Focus Group Practice

Puchta, Claudia; Potter, Jonathan

doi:10.4135/9781849209168

Cited by 354 publications

(268 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

247

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This was considered important to allow participants to speak at ease and without hierarchical barriers. 32 The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using NVivo 8 analysis software to assist the process of coding and the identification of the relationships between themes. 33 A grounded theory 34 approach was taken to provide a systematic and inductive analysis of the data and theory generation.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preparing for the future: challenges and opportunities for management and leadership skills

Morison

McMullan

2013

Br Dent J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preparing for the future: challenges and opportunities for management and leadership skills

Morison

McMullan

2013

Br Dent J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…While focus groups and related group discussion-based approaches to data collection are sometimes seen as merely a more efficient means of interviewing that allow responses to be elicited from multiple participants at the same time, the crucial feature that distinguishes them from one-on-one interviews is the possibility of interactional engagement between the participants, rather than between the interviewer and a single participant (see, e.g., Kitzinger, 1995;Puchta & Potter, 2004). Research based on focus group data has thus been able to add a more strongly interactional focus to the examination of themes similar to those discussed above, including new racisms and the denial of racism (see, e.g., Augoustinos, Tuffin, & Every, 2005;Goodman & Burke, 2010).…”

Section: Focus Groups and Group Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discursive Approaches to Race and Racism

Whitehead¹

2017

Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryIn the wake of what has been called the "discursive turn" or "linguistic turn" in the social sciences, research at the intersection of language and communication and race and racism shifted from being largely dominated by quantitative and experimental methods to include qualitative and particularly discursive approaches. While the term "discursive" potentially encompasses a wide range of modes of discourse analysis, discursive approaches share in common a focus on language use as social action, and as a constitutive feature of actions, events and situations, rather than as merely a passive means of describing or transmitting information about them.When applied to the study of race and racism, such approaches have examined ways in which language functions to construct, maintain and legitimate as well as subvert or resist racial and/or racist ideologies and social structures.Research in these areas has made use of a range of empirical materials, including "elite" texts and talk (media texts, parliamentary debates, academic texts, etc.), individual interviews, focus groups and group discussions, "naturally occurring" talk-in-interaction from conversational and institutional settings, and text-based online interactions. Although these different data types should not be seen as strictly mutually exclusive, each of them serves to foreground particular features of racial or racist discourse(s), thus facilitating or constraining particular sorts of discourse analytic findings. Thus, different data sources respectively tend to foreground ideological features of racial discourse(s) and their intersection with power and domination, 2 including examination of "new" racisms and the production and management of accusations and denials of racism; discursive processes involved in the construction and uses of racial subjectivities and identities; interactional processes through which prejudice and racism are constructed and contested; and the everyday interactional reproduction of systems of racial categories, independently of whether the talk in which they occur can or should be considered "racist".

show abstract

“…As a frame for analyzing group interaction, elements of discursive psychology and conversation analysis were used Potter, 1996;Potter & Wetherell, 1987;Puchta & Potter, 2004;Silverman, 2014). This article demonstrates how focus group discussions act as a social arena for the negotiation of social norms and normativity and discusses the implications for the analysis of focus group discussions.…”

Section: What This Paper Adds?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Kitzinger, 1994;Morgan, 1997), and researchers have provided theoretical and analytical perspectives and tools that might be applied to the analysis of the social construction of norms in focus groups (Halkier, 2010(Halkier, , 2012Liddicoat, 2012;Potter, 1996;Puchta & Potter, 2004;Silverman, 2014). Yet the particular ways in which social norms and normativity are negotiated, constructed, and legitimized during focus group discussions seem to have received little attention in empirical studies.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, this article provides a contribution to utilization of focus group interaction by analyzing sequences of group interaction that were collected during a research project where focus groups were used to explore everyday life with chronic illness. As a frame for analyzing group interaction, elements of discursive psychology and conversation analysis are used Potter, 1996;Potter & Wetherell;1987;Puchta & Potter, 2004;Silverman, 2014). This article aims to demonstrate how focus group discussions act as a social arena for the negotiation of social norms and normativity and to discuss the implications for the analysis of focus group discussions.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Focus Groups as Social Arenas for the Negotiation of Normativity

Kristiansen

Grønkjær

2018

International Journal of Qualitative Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: This article aims to demonstrate how focus group discussions act as a social arena for the negotiation of social norms and normativity and to discuss the implications for the analysis of focus group discussions. Participants and methods: We have used sequences of group interactions from a focus group study on everyday life and chronic illness to demonstrate how methodological tools from conversation analysis and discursive psychology can be used to facilitate a systematic analysis of the negotiation and legitimization of social norms and normativity in focus groups. The empirical data consisted of six focus groups with a total of 32 participants. Results: The analysis demonstrated negotiations on normativity concerning four central aspects related to living with chronic illness: negotiating normativity about adjustment to the disease, negotiating normativity about being a dutiful employee, negotiating normativity about responsibility for the illness, and negotiating normativity about carrying on. Conclusion: Although the role of interaction in focus group data analysis and its impact on the content of the data should always be viewed in relation to the specific study and study focus, based on the analyses, we argue that adding different epistemological and analytical lenses to a data set may produce different, additional, and more complex insights into the research field.Keywords focus groups, conversation analysis, negotiation, normativity, chronic illness, discursive psychology What Is Already Known?Focus groups are a qualitative research technique particularly useful in studying social interaction and the negotiation and construction of social norms (Bloor, Frankland, Thomas, & Robson, 2001;J. Kitzinger, 1994;Morgan, 1997). Nevertheless, it seems that the social interaction has been neglected in analyzing and reporting focus group data including its impact on eliciting the content of such data. The particular ways in which social norms and normativity are negotiated, constructed, and legitimized during focus group discussions seem to have received little attention in empirical studies. What This Paper Adds?This article adds a contribution to utilization of focus group interaction by analyzing sequences of group interaction that were collected during a research project that explored everyday life with chronic illness. As a frame for analyzing group interaction, elements of discursive psychology and conversation analysis were used Potter, 1996;Potter & Wetherell, 1987;Puchta & Potter, 2004;Silverman, 2014). This article demonstrates how focus group discussions act as a social arena for the negotiation of social norms and normativity and discusses the implications for the analysis of focus group discussions.Focus groups is a qualitative research technique that collects data through group interaction on a topic determined by the researcher (Morgan, 1997). The rationale behind the use of focus groups is that knowledge is created through the diverse experiences and knowledge of, and interaction between...

show abstract

Focus Group Practice

Cited by 354 publications

References 0 publications

Preparing for the future: challenges and opportunities for management and leadership skills

Preparing for the future: challenges and opportunities for management and leadership skills

Discursive Approaches to Race and Racism

Focus Groups as Social Arenas for the Negotiation of Normativity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About