Carol DevineProfessor, Division of Nutritional Sciences

TRIPLL- 2.23.2011

1

Focus Group“The explicit use of group interaction to

produce data and insights that would be less accessible without the interaction found in a group.” (Morgan, 1988)

2

Key resources for presentation

3

Sage Publications, 1998

Kruger, R., Casey, M.A. 2009. Focus groups: a practical guide for applied research. Sage

Why focus groups?Want opinionsUse group dynamicsExplore new topicsCommunication with new groupsMany opinionsPlan additional data collectionPlan an intervention: reactions to messages,

materials or strategies

4

When is a focus group not useful?Need consensusCharged or confidential topicIndividual experiences neededNeed to generalize

5

Example: Small Changes and Lasting Effects (SCALE) (NHBLI, P.I. Charlson)

• Purpose: Culturally tailor a weight loss intervention

• Methods: 6 focus groups (3 Spanish, 3 English) from 3 community sites in Harlem & Bronx

• Content: Response to dietary change strategies

6

7

Example: Images of a Healthy Worksite (NCI: P.I. Fernandez)

• Purpose: Develop a feasible and acceptable worksite intervention to prevent weight gain

• Methods: 15 in-depth interviews, 5 focus groups, and community mapping at 2 sites with 79 administrators, managers, workers, and food service personnel

• Content: What would work here?

Devine C, Nelson J, Chin N, Dozier A, Fernandez D. 2007. “Pizza is cheaper than salad:” assessing workers’ views for an environmental food intervention. Obesity. 15: S57-S68.

Example: Women, Weight and Cancer (NIFA, P.I. Devine)

• Purpose: How breast cancer survivors think about healthy eating, physical activity, body weight, and their relationships to cancer• Develop a walking intervention with

community cancer organizations

• Methods: 21 women in 3 focus groups & 15 interviews from 2 communities

8

Study DesignWhy are focus groups the right approach?How will the focus group findings be used?

9

Sampling

Purposive/theoretical sampling

Sample monitoring for characteristics of theoretical importance

Theoretical saturation

10

Group characteristicsAt least 3-4 groups5-8 people per groupHomogeneous

Use separate groups for dissimilar people (gender, ethnicity, age)

Equal in powerUnfamiliar with each other

11

RecruitingCriteria: whose opinions are desired?What would it take to get someone to come?Personal contact with participants

Contact (2 weeks ahead)Invitation (1 week ahead)Reminder (1 day ahead)

Incentives

12

LocationConvenient for participantsPermissive – promote sharing opinionsConfidentialQuietFoodTransportationChild care?

13

Staffing – at least 2Moderator: like the participants

Welcome, overview Ground rules Questions, probes Listen, neutral responses Facilitate participation by all members

Assistant moderator Greet late comers Monitor recording equipment Take notes Handle consent and demographic forms Draw a diagram of participants

14

ToolsConsentsDemographic formsName tentsQuestioning guideDigital tape recorders – 2!Others: Flip charts, visuals, educational

materials, photographs

15

5-6 Open-ended QuestionsEasy open – go around the table

First name, neighborhood, number of children, favorite food, etc.

Introductory Q In the last 25 years the proportion of overweight and obese

adults in the US has risen dramatically. What do you think are some of the factors that have contributed to this increase?

Transition Q How do you see these factors getting played out here at

work?Key Q

What changes in your work place do you think would help workers maintain a healthy weight?

How would people at work respond to changes like these?Final Q – Is there anything else you would like us to know?

Data AnalysisHow will findings be used?Type of analysis

Transcript, Tape, or Note basedLooking for:

Words and meaningContextConsistency or DifferencesIntensityWhat was missing

17

Analysis Coding

what type (by question or open)quality control

Approaches Word processorSpread sheetColored markers on transcriptsPilesSoftware

18

Analytic Steps in One Study

1)Verbatim transcription and tape verification 2)Review transcripts, notes, and demographics by team3)Peer review of each transcript4)Develop initial coding scheme by open coding of

emergent themes by 2 coders5)Iterative revision of the codes as additional groups

coded6)Comparison of coding by corroborators7)Conceptual model to represent the experience of

participants8)Interpret findings in the context of existing

theory/empirical research 9)Peer debriefing with researchers with expertise in

topic10)Member check with participants

19

Your Questions and Comments

20