Focus groups

Rationale and uses of focus groups

Focus groups are usually employed within the traditions of qualitative research in order to explore participants’ experience, perception, belief and attitudes (Bryman, 2012). A focused topic, organised discussion, group interactions and

91 collective activities are generally regarded as the main features of focus groups (Bryman 2012; Gibbs, 1997; Kitzinger, 1995; Powell et al., 1996). Therefore, the aim of focus groups is to obtain collective information of a specific topic through group discussions ‘led by a trained moderator or facilitator’ (Hennink et al., 2011, p.136).

Several advantages of using focus groups are well recognised in social research. It is believed that through focus groups, a range of views and perspectives can be collected within a short period time, which helps researchers save time and money. More importantly, a researcher may come up with new issues or ideas that may not be realised in the literature review stage (Hennink et al., 2011). In other words, various views obtained through focus groups could help with generating a general picture of selected topics or a social phenomenon, which provides insight into what researchers want to study. Gibbs (1997) suggests that focus groups are often used as ‘the preliminary or exploratory stages of a study’ to ‘lay the groundwork for subsequent survey research’ (Krueger & Casey, 2008, p.12). In this sense, clearer ideas for the chosen topic could be achieved if focus groups were used at the exploratory stage, which may set the agenda for later research procedures. Hennick et al. (2011) demonstrate that it has become common to use focus groups with research methods, either qualitative or quantitative. Focus groups can be used prior to or after a quantitative research method, or used in parallel with other methods based on the research needs and aims (Morgan, 1997). In this study, focus groups were adopted before self-completion questionnaires as an exploratory stage to achieve general ideas of the chosen topic. As discussed earlier, literacy practices are shaped by fast-changing technologies (Leu et al., 2011) which affect how we perceive literacy. Existing literature may not fully cover updated practices and perceptions of digital reading. Therefore, using focus groups in the first place is believed to help understand knowledge of the chosen topic that is not discussed in literature review. What was found through focus groups, together with knowledge gained

92 from literature, provided a relatively full picture of the chosen topic, which laid the groundwork for the survey.

Apart from the advantages of focus groups, some disadvantages, limitations or challenges have also been identified (Bryman, 2012; Hennink et al., 2011; Krueger & Casey, 2008; Morgan, 1997). As has been argued, focus group participants may feel uncomfortable in an environment where a group of individuals with different backgrounds share their own ideas and experiences (Krueger & Casey, 2008). This leads to the concerns about their unwillingness to talk, a lack of confidentiality, and the presence of dominant opinions or drifting views (Greenbaum, 1998; Hennink et al., 2011). Therefore, a well-trained moderator (Greenbaum, 1998) with control techniques is expected, such as encouraging ‘self-disclosure among participants’ (Krueger & Casey, 2008, p.4) and avoiding dominant speakers. Control techniques can be achieved by conducting pilot studies to understand the characteristics of participants and how they interact in a group. In order to minimise possible concerns, pilot studies of focus groups were conducted in this study, which will be discussed below. Regarding concerns about confidentiality, confidentiality and anonymity were clearly stated in the consent. Schools, teachers and students were informed about confidentiality before the start of focus groups as well. Some other limitations, such as assembling participants, choice of interview locations and control over focus groups data were considered to ensure that the use of focus groups helped me get a clear idea of adolescents’ literacy practices and perceptions. Later sections, will present how problems caused by limitations and challenges were overcome.

Planning and conducting focus groups Arranging

As indicated, assembling participants is a challenge for researchers (Bryman, 2012; Morgan, 1997; Krueger & Casey, 2014). In order to guarantee the

93 possibility of getting responses from schools, emails were sent to a number of schools in the UK and China whose contacts could be found online. The purpose of the research was fully explained and group composition, the expected numbers of groups, sizes of groups and cost of time for each group were provided in the email so that schools could have a clear idea of the research and actions they might need to do if they could assist the data collection.

Regarding group composition, mixed groups (Morgan, 1997) were chosen which included students, both girls and boys, from different Year groups in order to gain various perspectives from different groups of students. For the size of a group, Krueger (2002) suggests that 5 to 10 people per group can be accepted although 6 to 8 is a preferred size. However, in real research, it is hard to recruit the exact numbers of participants as expected. In this study, 4-5 students were gathered in a group depending on their availability and willingness, Two UK schools responded positively that they would manage to arrange focus groups. Two focus groups in each school were conducted. In order to match the number of groups in the UK, it was decided that four focus groups would also be conducted in China.

Two UK schools provided a deputy head teacher’s office as a research venue. Schools requested to have one teacher to sit in the corner of the room during focus group discussions. It was of some concern as to whether the appearance of a teacher would cause silence or hesitation. In the event, students felt no pressure with this arrangement. For the Chinese groups, online/virtual focus groups were used due to limitations of time and money.

Virtual focus groups are useful for researchers who are living too far away from participants to conduct in-person focus groups (Bloor et al., 2001; Galloway, 2011; Kenney, 2005; Turney & Pocknee, 2005). Virtual focus groups used to be conducted through email (Murray, 1997) or audio teleconferencing (White & Thomson, 1995). Today, virtual focus groups can be conducted through online

94 group chat or video conferencing. It is believed that this enables savings to be made both in terms of money and travel time. However, there are several concerns with the quality of focus groups, such as technical issues and the lack of interaction among participants (Murray, 1997; Kenney, 2005). When contacting schools in China, online focus groups were proposed. The teachers arranged some students who were willing to help with organising members of focus groups. These students were told to inform parents of their participation in this research. Focus group participants gathered together at one of the student’s house, which helped to avoid complicated technical issues, such as setting up online groups individually for each participant. Four focus groups were conducted through video conferencing, which meant that participants’ non-verbal interactions were not missed. Each group had 4 to 5 students, both girls and boys.

The schools in the UK said only around 40 minutes could be guaranteed because students could miss too many class sessions. Chinese students, who are used to extensive amounts of homework spared no more than one hour for interviewing. Having an idea of how long each focus group lasts was helpful for question design.

Questions

The importance of questions in focus groups has been widely recognised (Hennink et al., 2011; Krueger, 2002; Krueger & Casey, 2000). Detailed information and deep insights can be obtained in focus groups if good questions are asked. Krueger and Casey (2000) suggest that basic characteristics for good questions are that they should be short, easy and clear so that participants can understand them without confusion or too much thinking. Their nine qualities of good questions (p.40-41) are that they should:

 Evoke conversations (one of the purposes of focus groups is to ‘encourage

95 one another’s comments, rather than directing each comment to the

moderator’ (p.41)

 Use words participants would use (participants feel more comfortable with

words they use in common life rather than being expected to talk like an academic)

 Talk about the issue  Be easy to say  Be clear  Be short

 Usually be open-ended (‘Open-ended questions are a hallmark of focus

group interviewing’) (p. 41)

Meanwhile, using different types of questions is regarded as important for meeting research purposes, collecting more information and achieving a variety of perspectives. Questions have been identified as the following types: opening questions, introductory questions, transition questions, key questions, and closing questions or ending questions (Krueger & Casey, 2014).

In this study, to get more information relating to the research closed questions were avoided in focus groups because yes-or-no answers would cause silence and make discussion boring. As this study focused on adolescents’ perceptions of digital reading in the light of their reading experiences, general questions about students’ usage of digital devices related to literacy practices in daily life were considered as opening questions. Asking about participants’ experience of reading with different technologies is believed to be a good way to introduce them to the topic. ‘What kinds of technologies do they use which involve reading and/or writing?’ was designed as the opening question. Key questions are essential questions designed to meet the purposes of focus groups (Hennink et al., 2011). As adolescents are exposed in new textual landscapes (Carrington,

96 2005), questions regarding what they think about reading through different media are important for investigations of their perceptions of reading. Questions about their choices of text formats and reading strategies were designed. In this part, exploratory questions were designed to gain deeper insights. Questions such as ‘What do you feel when you read on screen/print?’ and ‘Could you tell me some reasons why you prefer this?’ were used combined with key questions. In the final section a brief summary based on discussion was designed. Participants were asked what else related to the topic so that any important further information would not be missed. The same questions were used in the focus groups of both British and Chinese students, although obviously in different languages (see below). A copy of the questions used in the focus groups can be found in Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 of Chinese version.

Language

Questions were designed in English, and they were translated into Chinese when conducting focus groups with Chinese students. Hennink et al. (2011) agree that a moderator feels less pressure when questions are translated into the language that is to be used in focus groups. Quality of translation is quite important. I translated questions from English to Chinese and someone who is not from my research area also did the translation. The translated questions were reviewed and translated into the original by a third person. Based on comparisons and comments, questions were translated to make sure the precise meaning of questions was fully captured and expressed accurately.

Pilot study

Owing to the fact that problems may occur because of limitations and challenges in focus groups, pilot studies were conducted. The purpose of a pilot study is to test the adequacy of research instruments (Van Teijlingen & Hundley, 2001). The objectives of pilot studies in this research were to establish whether questions could be understood as intended, to investigate what kind of behaviour the

97 students may have, to test whether the question order was appropriate and to gain an idea of whether sufficient information can be obtained within the suggested period of time. Based on the availability of participants, one UK student focus group and one Chinese student focus group were conducted. The UK student focus group was conducted in person. The Chinese one involved an online group chat. Each group had four participants, both boys and girls, aged 12-16.

I found that participants tended to produce long silence (lasting around 30 seconds) after questions were posted at the beginning. Participants were more talkative once they had become familiar with the moderator. Therefore, making participants feel relaxed before the start was quite important so that time was not wasted. The researcher took part in some small talks with participants before focus groups, by having jokes and discussing relaxed topics, such as music and pop star news. Although questions were understood, some of them were too wordy, which meant that participants had to pay greater attention. Prior to data collection, long questions were revised into shorter ones. Regarding participants’ behaviour, some participants asked questions of others by taking the moderator’s place and moving the discussion into non-related topics. In the real research, the moderator had more involvement and control in leading the conversation by avoiding merely posing questions. Eye contact with participants who spoke less was found helpful to encourage them to speak.

Data collection

On the arranged date of conducting focus groups with UK students, I arrived at the school 20 minutes before interviewing. After handing copies of a DBS check to the reception, self-introduction was made to the teacher who would be present during the interview. The purposes of this research were briefly explained and a list of questions was provided to the teacher. The need for voice recording was confirmed. Permission to record the conversation was gained from

98 all focus group members before the start. Details of data collection of UK focus groups are shown in Table 3.1 below.

Table 3.1: Focus groups of the UK students

Focus groups with Chinese students were conducted through visual conferencing. They were face-to-face simultaneous focus groups. As parents had been told about the research purposes and what questions would be asked in the interview, it was not necessary for an adult to be present during discussion. Chinese student focus groups were audio recorded as students did not feel comfortable having their visual movement recorded. Details of data collection of Chinese focus groups are shown in Table 3.2 below.

99 Table 3.2: Focus groups of the Chinese students