How Many Focus Groups Are Enough? Building an Evidence Base for Nonprobability Sample Sizes

Guest, Greg; Namey, Emily; McKenna, Kevin

doi:10.1177/1525822x16639015

Cited by 1,061 publications

(774 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

669

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Due to the rapid nature of this technique and the intention to gather preliminary consumer‐generated terminology rapidly for further steps in the research process, only three groups where conducted. Guest, Namey & Mckenna () states that when conducting three focus groups, about 80 to 90% of the information can be discoverable. Those authors also mentioned that three focus groups were “enough to identify all of the most prevalent themes within the data set.” The participants were all female, and there were seven participants in each group.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gathering consumer terminology using focus groups—An example with beauty care

Talavera

Sasse

2019

Journal of Sensory Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using consumer‐friendly terminology is essential for more impactful consumer research. As an example, focus groups are effective to gather emotional and attitudinal information in ways that surveys and questionnaires cannot. The objective of this study was to use situational exercises in focus groups to generate terminology about emotions and attitudes in beauty care. These terms can be used to aid the product development process and product communication. Women in the Kansas City area (N = 21), who use a variety of different beauty care products, were recruited for three focus groups of seven people each. The groups were divided by age group as follows: 18–35, 36–50, and 51+. Participants were asked questions regarding their behaviors behind their purchasing habits and use of beauty care products, both positive and negative. Women reported that when not using beauty care products, they felt tired, dirty, and self‐conscious. Contrarily, they reported feeling confident, clean, and beautiful when using products. They also mentioned the importance of ingredients. Women overwhelmingly wanted products to have more natural ingredients and to be created “cruelty‐free” (no animal testing). These qualitative techniques help understand the consumer so companies can better communicate with their target users. Practical Applications This article provides an example on the use of focus groups as a tool to rapidly gather relevant information about emotions and behaviors in the beauty care category. This technique is a fast way to gather rich information that could benefit a research and development team from two fronts: first, to a sensory or product development group to understand the relations between product characteristics and the emotional construct of consumers and perhaps provide a key into changing consumer behaviors and second, to a brand or marketing team to understand what their target users are saying so they can think about better ways to reach the consumer and communicate with them, in this case, within the beauty care industry.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gathering consumer terminology using focus groups—An example with beauty care

Talavera

Sasse

2019

Journal of Sensory Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, four focus groups comprising 41 participants were conducted. Previous research has suggested that 80% of all themes can be identified in two to three focus groups (Guest et al, 2016). Second, we systematically sampled first, second, and third year students respectively from one degree for the first three focus groups to ensure we could identify possible similarities and differences across cohorts, and followed this with a focus group comprising students from varying degrees and years.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Student Attitudes toward Learning Analytics in Higher Education: “The Fitbit Version of the Learning World”

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasingly, higher education institutions are exploring the potential of learning analytics to predict student retention, understand learning behaviors, and improve student learning through providing personalized feedback and support. The technical development of learning analytics has outpaced consideration of ethical issues surrounding their use. Of particular concern is the absence of the student voice in decision-making about learning analytics. We explored higher education students' knowledge, attitudes, and concerns about big data and learning analytics through four focus groups (N = 41). Thematic analysis of the focus group transcripts identified six key themes. The first theme, “Uninformed and Uncertain,” represents students' lack of knowledge about learning analytics prior to the focus groups. Following the provision of information, viewing of videos and discussion of learning analytics scenarios three further themes; “Help or Hindrance to Learning,” “More than a Number,” and “Impeding Independence”; represented students' perceptions of the likely impact of learning analytics on their learning. “Driving Inequality” and “Where Will it Stop?” represent ethical concerns raised by the students about the potential for inequity, bias and invasion of privacy and the need for informed consent. A key tension to emerge was how “personal” vs. “collective” purposes or principles can intersect with “uniform” vs. “autonomous” activity. The findings highlight the need the need to engage students in the decision making process about learning analytics.

show abstract

“…We elicited participants through email, brief presentations at staff meetings, flyers, and word of mouth with a target sample size of two to four focus groups and/or individual interviews per profession or until saturation of the data was achieved. Two to four focus groups has been shown to reliably achieve data saturation in previous research . We sought a total of 30 to 35 participants (approximately 8%–10% of the total eligible subjects) to capture the diverse role‐based experiences of staff.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%