections on practice " (Lorna Porcellato  et al. ,  Health Education , Vol. 102 No. 6) also provides a copy of the interview schedule in the Appendix.

Conducting a discussion

Leading a good focus group discussion is a balancing act between on the one hand flexibility, allowing a free-flowing conversation, and on the other structure, ensuring that the conversation does not stray too far from the research objectives, that it remains relevant, inclusive of everyone and not dominated by one person. It is very important to obtain responses from the maximum number of people in the group to get the fullest coverage.

Ideally, the discussion should regulate itself and the issues be covered by the respondents without much steering. However, the following techniques will be useful:

• Steering . Techniques for steering the discussion include reconciling and commenting on divergent views, making links.
• Probing . The facilitator may need to probe interesting points to get a fuller response, for example by opening up the discussion to others ("How do other people feel about this?"), asking a question ("Can you say a bit more about this?"), repeating what the participant has said, or highlighting different views.
• Listening to material which may seem divergent . A  participant may launch into an anecdote which may appear to be off the topic but which may contain a nugget of highly relevant information. At the same time it is also necessary to watch out for emergent issues, which may not be in the notes but which may lead to fertile areas for research.
• Be alert for non verbal signals . For example, nodding or shaking the head to indicate agreement or disagreement, a frown, surprise. Such non verbal signals are best verbalised so that they can be translated into data.
• Controlling the balance between participants . It's important to moderate between the dominant person and the shy person, and to encourage equality of contribution. This should be done tactfully, with avoidance of hurting someone or embarrassing them. A lot can be achieved by eye contact: withdraw it from the dominant person, look at the shy person encouragingly. If this fails, then try a verbal intervention: "That was very interesting, can we perhaps hear some other views?", "You haven't had a chance to say what you think".
• Encourage expression of personal views . Participants need to be encouraged to say what they think, which they may find difficult if they feel that it is not politically or strategically acceptable (for example, complaining about a long hours culture). The facilitator should encourage this by stressing that disagreement, and challenging received attitudes, is acceptable.

See " Workplace health concerns: a focus group study " (Annette M. Jinks and Ruth Daniels,  Journal of Management in Medicine , Vol. 13 No. 2) for a discussion of the role of the researcher in their focus groups.

The focus group within the overall research design

Whether you are using just focus groups as a research method will depend on whether the technique can answer all your research questions by itself, and whether it alone is an effective way of reaching your target population. It is in any case highly likely that you will want to triangulate it with another method in order to increase reliability.

Which other method you choose will depend on the type of data you are trying to collect. You may for example wish to explore some issues in further depth through individual interviews, or you may wish to combine the focus groups with a survey, for which the former act as a method of exploring the issues.

In " Consumer acceptance of online banking: an extension of the technology acceptance model " ( Internet Research , Vol. 14 No. 3), Tero Pikkarainen  et al.  use focus groups to test a questionnaire, and to verify the hypothesis that affective factors were relevant to online banking acceptance.

" Probing user perceptions of service quality: using focus groups to enhance quantitative surveys " (Gwyneth H. Crowley and Charles L. Gilreath,  Performance Measurement and Metric , Vol. 3 No. 2) describes the use of this technique to gain greater depth of data following a survey.

One focus group is difficult to generalise from, and you should have at least two, and more if you want to examine the views of more than one target population, say for example employed and unemployed, or people at different levels in an organisation. Generally, fewer groups are necessary for more structured, exploratory work, and more for unstructured work.

In " Application of the means-end value hierarchy model to understanding logistics service value " ( International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management , Vol. 27 No. 9/10), Mentzer  et al.  explore the value of logistics in terms of enhancing value perceptions to customers. They held 13 different focus groups each featuring a different product but covering the same broad areas. The moderator introduced a few general topics to get the conversation started, but afterwards let the discussion roam freely as this unstructured technique was felt to be most appropriate to gather underlying themes.

Sampling considerations, group size and composition

For  recruitment , convenience sampling (see our companion " How to... design a research study " guide), whereby participants are recruited based on their easy accessibility to the researcher, will be cheaper than probability sampling, although you should consider whether or not this will provide sufficient rigour for your design. Snowball sampling, whereby participants recruit others, may also be possible, and purposive sampling may also be appropriate.

See " Community policing and social capital " (Nathan W. Pino,  Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management , Vol. 24 No. 2) for an account of how he recruited participants from neighbourhood groups as these were more likely to be sufficiently informed.

Care should be taken over the wording of the  invitation to attend , particularly if inviting members of an organisation as the invitation can seem like an instruction.

Estimates of desirable  group size  vary between four to 12 and six to eight. It's a good idea to invite more people that your target number in case some don't turn up. A small group may be biassed by existing relationships among participants and silent members, whereas a large group may be difficult to control and splinter into sub-groups. Less than four people will lose the character of a group. The size will vary according to a number of factors:

• sensitivity of the issue – for a sensitive issue a small group is better
• the breadth/depth of data required – if you want breadth, go for large, if you want depth, go for small
• the target population – if this is highly articulate, it will probably be better to go for small
• the structure of the focus group – if the group is to undertake relatively structured work say in a workshop, then it's better to have a larger group.

In determining  group composition , it's important to maintain a balance between homogeneity and heterogeneity. In studying disadvantaged groups, reticence may be lessened by ethnic and linguistic homogeneity, and it is generally better to avoid large differences in status and power. For example, when researching issues in an organisation it is best to have different focus groups for different levels, and to select a horizontal slice through the organisation. Homogeneity is particularly important when studying sensitive topics – for example in a study of people's attitudes towards threatened redundancy, you should not include people who don't feel threatened.

See " Focus group exploration of firm-employee relationship strength " (Carmel Herington  et al. ,  Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal , Vol. 8 No. 3) for a discussion of the use of focus groups and how the authors justified size and composition.

Group members should all have a degree of commonality in terms of how they relate to the topic, for example if researching reactions to a service, all group members should be users. On the other hand, too much homogeneity can impede discussion as agreement may make people fail to articulate views sufficiently clearly.

It is also important to avoid tokenism, for example just one male, one member of an ethnic group. If the group have a demographic feature in common, then it is better that the leader also shares the feature, e.g. is of the same ethnic origin as the group, or, in the case of a group studying issues of female managers, the leader should also be female.

It may be desirable in some instances that the group are strangers to one another, as this may make discussion easier. If you find that some people know one another, then get them to sit apart. On other occasions, for example if you are investigating issues within an organisation, members of the group will already know one another.

Time, place and other practicalities

In setting the  time  for the focus groups, you need to consider potential clashes with major events, for example, sporting fixtures or major holidays, as well as the needs of your target population. (If researching in an organisation, there may be particular days of the week which are allocated to meetings and it is best to avoid these.) For example, mothers with school age children are more likely to come to an event during school hours, busy managers more likely to show up if the event is organised around lunch time, especially if lunch is provided (see below). If planning more than one focus group, have these at different times to accommodate people's schedules.

The  venue  also needs to be appropriate to the participants. If using a pre-existing group, then there is some advantage to meeting on familiar territory, for example a church hall, or meeting room of a place of work (although in the latter case, the setting should be as neutral as possible). If there are no such places available, then you will have to give some thought to hire of a room in, say, a pub or local hotel – in which case, you need to make sure that you have the funds in your budget.

The  room  needs to be of adequate size and quiet, so that group members are not distracted. Pay attention to the arrangement of the seating – are the chairs arranged in such a way as to facilitate discussion? If you are planning to have the groups back to back, you need to have a second room for the next lot of participants to wait in.

It is quite common to offer some sort of  incentive  to attend the focus group, such as refreshments (which should be offered anyway). For example, publishers of school textbooks offer vouchers for educational material.

" Using focus groups to assess student needs " (Britt Anna Fagerheim and Sandra J. Weingart,  Library Review , Vol. 54 No. 9) describes how the authors went about recruiting students to their focus group, and how they organised the practical issues.

Focus groups online

Needless to say, once you remove focus groups from the conventional physical environment there needs to be considerable differences in the design, and despite the growing sophistication of Internet technologies, focus groups in a virtual environment are still a relative novelty. As with any form of virtual communication, the loss of non verbal clues creates a challenge, with the use of probes being particularly problematic as silence has different connotations.

Advantages are that people do not have to travel to a particular location, and those who are shy may have a greater degree of confidence. There is the very real plus that data is automatically recorded.

Care needs to be taken to create a genuine "virtual space", which should have its own design, make people feel at home and be dedicated, so that it can be free of other distractions.

The following three articles, though none of them very up-to-date, discuss virtual focus groups.

" Focus groups in cyberspace: using the Internet for qualitative research " (Henrietta O'Connor and Clare Madge,  Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal , Vol. 6 No. 2)

" Designing and conducting virtual focus groups " (Casey Sweet,  Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal , Vol. 4 No. 3)

" On-line focus groups: conceptual issues and a research tool " (Mitzi Montoya-Weiss  et al. ,  European Journal of Marketing , Vol. 32 No. 7/8)

An important consideration is, how will you record the data? There are various ways:

• Relying on memory .
• Taking notes , in which case you will need a second facilitator who sits next to you, as you will be too tied up with moderating the group to take notes as well.
• Tape recording . This is probably the best way, but you should remember the length of time it takes to transcribe the results. You should also have a good quality tape recorder with a multidirectional microphone placed on the table, and a good quality tape close to the recorder (trying to transcribe from a poor quality tape is a very frustrating experience). You should also ask permission before you record, and check that the recorder is functioning before you start.
• Video recording . The advantage here is that you can record body language as well as verbal data, but it's very intrusive and you will definitely need permission.

The level of sophistication of analysis may vary – you may feel that a full-scale content analysis (which we shall deal with as a separate topic) is called for, or it may be sufficient to do a more "informal" analysis of the themes.

Whichever method you choose, it is advisable to listen to the tape recording or look at your notes, and analyse the main themes and sub-themes, as well as the participants' characteristics. You need to think about how you are going to substantiate your findings: what is the real evidence? Are there particular characteristics of the participants which might affect the data? Are there any particularly strong statements? Does a consensus emerge?

Having done this, you can then summarise in a series of statements expressing the main themes.

Most of your data will be in the form of text; if you use numerical analysis it should be to give an impression, for example a certain percentage felt... It is not usual to subject the findings of focus group research to statistical tests, although recently analytic methods for qualitative data have become more sophisticated.

When you write your report, you should organise according to major themes, noting any significant differences between groups but not writing individually on each group. More detailed analysis should go in an Appendix.

In " Workplace health concerns: a focus group study " ( Journal of Management in Medicine , Vol. 13 No. 2), Annette M. Jinks and Ruth Daniels describe how they analysed their data using content analysis and "meaning units" or words or phrases that characterised categories.

" Recruiting and retaining scarce information technology talent: a focus group study " (Diane Lockwood and Al Ansari,  Industrial Management & Data Systems , Vol. 99 No. 6) provides an example of reporting the findings of focus groups.

" Using an ANN-approach for analyzing focus groups " (Marcus Schmidt,  Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal , Vol. 4 No. 2) describes a quantitative approach to analysis of focus group data.

• Developing Focus Group Research: Politics, Theory and Practice edited by Rosaline S. Barbour and Jenny Kitzinger (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, 1999) 
• Advanced Focus Group Research Edward F. Fern (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, 2001)
• The Handbook for Focus Group Research Thomas L. Greenbaum (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, 1998) 
• Moderating Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Group Facilitation Thomas L. Greenbaum (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, 2000)
• Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research edited by Richard A. Krueger and Mary Anne Casey  (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, 2000)
• The Focused Interview Robert K. Merton, Marjorie Fiske and Patricia L. Kendall (The Free Press, New York, NY, 1990) 
• Successful Focus Groups: Advancing the State of the Art edited by David L. Morgan (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, 1993) 
• Focus Groups as Qualitative Research David L. Morgan (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, 1997) 
• Focus Groups: Theory and Practice David W. Stewart and Prem N. Shamdasani (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, 1990) 
• Focus Group Interviews in Education and Psychology Sharon Vaughn, Jeanne Shay Schumm and Jane M. Sinagub (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, 1996)

As is to be expected, there is much information on focus groups on the Web, much of it from organisations with other main objectives, e.g. advising particular groups, marketing etc.

• The use and misuse of focus groups Article on Jacob Neilsen's website (1997)
• Focus groups Article from  Social Research Update , published by the University of Surrey Sociology Department (1997)
• Focus group research in American politics Looks at the political use of focus groups
• Focus groups Articles from  SixSigma , a commercial publication
• Focus group articles by Tom Greenbaum
• Focus group research Articles from Coventry University's Centre for Higher Education Development
• How to conduct a focus group Information from an advisory centre for non profits

• Reviews / Why join our community?
• For companies
• Frequently asked questions

How to Conduct Focus Groups

Focus groups have long been a popular tool in market research and have become more popular in user research in the recent past too. They consist of a group of between 5 and 10 users who work with a moderator/facilitator/researcher. The moderator will pose questions from a script to the group. Their answers are recorded, sometimes by the moderator sometimes by an observer or observers, and then analyzed and reported on at the end of the process.

Preparing for a Focus Group

A focus group is, in essence, a large scale interview. Preparation for a focus group can be broken down into two key areas; recruitment of participants and creating the script for the moderator to use.

Author/Copyright holder: UBC LEAP. Copyright terms and license: Fair Use.

When it comes to recruiting participants all the usual methods of recruitment can be employed to deliver groups of between 5 and 10 participants. While, technically, it is possible to use larger groups in practice these are very hard to facilitate and it often leads to certain participants being left unheard while a small group of users dominates the proceedings. It is important to run more than one focus group to see if the question set is delivering consistent responses and, in many cases, to ensure a representative sample of users is being worked with.

In terms of scripting; it’s best to decide what the purpose of your focus group will be and then design questions to elicit responses that let you reach your objectives. In general, it is best to stay away from the use of leading questions. These are questions that make presumptions on behalf of the user or alternatively presuppose a given response. For example; “How much time do you spend on Twitter?” presumes that the users are using Twitter. A more general question about what social networks users use is likely to give more valuable data. Also a question like; “Everyone here likes Facebook, right?” presupposes that the users do like Facebook. A more neutral; “Tell me what your feelings are about Facebook?” is more likely to yield responses that show a range of feelings.

The environment for the focus group should also be prepared prior to the event taking place. It should be comfortable, ideally it should be laid out in a circle or horseshoe arrangement and have recording (video or tape) facilities to enable a further review of the proceedings once they have been completed.

Conducting a Focus Group

Conducting a focus group is simply a matter of asking the questions and recording the responses to those questions. However, there are some tips for facilitating high-quality focus groups:

The moderator should begin by explaining the purpose of the group and what is expected of the group

They should also address the question of how any data collected or personal data will be used and how it won’t be used

Name badges can help participants talk to each other and to the moderator

It can be a good idea to carry out an “ice breaker” exercise which frees people up to talk prior to engaging with scripted questions

The moderator should not be tasked with note taking. Ideally one or two observers will do this – they should be introduced to the group and their roles explained as part of the introduction

If video or audio recording is to be used – this should be explained in the introduction too

Refreshments should be made available and if the focus group sessions are lengthy – regular comfort breaks should be given

The moderator should try to establish a permissive environment in which everyone feels free to contribute

If a participant or participants begins to dominate proceedings – the moderator should gently encourage others to get involved and rein in the dominant participant(s)

The moderator should sum up important points at convenient moments and ensure that they have understood them

If the session goes for a long period of time – it’s important to vary the question and answer style script with other exercises (for example card sorting or prioritization exercises)

The moderator’s job is to progress the discussion and to facilitate it and not to participate in the discussion itself

The moderator may probe for understanding if they feel that someone is on the verge of an important insight

The moderator (with the observers) should lead a summary exercise at the end to summarize key themes, check for understanding and ask any questions that the observers feel would be useful

While question and answer is the most common format for short focus groups alternative activities may include (for variety):

Making choices from lists of alternatives

List making

Fill in the blank exercises

Fantasy/daydream exercises

Picture drawing

Role playing

Card sorting

Author/Copyright holder: Luca Mascaro. Copyright terms and license: CC BY-SA 2.0

Note Taking Hints for Observers

While the moderator is free to make notes that help them drive the focus group’s activities forward and to keep within the time available for the group; the observers are tasked with making detailed notes about the actual content of the discussion.

These notes may include:

Interesting quotes. Try to capture who said it as well as what was said, it can help to use a participant’s initials for this. If you can’t get all the information down it’s common to use an ellipsis (…) to show that material is missing and needs to be retrieved from recordings.

Key points and themes from any exercise or question. Again try to capture who brought up these points with their initials. These form themes that should be shared by the observer with the group at the end of the session.

Follow up questions . If there’s something that the observer feels is significant and would like clarification on – they should record it and bring it up at a natural break in the group or at the end during the summary.

Ideas and insights “light bulb moments”. The observer may also record anything that occurs to them that they feel is important or useful – this does not have to be based on any particular observation but their own insight.

Anything else. It might be body language or the level of passion/anger etc. at any given time in the group. If something feels significant – it’s probably worth recording.

It can also be useful for an observer to complete a seating plan which shows where each person was sitting during the exercise.

Author/Copyright holder: Wesley Fryer . Copyright terms and license: CC BY 2.0

Individual focus groups are best analyzed immediately after they finish. It’s when things are freshest in the minds of the moderator and the observers. Other participants may be brought in to the analysis and videos/audios reviewed during that process.

If possible, a transcript of the audio may be useful to prepare for later analysis at the same time.

A simple report should be made of key findings after an individual focus group.

Once all your focus groups are complete – it’s time to do a meta-analysis. Key themes and ideas from all reports should be brought together. Compare and contrast exercises should be carried out between groups. Diagrams that help aid understanding of the data can be prepared. Then a report describing the overall findings should be written and issued to those who need it.

Things to consider when analyzing focus groups include:

Words. How are they used, what do they mean, are there similarities between participants or different groups?

Context. What happened to trigger a particular response?

Consistency. Was the participant consistent throughout or were they influenced by other group members?

Frequency of participation. Did someone dominate the discussion (it’s not always obvious even when the discussion is heavily moderated)? What comments were made most often? What comments occurred least? Were there any comments you expected but which didn’t occur?

Intensity. What was the intensity of feeling put into particular comments? Things that really matter tend to make people passionate, happy, angry, etc.

Specificity. How specific was someone’s comment? How much detail did someone give when probed about a response?

One final thing; it’s easy to get too focused on fine detail when analyzing the outputs from lots of focus groups. It can be useful to take a day’s break (or more) from the data once you’ve done the initial analysis and then come back and look for any “big ideas” which got bogged down in the detail.

Author/Copyright holder: Parhamr. Copyright terms and license: CC BY-SA 3.0

The Take Away

Conducting focus groups is easy(ish) as long as you have a good moderator and observers. They are relatively expensive to conduct because of the number of participants involved and will generally be used to deal with major usability or user experience issues for large groups of users.

It’s always important to remember that people say they do things in one way but may actually do them in another. Focus groups are awesome for identifying issues for further examination and for soliciting large amounts of feedback but you may want to do a little more research on the results before treating them as gospel.

Lehigh University offers some additional guidelines here .

WikiHow offers an interesting pictorial guide to focus groups here .

Hero Image: Author/Copyright holder: Kate Ter Haar. Copyright terms and license: CC BY 2.0

Information Visualization

Get Weekly Design Tips

Topics in this article, what you should read next, bad design vs. good design: 5 examples we can learn from.

• 1.5k shares

User Interface Design Guidelines: 10 Rules of Thumb

• 1.4k shares

A Simple Introduction to Lean UX

• 1.3k shares
• 3 years ago

How to Do a Thematic Analysis of User Interviews

• 4 years ago

The 7 Factors that Influence User Experience

KISS (Keep it Simple, Stupid) - A Design Principle

• 1.2k shares

How to Conduct User Interviews

7 Great, Tried and Tested UX Research Techniques

Usability: A part of the User Experience

Information Overload, Why it Matters and How to Combat It

• 1.1k shares

Open Access—Link to us!

We believe in Open Access and the  democratization of knowledge . Unfortunately, world-class educational materials such as this page are normally hidden behind paywalls or in expensive textbooks.

If you want this to change , cite this article , link to us, or join us to help us democratize design knowledge !

Privacy Settings

Our digital services use necessary tracking technologies, including third-party cookies, for security, functionality, and to uphold user rights. Optional cookies offer enhanced features, and analytics.

Experience the full potential of our site that remembers your preferences and supports secure sign-in.

Governs the storage of data necessary for maintaining website security, user authentication, and fraud prevention mechanisms.

Enhanced Functionality

Saves your settings and preferences, like your location, for a more personalized experience.

Referral Program

We use cookies to enable our referral program, giving you and your friends discounts.

Error Reporting

We share user ID with Bugsnag and NewRelic to help us track errors and fix issues.

Optimize your experience by allowing us to monitor site usage. You’ll enjoy a smoother, more personalized journey without compromising your privacy.

Analytics Storage

Collects anonymous data on how you navigate and interact, helping us make informed improvements.

Differentiates real visitors from automated bots, ensuring accurate usage data and improving your website experience.

Lets us tailor your digital ads to match your interests, making them more relevant and useful to you.

Advertising Storage

Stores information for better-targeted advertising, enhancing your online ad experience.

Personalization Storage

Permits storing data to personalize content and ads across Google services based on user behavior, enhancing overall user experience.

Advertising Personalization

Allows for content and ad personalization across Google services based on user behavior. This consent enhances user experiences.

Enables personalizing ads based on user data and interactions, allowing for more relevant advertising experiences across Google services.

Receive more relevant advertisements by sharing your interests and behavior with our trusted advertising partners.

Enables better ad targeting and measurement on Meta platforms, making ads you see more relevant.

Allows for improved ad effectiveness and measurement through Meta’s Conversions API, ensuring privacy-compliant data sharing.

LinkedIn Insights

Tracks conversions, retargeting, and web analytics for LinkedIn ad campaigns, enhancing ad relevance and performance.

LinkedIn CAPI

Enhances LinkedIn advertising through server-side event tracking, offering more accurate measurement and personalization.

Google Ads Tag

Tracks ad performance and user engagement, helping deliver ads that are most useful to you.

Share Knowledge, Get Respect!

or copy link

Cite according to academic standards

Simply copy and paste the text below into your bibliographic reference list, onto your blog, or anywhere else. You can also just hyperlink to this article.

New to UX Design? We’re giving you a free ebook!

Download our free ebook The Basics of User Experience Design to learn about core concepts of UX design.

In 9 chapters, we’ll cover: conducting user interviews, design thinking, interaction design, mobile UX design, usability, UX research, and many more!

New to UX Design? We’re Giving You a Free ebook!

How Effective has the TADAT Framework Been in Improving Tax Administration in Uganda?

• VoR (Version of Record)

IDS Item Types

Copyright holder, usage metrics.