This study offers an examination of data richness (i.e., topic-related data, topic unrelated data, researcher ratings of data richness, word count, and linguistic characteristics of data richness) trade-offs between face-to-face (FTF), online text-only and online audiovisual focus group mediums. Two focus group sessions were held for each type of medium. Data were analyzed using systematic content analysis and Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count. Findings showed that although online audiovisual focus groups show potential for producing data similar in richness to FTF focus groups, researchers should carefully consider the potential distractions that manifested in this study as a result of the medium itself, likely due to its novelty as a group communication medium. Online text-only groups did not facilitate rich data, as operationalized in this study, and also had a lower amount of data related to the topic of the groups due to more socializing and off-topic discussion. As the first study to empirically examine the potential of data from focus groups facilitated via webcam (online audiovisual), it concludes, the technology offers similar data richness to FTF focus groups.

Consumers are bombarded with labels and claims that are intended to address their concerns about how food products are produced, processed, and regulated. Among those are the natural or all-natural claims and the certified organic label. In this study, two focus groups were conducted to explore consumers' attitudes toward all-natural and organic pork and to gather their reactions to the USDA organic standards for meat, and the policy for natural claims. Results indicated that participants had positive associations with the terms ''organic'' and ''all-natural'' with exceptions regarding the trustworthiness of all-natural claims. Participants perceived the ''no'' labeling theme (no antibiotics, no hormones, no chemicals, etc.) often coupled with the all-natural label on pork products as identifying potential health and animal welfare risks. In response to the USDA standards and policies for labeling pork products as organic or all-natural, participants expressed confusion and had many unanswered questions.

No abstract

No abstract

Seeing wildlife in natural habitat is an exciting and powerful experience for national park visitors but is risky for visitors and wildlife alike. National parks have long used educational approaches to inspire visitors to engage in conservation behavior and protect themselves from harm. With record visitation in recent years, national parks must hone their communication strategies that support wildlife conservation and reduce wildlife-caused injuries to visitors. We tested a campaign that strongly promoted the visitor's experience as it aligns with wildlife protection. We measured its effect on how close people approached wildlife in four US national parks. The campaign resulted in fewer visitors observed within unsafe distances to wildlife in three of the four parks. We recommend parks use messages emphasizing the visitor experience gained by engaging in the desired behavior rather than messages that only highlight the importance of wildlife protection.