Online focus groups and qualitative research in the social sciences: their merits and limitations in a study of housing and youth

Abstract

This paper considers the use of online focus groups as a method for conducting qualitative research in the social sciences. Researchers have increasingly utilised online focus groups involving live, synchronous chat room interactions. However, to date there has been little insight and a lack of discussion as to the applicability of online focus groups in the social sciences. Reflecting on a study of young people's housing opportunities and financial welfare in the UK, this paper considers the advantages and limitations of online qualitative methods. We argue that online methods offer significant advantages, especially in longer-term studies crossing time and space, but that their design and implementation raise methodological challenges, with implications for the depth and insight of the knowledge produced. Their use for social science research therefore requires reflexivity and adjustment, including attention to the positionality of the researcher, the nature and level of participant involvement, and adjustment to the loss of non-verbal cues and interactions found in conventional qualitative research. This paper advances knowledge on the opportunities of and challenges to online methodologies, and highlights how creative use of webbased technology can support social scientists conducting qualitative research.

‘Generation Rent’ and The Fallacy of Choice

“…Online methods were chosen since the internet is a popular communication medium for young people and this approach enables a much broader geographical sample than could be covered within the time and cost constraints of traditional facetoface methods. Our reflections on fieldwork, including the particular challenges and ethics of online research, have been published elsewhere (Moore et al, 2015). For reasons of space and to avoid repetition these arguments are not recounted here.…”

‘Generation rent’ and the ability to ‘settle down’: economic and geographical variation in young people’s housing transitions

“…Online methods however pose additional ethical challenges which have been explored in detail in a separate publication (Moore, McKee and McLoughlin, 2015). Space constraints do not allow us to revisit these arguments here.…”

“…Moreover, it is argued to be more attractive to a demographic who spend a lot of time online, communicating virtually. For further discussion of the authors' experiences and reflections of setting up, running and interpreting this online data, see Moore, McKee and McLoughlin, (2015). Table 1 provides an overview of the tenure and location of the young people in our study at the point they participated in an interview or focus group.…”

Appraising the utility of Internet-mediated communication for qualitative data collection in built environment research

“…However, they opine that its adoption within the research context has availed researchers with an opportunity to gain access to previously hard to reach groups. This was buttressed in a recent study [19] wherein an online discussion forum was used gathering qualitative data from young people who have experienced breakups in romantic relationships and in another study, wherein online discussion forums where applied in understudying the perception of the youth on the burgeoning housing issues in their locality by [20] . Maestre et al (2018) [18] highlight the salient nature of online discussion forums in researching into stigmatized groups.…”

“…Examples of the former include online chat-rooms and online interviewing platforms such as Skype and other types of voice over internet protocol (VOIP) platforms whereas online discussion forums/ boards can be classified as being asynchronous discussion platforms. Also, the asynchronous category allows for participants to join in on any discussion at their convenience without prompting, the synchronous category does not allow for this as it is instant [20] .…”