Situational Factors in Focus Group Studies
A Systematic Review
Abstract
The aim of this study was to see how contextual factors are expressed, used, and analyzed in data collected in focus group discussions (FGDs). The study includes an assessment of how the methodological reporting of contextual factors might influence and improve the trustworthiness of articles. Articles reporting workplace health, stress, and coping among health professionals were identified in a systematic review and used in the analysis. By using Vicsek’s framework of situational factors for analysis of focus group results as a starting point, we found that contextual factors were most frequently described in the method sections and less frequently in the results and discussion sections. Vicsek’s framework for the analysis of focus group results covers six contextual and methodological dimensions: interactional factors, personal characteristics of the participants, the moderator, the environment, time factors, and the content of FGDs. We found that the framework does not include a consideration of psychological safety, ethical issues, or organizational information. To deepen the analysis of focus group results, we argue that contextual factors should be analyzed as methodological dimensions and be considered as a sensitizing concept. Credibility, confirmability, dependability, and transferability can be strengthened by using, reporting, and discussing contextual factors in detail. The study contributes to elucidating how reporting of contextual data may enrich the analysis of focus group results and strengthen the trustworthiness. Future research should focus on clear reporting of contextual factors as well as further develop Vicsek’s model to enhance reporting accuracy and transferability.
Originalmente publicado en International Journal of Qualitative Methods (2013), 12, 338-358. Copyright 2013: Orvik, Larun, Berland y Ringsberg. Traducido al español con permiso de los titulares de los derechos de autor.
References
Asch, S. E. (1951). Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distortion of judgments. En H. Guetzkow (Ed.), Groups, leadership and men (pp. 177-190). Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie.
Barbour, R. (2007). Doing focus groups. Londres: SAGE.
Benoit, L. G., Veach, P. M., & LeRoy, B. S. (2007). When you care enough to do your very best: Genetic counselor experiences of compassion fatigue. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 16(3), 299-312.
Berland, A., Natvig, G. K., & Gundersen, D. (2008). Patient safety and job-related stress: A focus group study. Intensive and Critical Care Nursing, 24(2), 90-97.
Blomberg, K., & Sahlberg-Blom, E. (2007). Closeness and distance: A way of handling difficult situations in daily care. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 16(2), 244-254.
Blumer, H. (1954). What is wrong with social theory? American Sociological Review, 19, 3-10.
Blythe, J., Baumann, A., & Giovannetti, P. (2001). Nurses’ experiences of restructuring in three Ontario hospitals. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 33(1), 61-68.
Clarke, J. B. (1999). Hermeneutic analysis: A qualitative decision trail. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 36(5), 363-369.
Crabtree, B. F., & Miller, W. L. (1999). Using codes and code manuals: A template organizing style of interpretation. En B. F. Crabtree & W. L. Miller (Eds.), Doing qualitative research (2a ed., pp. 163-77). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1998). Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Duggleby, W. (2005). What about focus group interaction data? Qualitative Health Research, 15(6), 832-840.
Fern, E. F. (1982). The use of focus groups for idea generation: The effects of group size, acquaintanceship, and moderator on response quantity and quality. Journal of Marketing Research, 19, 1-13.
Fern, E. F. (2001). Advanced focus group research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Freeman, T. (2006). “Best practice” in focus group research: Making sense of different views. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 56(5), 491-497.
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Giddens, A. (1993). New rules of sociological method: A positive critique of interpretative sociologies. (2a ed.). Cambridge, Reino Unido: Polity Press.
Gilje, N., & Grimen, H. (1995). Samfunnsvitenskapenes forutsetninger [Las premisas de las ciencias sociales] (2a ed.). Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.
Graneheim, U. H., & Lundman, B. (2004). Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education Today, 24(2), 105-112.
Grbich, C., Abernethy, A. P., Shelby-James, T., Fazekas, B., & Currow, D. C. (2008). Creating a research culture in a palliative care service environment: A qualitative study of the evolution of staff attitudes to research during a large longitudinal controlled trial. Journal of Palliative Care, 24(2), 100-109.
Grim, B. J., Harmon, A. H., & Gromis, J. C. (2006). Focused group interviews as an innovative Quanti-Qualitative Methodology (QQM): Integrating quantitative elements into a qualitative methodology.
The Qualitative Report, 11(3), 516-537.
Hart, C. (1998). Doing a literature review: Releasing the social science research imagination. Londres: SAGE.
Hoddinott, P., & Pill, R. (1997). Qualitative research interviewing by general practitioners: A personal view of the opportunities and the pitfalls. Family Practice, 14(4), 307-312.
Hollander, J. A. (2004). The social contexts of focus groups. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 33(5), 602-637.
Kälvemark, S., Höglund, A. T., Hansson, M. G., Westerholm, P., & Arnetz, B. (2004). Living with conflicts: Ethical dilemmas and moral distress in the health care system. Social Science & Medicine, 58(6), 1075-1084.
King, N. (2004). Using templates in the thematic analysis of text. En C. Cassell & G. Symon (Eds.), Essential guide to qualitative methods in organizational research (pp. 25-270). Londres: SAGE.
King, N., Carroll, C., Newton, P., & Dornan, T. (2002). “You can’t cure it so you have to endure it”: The experience of adaptation to diabetic renal disease. Qualitative Health Research, 12(3), 329-346.
Kitzinger, J. (1994). The methodology of focus groups: The importance of interaction between research participants. Sociology of Health & Illness, 16(1), 103-121.
Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Londres: SAGE.
MacDougall, C. (1997). The devil’s advocate: A strategy to avoid groupthink and stimulate discussion in focus groups. Qualitative Health Research, 7(4), 532-541.
Malterud, K. (2001). Qualitative research: Standards, challenges, and guidelines. The Lancet, 358(9280), 483-488.
Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2011). Evidence-based practice in nursing & healthcare: A guide to best practice (2a ed.). Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer.
Morgan, D. L., & Krueger, R. A. (1998). The focus group kit. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Morgan, P. A., & Moffatt, C. J. (2008). Non-healing leg ulcers and the nurse-patient relationship. Part 2: The nurse’s perspective. International Wound Journal, 5(2), 332-339.
Morse, J. (2003). Principles of mixed-and multi-method research design. En A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 189-208). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Öhman, A., Hegg, K., & Dahlgren, L. (2005). A stimulating, practicebased job facing increased stress: Clinical supervisors’ perceptions of professional role, physiotherapy education and the status of the profession. Advances in Physiotherapy, 7(3), 114-122.
Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2006). Essentials of nursing research: Methods, appraisal, and utilization (6a ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Porter, S. (2007). Validity, trustworthiness and rigour: Reasserting realism in qualitative research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 60(1), 79-86.
Raczka, R. (2005). A focus group enquiry into stress experienced by staff working with people with challenging behaviours. Journal of Intellectual Disabilities, 9(2), 167-177.
Reed, J., & Payton, V. R. (1997). Focus groups: Issues of analysis and interpretation. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 26(4), 765-771.
Rolfe, G. (2006). Validity, trustworthiness and rigour: Quality and the idea of qualitative research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 53(3), 304-310.
Selamat, M. H., & Hashim, A. H. (2008). A qualitative decision trail in the hermeneutic analysis: Evidence from the case study. International Journal of Business and Management, 3(3), 41-55.
Sim, J. (1998). Collecting and analysing qualitative data: Issues raised by the focus group. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 28(2), 345-352.
Somer, E., Buchbinder, E., Peled-Avram, M., & Ben-Yizhack, Y. (2004). The stress and coping of Israeli emergency room social workers following terrorist attacks. Qualitative Health Research, 14(8), 1077-1093.
Stige, B., Malterud, K., & Midtgarden, T. (2009). Toward an agenda for evaluation of qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 19(10), 1504-1516.
Thomas, E. J., Sherwood, G. D., Mulhollem, J. L., Sexton, J. B., & Helmreich, R. L. (2004). Working together in the neonatal intensive care unit: Provider perspectives. Journal of Perinatology, 24(9), 552-59.
Twohig, P. L., & Putnam, W. (2002). Group interviews in primary care research: Advancing the state of the art or ritualized research? Family Practice, 19(3), 278-284.
Vicsek, L. (2007). A scheme for analyzing the results of focus groups. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 6(4), 20-34.
Vicsek, L. (2010). Issues in the analysis of focus groups: Generalisability, quantifiability, treatment of context and quotations. The Qualitative Report, 15(1), 122-141.
Waterton, C., & Wynne, B. (1999). Can focus groups access community views? En R. S. Barbour & J. Kitzinger (Eds.), Developing focus group research (pp. 127-143). Londres: SAGE.
Watmough, S., Garden, A., & Taylor, D. (2006). Pre-registration house officers’ views on studying under a reformed medical curriculum in the UK. Medical Education, 40(9), 893-899.
Webb, C., & Kevern, J. (2001). Focus groups as a research method: A critique of some aspects of their use in nursing research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 3(6), 798-805.
Whitehead, L. (2004). Enhancing the quality of hermeneutic research: Decision trail. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 45(5), 512-518.
Wilkinson, S. (1998). Focus groups in health research: Exploring the meanings of health and illness. Journal of Health Psychology, 3(3), 329-348.
Copyright (c) 2014 Arne Orvik, Mg. Pol. Sc., Astrid Berland, Mg. Pol. Sc., Lillebeth Larun, Ph.D., Karin C. Ringsberg, Ph.D.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Los artículos emplean licencias de acceso abierto distribuido bajo los términos de la licencia de Creative Commons 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), la cual permite su uso,
distribución y reproducción de forma libre siempre y cuando el o los autores reciban el respectivo crédito.
