No abstract

The focus group is a research methodology in which a small group of participants gathers to discuss a specified issue under the guidance of a moderator. The discussions are tape-recorded, transcribed and analysed. Notably, the interaction between focus group participants has seldom been evaluated, analysed or discussed in empirical research. We argue that considering the focus group in light of current research into interaction in problem-based learning (PBL) tutorial groups would facilitate the deliberate exploitation of group processes in designing focus groups, staging data collection and analysing and interpreting data. When the analytical focus shifts from mere content analysis to an analysis of what the participants themselves are trying to learn, one can explore not only what the participants are talking about, but also how they are trying to understand and conceptualise the issue under discussion.

Abstract:This paper explores social representations of climate change, investigating how climate change is discussed by Swedish laypeople interacting in focus group interviews. The analysis focuses on prototypical examples and metaphors, which were key devices for objectifying climate change representations. The paper analyzes how the interaction of focus group participants with other speakers, ideas, arguments, and broader social representations shaped their representations of climate change. Climate change was understood as a global but distant issue with severe consequences. There was a dynamic tension between representations of climate change as a gradual vs. unpredictable process. Implications for climate change communication are discussed.

This study explores sense-making about climate engineering among lay focus group participants in Japan, New Zealand, the USA and Sweden. In total, 23 qualitative focus group interviews of 136 participants were conducted. The analyses considered sense-making strategies and heuristics among the focus group participants and identified commonalities and variations in the data, exploring participants' initial and spontaneous reactions to climate engineering and to several recurrent arguments that feature in scientific and public debate (e.g. climate emergency). We found that, despite this study's wide geographical scope, heterogeneous focus group compositions, and the use of different moderators, common themes emerged. Participants made sense of climate engineering in similar ways, for example, through context-dependent analogies and metaphorical Climatic Change (2017)

No abstract