7.7
The focus groups were designed to allow participants to discuss experiences of comfort and their everyday routines; it also included a briefing stage for studies 3 and 4. The design of the focus group followed the guidelines on best practices for focus groups set out by Krueger; questions were designed to flow from general to specific (Krueger 1998). Details of the questions asked can be found in appendix C and Table 8 shows the stages of the focus group design and procedure.
The day-in-the-life exercise was designed to outline a typical day after work for participants; it was intended to focus their attention on the activities which they complete on a daily basis. Participants were asked to share their routines giving them the opportunity to express their emotions and feelings associated to their everyday activities.
Focus groups took place in two locations which were chosen as convenient places for the majority of participants; in Luton it was held in the dining room of a family home, in Loughborough it was held in a meeting room in Loughborough Design School.
131
Table 8: Focus Group Process
Focus Group Process Details of Stage Time Taken (minutes)
Introduction to Focus Group Outline the focus group process 1-2
Briefing for Study 3 and 4 Oral instructions to the photo elicitation interview process, time for questions.
8-10
Introductory and Key Questions for Study 3
Question to introduce the topic of comfort and focus the discussion.
10-15
Transitioning Questions Use to link between study 3 and
study 4
2-5 Key Questions For Study 4 Questions to focus the discussion on
topic towards routines.
10-12 Day-In-The-Life Exercise and
Closing Questions (Study 4)
Exercise to explore daily routines, discussion and questions focusing on routines.
12-15
Next Steps Next contact with participants 2-3
Total Time Approximately
60 minutes
Ethics
7.8
As stated in Chapter 4: Methodology, section 4.8, Loughborough University ethical guidelines were followed, an ethical checklist was completed, and full ethical approval was not required. As this study included off-campus interviews and circumstances where the investigator would be alone with participants; in these incidences precautionary guidelines provided by Loughborough University’s Ethical Advisory Committee were followed to ensure the safety of the investigator.
Equipment
7.9
Both focus groups were recorded with a Dictaphone and video camera, for transcribing later. All equipment required for study 3 and 4 were provided at the focus group, this included the record books, data loggers, and SenseCams. For the focus group activities, participants were provided with A3 whiteboards and pens to write down their routines for the day-in-the-life exercise.
132
Data Analysis
7.10
The focus groups were transcribed and reviewed so that the researcher was familiar with the data. The comfort activities of householders were identified through a review of the audio tape and transcriptions of the focus groups. A thematic analysis was conducted based on the guidelines set out in chapter 4: Methodology, this was conducted for the purpose of identifying interesting and prevalent themes which will be discussed in the study findings section.
NEP Scale 7.10.1
The New Ecological Paradigm (NEP) Scale consists of 15-items, 8 positive and 7 negative, each with 5 responses (Dunlap et al. 2000). Scores are calculated by assigning values between 1 and 5 to the responses, ‘Strongly Agree’=5, ‘Mildly Agree’=4, ‘Unsure’=3, ‘Mildly Disagree’=2 and ‘Strongly Disagree’=1. For negative items the values are reversed (i.e. ‘Strongly Agree’=1 and ‘Strongly Disagree’=5). Mann-Whitney U test was conducted to see whether there were gender differences between attitudes and Spearman’s Rank Order Correlation (rho) was conducted to see whether there was a relationship between age and pro-environmental attitudes. The NEP scale can be found in appendix D.
Findings
7.11
Background Information 7.11.1
This section presents information about the 12 participants who took part in this study, and also studies 3 and 4.
Overall the 12 participants comprised of 8 females and 4 males with a mean age of 40.8 years ranging from 25 – 63 years. Participants were located in 2 places in England, 6 participants resided in Luton, Bedfordshire and 6 in Leicestershire (4 in Loughborough and 2 in Leicester). The marital status ranged from 1 unmarried living with partner, 4 single and 7 married.
133 All participants were either employed or full-time postgraduate researchers. Using occupational classification from the Office of National Statistics (ONS 2000), the sample consisted of 4 Professional occupations, 3 PhD Researchers, 2 Associate Professional and Technical, 2 Administrative and Secretarial and 1 Skilled Trades.
Household Information 7.11.2
The mean number of householders per home was 2.8, ranging from 2- 5 people. The mean number of adults (18+ years) per household were 2.3 ranging between 2- 3 adults per household, only 3 out of the 12 households had children, all of which had 2 children. The mean income band was between £30,001 – £50,000, incomes ranging between less than £15,000 to £70,000. The property types included flats, terrace, semi-detached and detached properties; the mean number of years of ownership was 10.5 years, ranging from 1.5 – 35 years.
Table 9 presents a summary of key participant and household information:
Table 9: Study 2 Participant Information Focus Group Participant Number Participants Name
Gender Age Number of Householders
Group 1 P1 Maria Female 29 2 adults
Group 1 P2 Eva Female 48 3 adults,
1 children
Group 1 P3 Pauline Female 56 2 adults
Group 1 P4 Sarah Female 50 2 adults
Group 1 P5 Sade Female 27 3 adults
Group 1 P6 Walter Male 58 2 adults
Group 2 P7 Kevin Male 45 2 adults,
2 children
134 Focus Group Participant Number Participants Name
Gender Age Number of Householders
Group 2 P9 Rachael Female 35 2 adults, 2 children
Group 2 P10 Lewis Male 25 3 adults
Group 2 P11 Jessica Female 28 3 adults
Group 2 P12 Olivia Female 26 2 adults
NEP Scale 7.11.3
The NEP scores have a maximum range between 15 and 75, with a score of 15 representing a negative attitude toward pro-environmentalism and 75 representing the strongest pro-environmental attitude (a score of 45 being neutral). The responses from participants ranged from 43 to 71 with a mean of 55.08 (SD =6.79), suggesting the sample had a slightly positive attitude towards the environment. Figure 12 presents the scores for the participants (see Table 9 for corresponding participant number). There was no significant difference found between males and females’ pro-environment attitude scores (U=14, Ucrit=4, n.s). Spearman’s Rank
Order Correlation (rho) was conducted to see what type of relationship there was between age and pro-environmental attitude scores, it found there was a negative correlation (rho=-0.55), thus younger participants’ expressed more pro- environmental attitudes than older participants.
135
Figure 12: Participant NEP Scores Findings
7.11.4
The dynamics of both focus group 1 and 2 was natural and friendly, discussions flowed with ease with minimal prompting was required by the facilitator. All participants contributed to the focus groups and engaged with other participants in meaningful discussions, sharing personal experiences on various aspects of home life. Once the procedure for studies 3 and 4 had been discussed, questions were put to participants on the topic of comfort, unwinding and after work routines.
7.11.4.1 Focus Groups Questions: Comfort in the Home
Achieving comfort in the home was considered important and meaningful by all participants. Participants discussed a series of different elements of comfort drawing upon specific furnishings or rooms which brought them comfort as well as sharing comfort activities and experiences.
The responses given were strongly towards the physical aspects of comfort in particular thermal and sitting comfort as illustrated by the following quotes from Maria, Sade and Pauline when asked about how they achieved comfort at home:
15 25 35 45 55 65 75 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 N EP Sc or e Participant Number