what is the difference between focus group and case study method

Research Methods at SCS

Basic Strategies
Literature Reviews & Annotated Bibliographies
Qualitative & Quantitative Methods

Case Studies

Focus groups.

White Papers

<< Previous: Qualitative & Quantitative Methods
Next: Surveys >>
Last Updated: Jan 26, 2024 10:52 AM
URL: https://guides.library.georgetown.edu/research

University of Huddersfield

What is the difference between a multiple case study and a focus group?

Most recent answer.

Top contributors to discussions in this field

Agricultural University of Athens Greece

Authernative, Inc., USA

Ministry of Science and Technology, Iraq

Universidad Politécnica de Cartagena

Forest Research Institute Dehradun

Get help with your research

Join ResearchGate to ask questions, get input, and advance your work.

All Answers (12)

Related Publications

Recruit researchers
Join for free
Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

Chapter 12. Focus Groups

Introduction.

Focus groups are a particular and special form of interviewing in which the interview asks focused questions of a group of persons, optimally between five and eight. This group can be close friends, family members, or complete strangers. They can have a lot in common or nothing in common. Unlike one-on-one interviews, which can probe deeply, focus group questions are narrowly tailored (“focused”) to a particular topic and issue and, with notable exceptions, operate at the shallow end of inquiry. For example, market researchers use focus groups to find out why groups of people choose one brand of product over another. Because focus groups are often used for commercial purposes, they sometimes have a bit of a stigma among researchers. This is unfortunate, as the focus group is a helpful addition to the qualitative researcher’s toolkit. Focus groups explicitly use group interaction to assist in the data collection. They are particularly useful as supplements to one-on-one interviews or in data triangulation. They are sometimes used to initiate areas of inquiry for later data collection methods. This chapter describes the main forms of focus groups, lays out some key differences among those forms, and provides guidance on how to manage focus group interviews.

what is the difference between focus group and case study method

Focus Groups: What Are They and When to Use Them

As interviews, focus groups can be helpfully distinguished from one-on-one interviews. The purpose of conducting a focus group is not to expand the number of people one interviews: the focus group is a different entity entirely. The focus is on the group and its interactions and evaluations rather than on the individuals in that group. If you want to know how individuals understand their lives and their individual experiences, it is best to ask them individually. If you want to find out how a group forms a collective opinion about something (whether a product or an event or an experience), then conducting a focus group is preferable. The power of focus groups resides in their being both focused and oriented to the group . They are best used when you are interested in the shared meanings of a group or how people discuss a topic publicly or when you want to observe the social formation of evaluations. The interaction of the group members is an asset in this method of data collection. If your questions would not benefit from group interaction, this is a good indicator that you should probably use individual interviews (chapter 11). Avoid using focus groups when you are interested in personal information or strive to uncover deeply buried beliefs or personal narratives. In general, you want to avoid using focus groups when the subject matter is polarizing, as people are less likely to be honest in a group setting. There are a few exceptions, such as when you are conducting focus groups with people who are not strangers and/or you are attempting to probe deeply into group beliefs and evaluations. But caution is warranted in these cases. [1]

As with interviewing in general, there are many forms of focus groups. Focus groups are widely used by nonresearchers, so it is important to distinguish these uses from the research focus group. Businesses routinely employ marketing focus groups to test out products or campaigns. Jury consultants employ “mock” jury focus groups, testing out legal case strategies in advance of actual trials. Organizations of various kinds use focus group interviews for program evaluation (e.g., to gauge the effectiveness of a diversity training workshop). The research focus group has many similarities with all these uses but is specifically tailored to a research (rather than applied) interest. The line between application and research use can be blurry, however. To take the case of evaluating the effectiveness of a diversity training workshop, the same interviewer may be conducting focus group interviews both to provide specific actionable feedback for the workshop leaders (this is the application aspect) and to learn more about how people respond to diversity training (an interesting research question with theoretically generalizable results).

When forming a focus group, there are two different strategies for inclusion. Diversity focus groups include people with diverse perspectives and experiences. This helps the researcher identify commonalities across this diversity and/or note interactions across differences. What kind of diversity to capture depends on the research question, but care should be taken to ensure that those participating are not set up for attack from other participants. This is why many warn against diversity focus groups, especially around politically sensitive topics. The other strategy is to build a convergence focus group , which includes people with similar perspectives and experiences. These are particularly helpful for identifying shared patterns and group consensus. The important thing is to closely consider who will be invited to participate and what the composition of the group will be in advance. Some review of sampling techniques (see chapter 5) may be helpful here.

Moderating a focus group can be a challenge (more on this below). For this reason, confining your group to no more than eight participants is recommended. You probably want at least four persons to capture group interaction. Fewer than four participants can also make it more difficult for participants to remain (relatively) anonymous—there is less of a group in which to hide. There are exceptions to these recommendations. You might want to conduct a focus group with a naturally occurring group, as in the case of a family of three, a social club of ten, or a program of fifteen. When the persons know one another, the problems of too few for anonymity don’t apply, and although ten to fifteen can be unwieldy to manage, there are strategies to make this possible. If you really are interested in this group’s dynamic (not just a set of random strangers’ dynamic), then you will want to include all its members or as many as are willing and able to participate.

There are many benefits to conducting focus groups, the first of which is their interactivity. Participants can make comparisons, can elaborate on what has been voiced by another, and can even check one another, leading to real-time reevaluations. This last benefit is one reason they are sometimes employed specifically for consciousness raising or building group cohesion. This form of data collection has an activist application when done carefully and appropriately. It can be fun, especially for the participants. Additionally, what does not come up in a focus group, especially when expected by the researcher, can be very illuminating.

Many of these benefits do incur costs, however. The multiplicity of voices in a good focus group interview can be overwhelming both to moderate and later to transcribe. Because of the focused nature, deep probing is not possible (or desirable). You might only get superficial thinking or what people are willing to put out there publicly. If that is what you are interested in, good. If you want deeper insight, you probably will not get that here. Relatedly, extreme views are often suppressed, and marginal viewpoints are unspoken or, if spoken, derided. You will get the majority group consensus and very little of minority viewpoints. Because people will be engaged with one another, there is the possibility of cut-off sentences, making it even more likely to hear broad brush themes and not detailed specifics. There really is very little opportunity for specific follow-up questions to individuals. Reading over a transcript, you may be frustrated by avenues of inquiry that were foreclosed early.

Some people expect that conducting focus groups is an efficient form of data collection. After all, you get to hear from eight people instead of just one in the same amount of time! But this is a serious misunderstanding. What you hear in a focus group is one single group interview or discussion. It is not the same thing at all as conducting eight single one-hour interviews. Each focus group counts as “one.” Most likely, you will need to conduct several focus groups, and you can design these as comparisons to one another. For example, the American Sociological Association (ASA) Task Force on First-Generation and Working-Class Persons in Sociology began its study of the impact of class in sociology by conducting five separate focus groups with different groups of sociologists: graduate students, faculty (in general), community college faculty, faculty of color, and a racially diverse group of students and faculty. Even though the total number of participants was close to forty, the “number” of cases was five. It is highly recommended that when employing focus groups, you plan on composing more than one and at least three. This allows you to take note of and potentially discount findings from a group with idiosyncratic dynamics, such as where a particularly dominant personality silences all other voices. In other words, putting all your eggs into a single focus group basket is not a good idea.

How to Conduct a Focus Group Interview/Discussion

Advance preparations.

Once you have selected your focus groups and set a date and time, there are a few things you will want to plan out before meeting.

As with interviews, you begin by creating an interview (or discussion) guide. Where a good one-on-one interview guide should include ten to twelve main topics with possible prompts and follow-ups (see the example provided in chapter 11), the focus group guide should be more narrowly tailored to a single focus or topic area. For example, a focus might be “How students coped with online learning during the pandemic,” and a series of possible questions would be drafted that would help prod participants to think about and discuss this topic. These questions or discussion prompts can be creative and may include stimulus materials (watching a video or hearing a story) or posing hypotheticals. For example, Cech ( 2021 ) has a great hypothetical, asking what a fictional character should do: keep his boring job in computers or follow his passion and open a restaurant. You can ask a focus group this question and see what results—how the group comes to define a “good job,” what questions they ask about the hypothetical (How boring is his job really? Does he hate getting up in the morning, or is it more of an everyday tedium? What kind of financial support will he have if he quits? Does he even know how to run a restaurant?), and how they reach a consensus or create clear patterns of disagreement are all interesting findings that can be generated through this technique.

As with the above example (“What should Joe do?”), it is best to keep the questions you ask simple and easily understood by everyone. Thinking about the sequence of the questions/prompts is important, just as it is in conducting any interviews.

Avoid embarrassing questions. Always leave an out for the “I have a friend who X” response rather than pushing people to divulge personal information. Asking “How do you think students coped?” is better than “How did you cope?” Chances are, some participants will begin talking about themselves without you directly asking them to do so, but allowing impersonal responses here is good. The group itself will determine how deep and how personal it wants to go. This is not the time or place to push anyone out of their comfort zone!

Of course, people have different levels of comfort talking publicly about certain topics. You will have provided detailed information to your focus group participants beforehand and secured consent. But even so, the conversation may take a turn that makes someone uncomfortable. Be on the lookout for this, and remind everyone of their ability to opt out—to stay silent or to leave if necessary. Rather than call attention to anyone in this way, you also want to let everyone know they are free to walk around—to get up and get coffee (more on this below) or use the restroom or just step out of the room to take a call. Of course, you don’t really want anyone to do any of these things, and chances are everyone will stay seated during the hour, but you should leave this “out” for those who need it.

Have copies of consent forms and any supplemental questionnaire (e.g., demographic information) you are using prepared in advance. Ask a friend or colleague to assist you on the day of the focus group. They can be responsible for making sure the recording equipment is functioning and may even take some notes on body language while you are moderating the discussion. Order food (coffee or snacks) for the group. This is important! Having refreshments will be appreciated by your participants and really damps down the anxiety level. Bring name tags and pens. Find a quiet welcoming space to convene. Often this is a classroom where you move chairs into a circle, but public libraries often have meeting rooms that are ideal places for community members to meet. Be sure that the space allows for food.

Researcher Note

When I was designing my research plan for studying activist groups, I consulted one of the best qualitative researchers I knew, my late friend Raphael Ezekiel, author of The Racist Mind . He looked at my plan to hand people demographic surveys at the end of the meetings I planned to observe and said, “This methodology is missing one crucial thing.” “What?” I asked breathlessly, anticipating some technical insider tip. “Chocolate!” he answered. “They’ll be tired, ready to leave when you ask them to fill something out. Offer an incentive, and they will stick around.” It worked! As the meetings began to wind down, I would whip some bags of chocolate candies out of my bag. Everyone would stare, and I’d say they were my thank-you gift to anyone who filled out my survey. Once I learned to include some sugar-free candies for diabetics, my typical response rate was 100 percent. (And it gave me an additional class-culture data point by noticing who chose which brand; sure enough, Lindt balls went faster at majority professional-middle-class groups, and Hershey’s minibars went faster at majority working-class groups.)

—Betsy Leondar-Wright, author of Missing Class , coauthor of The Color of Wealth , associate professor of sociology at Lasell University, and coordinator of staffing at the Mission Project for Class Action

During the Focus Group

As people arrive, greet them warmly, and make sure you get a signed consent form (if not in advance). If you are using name tags, ask them to fill one out and wear it. Let them get food and find a seat and do a little chatting, as they might wish. Once seated, many focus group moderators begin with a relevant icebreaker. This could be simple introductions that have some meaning or connection to the focus. In the case of the ASA task force focus groups discussed above, we asked people to introduce themselves and where they were working/studying (“Hi, I’m Allison, and I am a professor at Oregon State University”). You will also want to introduce yourself and the study in simple terms. They’ve already read the consent form, but you would be surprised at how many people ignore the details there or don’t remember them. Briefly talking about the study and then letting people ask any follow-up questions lays a good foundation for a successful discussion, as it reminds everyone what the point of the event is.

Focus groups should convene for between forty-five and ninety minutes. Of course, you must tell the participants the time you have chosen in advance, and you must promptly end at the time allotted. Do not make anyone nervous by extending the time. Let them know at the outset that you will adhere to this timeline. This should reduce the nervous checking of phones and watches and wall clocks as the end time draws near.

Set ground rules and expectations for the group discussion. My preference is to begin with a general question and let whoever wants to answer it do so, but other moderators expect each person to answer most questions. Explain how much cross-talk you will permit (or encourage). Again, my preference is to allow the group to pick up the ball and run with it, so I will sometimes keep my head purposefully down so that they engage with one another rather than me, but I have seen other moderators take a much more engaged position. Just be clear at the outset about what your expectations are. You may or may not want to explain how the group should deal with those who would dominate the conversation. Sometimes, simply stating at the outset that all voices should be heard is enough to create a more egalitarian discourse. Other times, you will have to actively step in to manage (moderate) the exchange to allow more voices to be heard. Finally, let people know they are free to get up to get more coffee or leave the room as they need (if you are OK with this). You may ask people to refrain from using their phones during the duration of the discussion. That is up to you too.

Either before or after the introductions (your call), begin recording the discussion with their collective permission and knowledge . If you have brought a friend or colleague to assist you (as you should), have them attend to the recording. Explain the role of your colleague to the group (e.g., they will monitor the recording and will take short notes throughout to help you when you read the transcript later; they will be a silent observer).

Once the focus group gets going, it may be difficult to keep up. You will need to make a lot of quick decisions during the discussion about whether to intervene or let it go unguided. Only you really care about the research question or topic, so only you will really know when the discussion is truly off topic. However you handle this, keep your “participation” to a minimum. According to Lune and Berg ( 2018:95 ), the moderator’s voice should show up in the transcript no more than 10 percent of the time. By the way, you should also ask your research assistant to take special note of the “intensity” of the conversation, as this may be lost in a transcript. If there are people looking overly excited or tapping their feet with impatience or nodding their heads in unison, you want some record of this for future analysis.

I’m not sure why this stuck with me, but I thought it would be interesting to share. When I was reviewing my plan for conducting focus groups with one of my committee members, he suggested that I give the participants their gift cards first. The incentive for participating in the study was a gift card of their choice, and typical processes dictate that participants must complete the study in order to receive their gift card. However, my committee member (who is Native himself) suggested I give it at the beginning. As a qualitative researcher, you build trust with the people you engage with. You are asking them to share their stories with you, their intimate moments, their vulnerabilities, their time. Not to mention that Native people are familiar with being academia’s subjects of interest with little to no benefit to be returned to them. To show my appreciation, one of the things I could do was to give their gifts at the beginning, regardless of whether or not they completed participating.

—Susanna Y. Park, PhD, mixed-methods researcher in public health and author of “How Native Women Seek Support as Survivors of Intimate Partner Violence: A Mixed-Methods Study”

After the Focus Group

Your “data” will be either fieldnotes taken during the focus group or, more desirably, transcripts of the recorded exchange. If you do not have permission to record the focus group discussion, make sure you take very clear notes during the exchange and then spend a few hours afterward filling them in as much as possible, creating a rich memo to yourself about what you saw and heard and experienced, including any notes about body language and interactions. Ideally, however, you will have recorded the discussion. It is still a good idea to spend some time immediately after the conclusion of the discussion to write a memo to yourself with all the things that may not make it into the written record (e.g., body language and interactions). This is also a good time to journal about or create a memo with your initial researcher reactions to what you saw, noting anything of particular interest that you want to come back to later on (e.g., “It was interesting that no one thought Joe should quit his job, but in the other focus group, half of the group did. I wonder if this has something to do with the fact that all the participants were first-generation college students. I should pay attention to class background here.”).

Please thank each of your participants in a follow-up email or text. Let them know you appreciated their time and invite follow-up questions or comments.

One of the difficult things about focus group transcripts is keeping speakers distinct. Eventually, you are going to be using pseudonyms for any publication, but for now, you probably want to know who said what. You can assign speaker numbers (“Speaker 1,” “Speaker 2”) and connect those identifications with particular demographic information in a separate document. Remember to clearly separate actual identifications (as with consent forms) to prevent breaches of anonymity. If you cannot identify a speaker when transcribing, you can write, “Unidentified Speaker.” Once you have your transcript(s) and memos and fieldnotes, you can begin analyzing the data (chapters 18 and 19).

Advanced: Focus Groups on Sensitive Topics

Throughout this chapter, I have recommended against raising sensitive topics in focus group discussions. As an introvert myself, I find the idea of discussing personal topics in a group disturbing, and I tend to avoid conducting these kinds of focus groups. And yet I have actually participated in focus groups that do discuss personal information and consequently have been of great value to me as a participant (and researcher) because of this. There are even some researchers who believe this is the best use of focus groups ( de Oliveira 2011 ). For example, Jordan et al. ( 2007 ) argue that focus groups should be considered most useful for illuminating locally sanctioned ways of talking about sensitive issues. So although I do not recommend the beginning qualitative researcher dive into deep waters before they can swim, this section will provide some guidelines for conducting focus groups on sensitive topics. To my mind, these are a minimum set of guidelines to follow when dealing with sensitive topics.

First, be transparent about the place of sensitive topics in your focus group. If the whole point of your focus group is to discuss something sensitive, such as how women gain support after traumatic sexual assault events, make this abundantly clear in your consent form and recruiting materials. It is never appropriate to blindside participants with sensitive or threatening topics .

Second, create a confidentiality form (figure 12.2) for each participant to sign. These forms carry no legal weight, but they do create an expectation of confidentiality for group members.

In order to respect the privacy of all participants in [insert name of study here], all parties are asked to read and sign the statement below. If you have any reason not to sign, please discuss this with [insert your name], the researcher of this study, I, ________________________, agree to maintain the confidentiality of the information discussed by all participants and researchers during the focus group discussion.

Signature: _____________________________ Date: _____________________

Researcher’s Signature:___________________ Date:______________________

Figure 12.2 Confidentiality Agreement of Focus Group Participants

Third, provide abundant space for opting out of the discussion. Participants are, of course, always permitted to refrain from answering a question or to ask for the recording to be stopped. It is important that focus group members know they have these rights during the group discussion as well. And if you see a person who is looking uncomfortable or like they want to hide, you need to step in affirmatively and remind everyone of these rights.

Finally, if things go “off the rails,” permit yourself the ability to end the focus group. Debrief with each member as necessary.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

Knowledge Base

Methodology

What Is a Case Study? | Definition, Examples & Methods

What Is a Case Study? | Definition, Examples & Methods

Published on May 8, 2019 by Shona McCombes . Revised on November 20, 2023.

A case study is a detailed study of a specific subject, such as a person, group, place, event, organization, or phenomenon. Case studies are commonly used in social, educational, clinical, and business research.

A case study research design usually involves qualitative methods , but quantitative methods are sometimes also used. Case studies are good for describing , comparing, evaluating and understanding different aspects of a research problem .

When to do a case study, step 1: select a case, step 2: build a theoretical framework, step 3: collect your data, step 4: describe and analyze the case, other interesting articles.

A case study is an appropriate research design when you want to gain concrete, contextual, in-depth knowledge about a specific real-world subject. It allows you to explore the key characteristics, meanings, and implications of the case.

Case studies are often a good choice in a thesis or dissertation . They keep your project focused and manageable when you don’t have the time or resources to do large-scale research.

You might use just one complex case study where you explore a single subject in depth, or conduct multiple case studies to compare and illuminate different aspects of your research problem.

Case study examples
Research question	Case study
What are the ecological effects of wolf reintroduction?	Case study of wolf reintroduction in Yellowstone National Park
How do populist politicians use narratives about history to gain support?	Case studies of Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán and US president Donald Trump
How can teachers implement active learning strategies in mixed-level classrooms?	Case study of a local school that promotes active learning
What are the main advantages and disadvantages of wind farms for rural communities?	Case studies of three rural wind farm development projects in different parts of the country
How are viral marketing strategies changing the relationship between companies and consumers?	Case study of the iPhone X marketing campaign
How do experiences of work in the gig economy differ by gender, race and age?	Case studies of Deliveroo and Uber drivers in London

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

Academic style
Vague sentences
Style consistency

See an example

Once you have developed your problem statement and research questions , you should be ready to choose the specific case that you want to focus on. A good case study should have the potential to:

Provide new or unexpected insights into the subject
Challenge or complicate existing assumptions and theories
Propose practical courses of action to resolve a problem
Open up new directions for future research

TipIf your research is more practical in nature and aims to simultaneously investigate an issue as you solve it, consider conducting action research instead.

Unlike quantitative or experimental research , a strong case study does not require a random or representative sample. In fact, case studies often deliberately focus on unusual, neglected, or outlying cases which may shed new light on the research problem.

Example of an outlying case studyIn the 1960s the town of Roseto, Pennsylvania was discovered to have extremely low rates of heart disease compared to the US average. It became an important case study for understanding previously neglected causes of heart disease.

However, you can also choose a more common or representative case to exemplify a particular category, experience or phenomenon.

Example of a representative case studyIn the 1920s, two sociologists used Muncie, Indiana as a case study of a typical American city that supposedly exemplified the changing culture of the US at the time.

While case studies focus more on concrete details than general theories, they should usually have some connection with theory in the field. This way the case study is not just an isolated description, but is integrated into existing knowledge about the topic. It might aim to:

Exemplify a theory by showing how it explains the case under investigation
Expand on a theory by uncovering new concepts and ideas that need to be incorporated
Challenge a theory by exploring an outlier case that doesn’t fit with established assumptions

To ensure that your analysis of the case has a solid academic grounding, you should conduct a literature review of sources related to the topic and develop a theoretical framework . This means identifying key concepts and theories to guide your analysis and interpretation.

There are many different research methods you can use to collect data on your subject. Case studies tend to focus on qualitative data using methods such as interviews , observations , and analysis of primary and secondary sources (e.g., newspaper articles, photographs, official records). Sometimes a case study will also collect quantitative data.

Example of a mixed methods case studyFor a case study of a wind farm development in a rural area, you could collect quantitative data on employment rates and business revenue, collect qualitative data on local people’s perceptions and experiences, and analyze local and national media coverage of the development.

The aim is to gain as thorough an understanding as possible of the case and its context.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

In writing up the case study, you need to bring together all the relevant aspects to give as complete a picture as possible of the subject.

How you report your findings depends on the type of research you are doing. Some case studies are structured like a standard scientific paper or thesis , with separate sections or chapters for the methods , results and discussion .

Others are written in a more narrative style, aiming to explore the case from various angles and analyze its meanings and implications (for example, by using textual analysis or discourse analysis ).

In all cases, though, make sure to give contextual details about the case, connect it back to the literature and theory, and discuss how it fits into wider patterns or debates.

If you want to know more about statistics , methodology , or research bias , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

Normal distribution
Degrees of freedom
Null hypothesis
Discourse analysis
Control groups
Mixed methods research
Non-probability sampling
Quantitative research
Ecological validity

Research bias

Rosenthal effect
Implicit bias
Cognitive bias
Selection bias
Negativity bias
Status quo bias

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, November 20). What Is a Case Study? | Definition, Examples & Methods. Scribbr. Retrieved June 18, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/case-study/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, primary vs. secondary sources | difference & examples, what is a theoretical framework | guide to organizing, what is action research | definition & examples, get unlimited documents corrected.

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

SUGGESTED TOPICS
The Magazine
Newsletters
Managing Yourself
Managing Teams
Work-life Balance
The Big Idea
Data & Visuals
Reading Lists
Case Selections
HBR Learning
Topic Feeds
Account Settings
Email Preferences

What the Case Study Method Really Teaches

Nitin Nohria

Seven meta-skills that stick even if the cases fade from memory.

It’s been 100 years since Harvard Business School began using the case study method. Beyond teaching specific subject matter, the case study method excels in instilling meta-skills in students. This article explains the importance of seven such skills: preparation, discernment, bias recognition, judgement, collaboration, curiosity, and self-confidence.

During my decade as dean of Harvard Business School, I spent hundreds of hours talking with our alumni. To enliven these conversations, I relied on a favorite question: “What was the most important thing you learned from your time in our MBA program?”

Nitin Nohria is the George F. Baker Jr. and Distinguished Service University Professor. He served as the 10th dean of Harvard Business School, from 2010 to 2020.

Partner Center

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

View all journals
Explore content
About the journal
Publish with us
Sign up for alerts
Published: 05 October 2018

Interviews and focus groups in qualitative research: an update for the digital age

P. Gill 1 &
J. Baillie 2

British Dental Journal volume 225 , pages 668–672 ( 2018 ) Cite this article

29k Accesses

50 Citations

20 Altmetric

Metrics details

Highlights that qualitative research is used increasingly in dentistry. Interviews and focus groups remain the most common qualitative methods of data collection.

Suggests the advent of digital technologies has transformed how qualitative research can now be undertaken.

Suggests interviews and focus groups can offer significant, meaningful insight into participants' experiences, beliefs and perspectives, which can help to inform developments in dental practice.

Qualitative research is used increasingly in dentistry, due to its potential to provide meaningful, in-depth insights into participants' experiences, perspectives, beliefs and behaviours. These insights can subsequently help to inform developments in dental practice and further related research. The most common methods of data collection used in qualitative research are interviews and focus groups. While these are primarily conducted face-to-face, the ongoing evolution of digital technologies, such as video chat and online forums, has further transformed these methods of data collection. This paper therefore discusses interviews and focus groups in detail, outlines how they can be used in practice, how digital technologies can further inform the data collection process, and what these methods can offer dentistry.

You have full access to this article via your institution.

Determinants of behaviour and their efficacy as targets of behavioural change interventions

Participatory action research

Digital twins for health: a scoping review

Introduction.

Traditionally, research in dentistry has primarily been quantitative in nature. 1 However, in recent years, there has been a growing interest in qualitative research within the profession, due to its potential to further inform developments in practice, policy, education and training. Consequently, in 2008, the British Dental Journal (BDJ) published a four paper qualitative research series, 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 to help increase awareness and understanding of this particular methodological approach.

Since the papers were originally published, two scoping reviews have demonstrated the ongoing proliferation in the use of qualitative research within the field of oral healthcare. 1 , 6 To date, the original four paper series continue to be well cited and two of the main papers remain widely accessed among the BDJ readership. 2 , 3 The potential value of well-conducted qualitative research to evidence-based practice is now also widely recognised by service providers, policy makers, funding bodies and those who commission, support and use healthcare research.

Besides increasing standalone use, qualitative methods are now also routinely incorporated into larger mixed method study designs, such as clinical trials, as they can offer additional, meaningful insights into complex problems that simply could not be provided by quantitative methods alone. Qualitative methods can also be used to further facilitate in-depth understanding of important aspects of clinical trial processes, such as recruitment. For example, Ellis et al . investigated why edentulous older patients, dissatisfied with conventional dentures, decline implant treatment, despite its established efficacy, and frequently refuse to participate in related randomised clinical trials, even when financial constraints are removed. 7 Through the use of focus groups in Canada and the UK, the authors found that fears of pain and potential complications, along with perceived embarrassment, exacerbated by age, are common reasons why older patients typically refuse dental implants. 7

The last decade has also seen further developments in qualitative research, due to the ongoing evolution of digital technologies. These developments have transformed how researchers can access and share information, communicate and collaborate, recruit and engage participants, collect and analyse data and disseminate and translate research findings. 8 Where appropriate, such technologies are therefore capable of extending and enhancing how qualitative research is undertaken. 9 For example, it is now possible to collect qualitative data via instant messaging, email or online/video chat, using appropriate online platforms.

These innovative approaches to research are therefore cost-effective, convenient, reduce geographical constraints and are often useful for accessing 'hard to reach' participants (for example, those who are immobile or socially isolated). 8 , 9 However, digital technologies are still relatively new and constantly evolving and therefore present a variety of pragmatic and methodological challenges. Furthermore, given their very nature, their use in many qualitative studies and/or with certain participant groups may be inappropriate and should therefore always be carefully considered. While it is beyond the scope of this paper to provide a detailed explication regarding the use of digital technologies in qualitative research, insight is provided into how such technologies can be used to facilitate the data collection process in interviews and focus groups.

In light of such developments, it is perhaps therefore timely to update the main paper 3 of the original BDJ series. As with the previous publications, this paper has been purposely written in an accessible style, to enhance readability, particularly for those who are new to qualitative research. While the focus remains on the most common qualitative methods of data collection – interviews and focus groups – appropriate revisions have been made to provide a novel perspective, and should therefore be helpful to those who would like to know more about qualitative research. This paper specifically focuses on undertaking qualitative research with adult participants only.

Overview of qualitative research

Qualitative research is an approach that focuses on people and their experiences, behaviours and opinions. 10 , 11 The qualitative researcher seeks to answer questions of 'how' and 'why', providing detailed insight and understanding, 11 which quantitative methods cannot reach. 12 Within qualitative research, there are distinct methodologies influencing how the researcher approaches the research question, data collection and data analysis. 13 For example, phenomenological studies focus on the lived experience of individuals, explored through their description of the phenomenon. Ethnographic studies explore the culture of a group and typically involve the use of multiple methods to uncover the issues. 14

While methodology is the 'thinking tool', the methods are the 'doing tools'; 13 the ways in which data are collected and analysed. There are multiple qualitative data collection methods, including interviews, focus groups, observations, documentary analysis, participant diaries, photography and videography. Two of the most commonly used qualitative methods are interviews and focus groups, which are explored in this article. The data generated through these methods can be analysed in one of many ways, according to the methodological approach chosen. A common approach is thematic data analysis, involving the identification of themes and subthemes across the data set. Further information on approaches to qualitative data analysis has been discussed elsewhere. 1

Qualitative research is an evolving and adaptable approach, used by different disciplines for different purposes. Traditionally, qualitative data, specifically interviews, focus groups and observations, have been collected face-to-face with participants. In more recent years, digital technologies have contributed to the ongoing evolution of qualitative research. Digital technologies offer researchers different ways of recruiting participants and collecting data, and offer participants opportunities to be involved in research that is not necessarily face-to-face.

Research interviews are a fundamental qualitative research method 15 and are utilised across methodological approaches. Interviews enable the researcher to learn in depth about the perspectives, experiences, beliefs and motivations of the participant. 3 , 16 Examples include, exploring patients' perspectives of fear/anxiety triggers in dental treatment, 17 patients' experiences of oral health and diabetes, 18 and dental students' motivations for their choice of career. 19

Interviews may be structured, semi-structured or unstructured, 3 according to the purpose of the study, with less structured interviews facilitating a more in depth and flexible interviewing approach. 20 Structured interviews are similar to verbal questionnaires and are used if the researcher requires clarification on a topic; however they produce less in-depth data about a participant's experience. 3 Unstructured interviews may be used when little is known about a topic and involves the researcher asking an opening question; 3 the participant then leads the discussion. 20 Semi-structured interviews are commonly used in healthcare research, enabling the researcher to ask predetermined questions, 20 while ensuring the participant discusses issues they feel are important.

Interviews can be undertaken face-to-face or using digital methods when the researcher and participant are in different locations. Audio-recording the interview, with the consent of the participant, is essential for all interviews regardless of the medium as it enables accurate transcription; the process of turning the audio file into a word-for-word transcript. This transcript is the data, which the researcher then analyses according to the chosen approach.

Types of interview

Qualitative studies often utilise one-to-one, face-to-face interviews with research participants. This involves arranging a mutually convenient time and place to meet the participant, signing a consent form and audio-recording the interview. However, digital technologies have expanded the potential for interviews in research, enabling individuals to participate in qualitative research regardless of location.

Telephone interviews can be a useful alternative to face-to-face interviews and are commonly used in qualitative research. They enable participants from different geographical areas to participate and may be less onerous for participants than meeting a researcher in person. 15 A qualitative study explored patients' perspectives of dental implants and utilised telephone interviews due to the quality of the data that could be yielded. 21 The researcher needs to consider how they will audio record the interview, which can be facilitated by purchasing a recorder that connects directly to the telephone. One potential disadvantage of telephone interviews is the inability of the interviewer and researcher to see each other. This is resolved using software for audio and video calls online – such as Skype – to conduct interviews with participants in qualitative studies. Advantages of this approach include being able to see the participant if video calls are used, enabling observation of non-verbal communication, and the software can be free to use. However, participants are required to have a device and internet connection, as well as being computer literate, potentially limiting who can participate in the study. One qualitative study explored the role of dental hygienists in reducing oral health disparities in Canada. 22 The researcher conducted interviews using Skype, which enabled dental hygienists from across Canada to be interviewed within the research budget, accommodating the participants' schedules. 22

A less commonly used approach to qualitative interviews is the use of social virtual worlds. A qualitative study accessed a social virtual world – Second Life – to explore the health literacy skills of individuals who use social virtual worlds to access health information. 23 The researcher created an avatar and interview room, and undertook interviews with participants using voice and text methods. 23 This approach to recruitment and data collection enables individuals from diverse geographical locations to participate, while remaining anonymous if they wish. Furthermore, for interviews conducted using text methods, transcription of the interview is not required as the researcher can save the written conversation with the participant, with the participant's consent. However, the researcher and participant need to be familiar with how the social virtual world works to engage in an interview this way.

Conducting an interview

Ensuring informed consent before any interview is a fundamental aspect of the research process. Participants in research must be afforded autonomy and respect; consent should be informed and voluntary. 24 Individuals should have the opportunity to read an information sheet about the study, ask questions, understand how their data will be stored and used, and know that they are free to withdraw at any point without reprisal. The qualitative researcher should take written consent before undertaking the interview. In a face-to-face interview, this is straightforward: the researcher and participant both sign copies of the consent form, keeping one each. However, this approach is less straightforward when the researcher and participant do not meet in person. A recent protocol paper outlined an approach for taking consent for telephone interviews, which involved: audio recording the participant agreeing to each point on the consent form; the researcher signing the consent form and keeping a copy; and posting a copy to the participant. 25 This process could be replicated in other interview studies using digital methods.

There are advantages and disadvantages of using face-to-face and digital methods for research interviews. Ultimately, for both approaches, the quality of the interview is determined by the researcher. 16 Appropriate training and preparation are thus required. Healthcare professionals can use their interpersonal communication skills when undertaking a research interview, particularly questioning, listening and conversing. 3 However, the purpose of an interview is to gain information about the study topic, 26 rather than offering help and advice. 3 The researcher therefore needs to listen attentively to participants, enabling them to describe their experience without interruption. 3 The use of active listening skills also help to facilitate the interview. 14 Spradley outlined elements and strategies for research interviews, 27 which are a useful guide for qualitative researchers:

Greeting and explaining the project/interview

Asking descriptive (broad), structural (explore response to descriptive) and contrast (difference between) questions

Asymmetry between the researcher and participant talking

Expressing interest and cultural ignorance

Repeating, restating and incorporating the participant's words when asking questions

Creating hypothetical situations

Asking friendly questions

Knowing when to leave.

For semi-structured interviews, a topic guide (also called an interview schedule) is used to guide the content of the interview – an example of a topic guide is outlined in Box 1 . The topic guide, usually based on the research questions, existing literature and, for healthcare professionals, their clinical experience, is developed by the research team. The topic guide should include open ended questions that elicit in-depth information, and offer participants the opportunity to talk about issues important to them. This is vital in qualitative research where the researcher is interested in exploring the experiences and perspectives of participants. It can be useful for qualitative researchers to pilot the topic guide with the first participants, 10 to ensure the questions are relevant and understandable, and amending the questions if required.

Regardless of the medium of interview, the researcher must consider the setting of the interview. For face-to-face interviews, this could be in the participant's home, in an office or another mutually convenient location. A quiet location is preferable to promote confidentiality, enable the researcher and participant to concentrate on the conversation, and to facilitate accurate audio-recording of the interview. For interviews using digital methods the same principles apply: a quiet, private space where the researcher and participant feel comfortable and confident to participate in an interview.

Box 1: Example of a topic guide

Study focus: Parents' experiences of brushing their child's (aged 0–5) teeth

1. Can you tell me about your experience of cleaning your child's teeth?

How old was your child when you started cleaning their teeth?

Why did you start cleaning their teeth at that point?

How often do you brush their teeth?

What do you use to brush their teeth and why?

2. Could you explain how you find cleaning your child's teeth?

Do you find anything difficult?

What makes cleaning their teeth easier for you?

3. How has your experience of cleaning your child's teeth changed over time?

Has it become easier or harder?

Have you changed how often and how you clean their teeth? If so, why?

4. Could you describe how your child finds having their teeth cleaned?

What do they enjoy about having their teeth cleaned?

Is there anything they find upsetting about having their teeth cleaned?

5. Where do you look for information/advice about cleaning your child's teeth?

What did your health visitor tell you about cleaning your child's teeth? (If anything)

What has the dentist told you about caring for your child's teeth? (If visited)

Have any family members given you advice about how to clean your child's teeth? If so, what did they tell you? Did you follow their advice?

6. Is there anything else you would like to discuss about this?

Focus groups

A focus group is a moderated group discussion on a pre-defined topic, for research purposes. 28 , 29 While not aligned to a particular qualitative methodology (for example, grounded theory or phenomenology) as such, focus groups are used increasingly in healthcare research, as they are useful for exploring collective perspectives, attitudes, behaviours and experiences. Consequently, they can yield rich, in-depth data and illuminate agreement and inconsistencies 28 within and, where appropriate, between groups. Examples include public perceptions of dental implants and subsequent impact on help-seeking and decision making, 30 and general dental practitioners' views on patient safety in dentistry. 31

Focus groups can be used alone or in conjunction with other methods, such as interviews or observations, and can therefore help to confirm, extend or enrich understanding and provide alternative insights. 28 The social interaction between participants often results in lively discussion and can therefore facilitate the collection of rich, meaningful data. However, they are complex to organise and manage, due to the number of participants, and may also be inappropriate for exploring particularly sensitive issues that many participants may feel uncomfortable about discussing in a group environment.

Focus groups are primarily undertaken face-to-face but can now also be undertaken online, using appropriate technologies such as email, bulletin boards, online research communities, chat rooms, discussion forums, social media and video conferencing. 32 Using such technologies, data collection can also be synchronous (for example, online discussions in 'real time') or, unlike traditional face-to-face focus groups, asynchronous (for example, online/email discussions in 'non-real time'). While many of the fundamental principles of focus group research are the same, regardless of how they are conducted, a number of subtle nuances are associated with the online medium. 32 Some of which are discussed further in the following sections.

Focus group considerations

Some key considerations associated with face-to-face focus groups are: how many participants are required; should participants within each group know each other (or not) and how many focus groups are needed within a single study? These issues are much debated and there is no definitive answer. However, the number of focus groups required will largely depend on the topic area, the depth and breadth of data needed, the desired level of participation required 29 and the necessity (or not) for data saturation.

The optimum group size is around six to eight participants (excluding researchers) but can work effectively with between three and 14 participants. 3 If the group is too small, it may limit discussion, but if it is too large, it may become disorganised and difficult to manage. It is, however, prudent to over-recruit for a focus group by approximately two to three participants, to allow for potential non-attenders. For many researchers, particularly novice researchers, group size may also be informed by pragmatic considerations, such as the type of study, resources available and moderator experience. 28 Similar size and mix considerations exist for online focus groups. Typically, synchronous online focus groups will have around three to eight participants but, as the discussion does not happen simultaneously, asynchronous groups may have as many as 10–30 participants. 33

The topic area and potential group interaction should guide group composition considerations. Pre-existing groups, where participants know each other (for example, work colleagues) may be easier to recruit, have shared experiences and may enjoy a familiarity, which facilitates discussion and/or the ability to challenge each other courteously. 3 However, if there is a potential power imbalance within the group or if existing group norms and hierarchies may adversely affect the ability of participants to speak freely, then 'stranger groups' (that is, where participants do not already know each other) may be more appropriate. 34 , 35

Focus group management

Face-to-face focus groups should normally be conducted by two researchers; a moderator and an observer. 28 The moderator facilitates group discussion, while the observer typically monitors group dynamics, behaviours, non-verbal cues, seating arrangements and speaking order, which is essential for transcription and analysis. The same principles of informed consent, as discussed in the interview section, also apply to focus groups, regardless of medium. However, the consent process for online discussions will probably be managed somewhat differently. For example, while an appropriate participant information leaflet (and consent form) would still be required, the process is likely to be managed electronically (for example, via email) and would need to specifically address issues relating to technology (for example, anonymity and use, storage and access to online data). 32

The venue in which a face to face focus group is conducted should be of a suitable size, private, quiet, free from distractions and in a collectively convenient location. It should also be conducted at a time appropriate for participants, 28 as this is likely to promote attendance. As with interviews, the same ethical considerations apply (as discussed earlier). However, online focus groups may present additional ethical challenges associated with issues such as informed consent, appropriate access and secure data storage. Further guidance can be found elsewhere. 8 , 32

Before the focus group commences, the researchers should establish rapport with participants, as this will help to put them at ease and result in a more meaningful discussion. Consequently, researchers should introduce themselves, provide further clarity about the study and how the process will work in practice and outline the 'ground rules'. Ground rules are designed to assist, not hinder, group discussion and typically include: 3 , 28 , 29

Discussions within the group are confidential to the group

Only one person can speak at a time

All participants should have sufficient opportunity to contribute

There should be no unnecessary interruptions while someone is speaking

Everyone can be expected to be listened to and their views respected

Challenging contrary opinions is appropriate, but ridiculing is not.

Moderating a focus group requires considered management and good interpersonal skills to help guide the discussion and, where appropriate, keep it sufficiently focused. Avoid, therefore, participating, leading, expressing personal opinions or correcting participants' knowledge 3 , 28 as this may bias the process. A relaxed, interested demeanour will also help participants to feel comfortable and promote candid discourse. Moderators should also prevent the discussion being dominated by any one person, ensure differences of opinions are discussed fairly and, if required, encourage reticent participants to contribute. 3 Asking open questions, reflecting on significant issues, inviting further debate, probing responses accordingly, and seeking further clarification, as and where appropriate, will help to obtain sufficient depth and insight into the topic area.

Moderating online focus groups requires comparable skills, particularly if the discussion is synchronous, as the discussion may be dominated by those who can type proficiently. 36 It is therefore important that sufficient time and respect is accorded to those who may not be able to type as quickly. Asynchronous discussions are usually less problematic in this respect, as interactions are less instant. However, moderating an asynchronous discussion presents additional challenges, particularly if participants are geographically dispersed, as they may be online at different times. Consequently, the moderator will not always be present and the discussion may therefore need to occur over several days, which can be difficult to manage and facilitate and invariably requires considerable flexibility. 32 It is also worth recognising that establishing rapport with participants via online medium is often more challenging than via face-to-face and may therefore require additional time, skills, effort and consideration.

As with research interviews, focus groups should be guided by an appropriate interview schedule, as discussed earlier in the paper. For example, the schedule will usually be informed by the review of the literature and study aims, and will merely provide a topic guide to help inform subsequent discussions. To provide a verbatim account of the discussion, focus groups must be recorded, using an audio-recorder with a good quality multi-directional microphone. While videotaping is possible, some participants may find it obtrusive, 3 which may adversely affect group dynamics. The use (or not) of a video recorder, should therefore be carefully considered.

At the end of the focus group, a few minutes should be spent rounding up and reflecting on the discussion. 28 Depending on the topic area, it is possible that some participants may have revealed deeply personal issues and may therefore require further help and support, such as a constructive debrief or possibly even referral on to a relevant third party. It is also possible that some participants may feel that the discussion did not adequately reflect their views and, consequently, may no longer wish to be associated with the study. 28 Such occurrences are likely to be uncommon, but should they arise, it is important to further discuss any concerns and, if appropriate, offer them the opportunity to withdraw (including any data relating to them) from the study. Immediately after the discussion, researchers should compile notes regarding thoughts and ideas about the focus group, which can assist with data analysis and, if appropriate, any further data collection.

Qualitative research is increasingly being utilised within dental research to explore the experiences, perspectives, motivations and beliefs of participants. The contributions of qualitative research to evidence-based practice are increasingly being recognised, both as standalone research and as part of larger mixed-method studies, including clinical trials. Interviews and focus groups remain commonly used data collection methods in qualitative research, and with the advent of digital technologies, their utilisation continues to evolve. However, digital methods of qualitative data collection present additional methodological, ethical and practical considerations, but also potentially offer considerable flexibility to participants and researchers. Consequently, regardless of format, qualitative methods have significant potential to inform important areas of dental practice, policy and further related research.

Gussy M, Dickson-Swift V, Adams J . A scoping review of qualitative research in peer-reviewed dental publications. Int J Dent Hygiene 2013; 11 : 174–179.

Article Google Scholar

Burnard P, Gill P, Stewart K, Treasure E, Chadwick B . Analysing and presenting qualitative data. Br Dent J 2008; 204 : 429–432.

Gill P, Stewart K, Treasure E, Chadwick B . Methods of data collection in qualitative research: interviews and focus groups. Br Dent J 2008; 204 : 291–295.

Gill P, Stewart K, Treasure E, Chadwick B . Conducting qualitative interviews with school children in dental research. Br Dent J 2008; 204 : 371–374.

Stewart K, Gill P, Chadwick B, Treasure E . Qualitative research in dentistry. Br Dent J 2008; 204 : 235–239.

Masood M, Thaliath E, Bower E, Newton J . An appraisal of the quality of published qualitative dental research. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2011; 39 : 193–203.

Ellis J, Levine A, Bedos C et al. Refusal of implant supported mandibular overdentures by elderly patients. Gerodontology 2011; 28 : 62–68.

Macfarlane S, Bucknall T . Digital Technologies in Research. In Gerrish K, Lathlean J (editors) The Research Process in Nursing . 7th edition. pp. 71–86. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell; 2015.

Google Scholar

Lee R, Fielding N, Blank G . Online Research Methods in the Social Sciences: An Editorial Introduction. In Fielding N, Lee R, Blank G (editors) The Sage Handbook of Online Research Methods . pp. 3–16. London: Sage Publications; 2016.

Creswell J . Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five designs . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1998.

Guest G, Namey E, Mitchell M . Qualitative research: Defining and designing In Guest G, Namey E, Mitchell M (editors) Collecting Qualitative Data: A Field Manual For Applied Research . pp. 1–40. London: Sage Publications, 2013.

Chapter Google Scholar

Pope C, Mays N . Qualitative research: Reaching the parts other methods cannot reach: an introduction to qualitative methods in health and health services research. BMJ 1995; 311 : 42–45.

Giddings L, Grant B . A Trojan Horse for positivism? A critique of mixed methods research. Adv Nurs Sci 2007; 30 : 52–60.

Hammersley M, Atkinson P . Ethnography: Principles in Practice . London: Routledge, 1995.

Oltmann S . Qualitative interviews: A methodological discussion of the interviewer and respondent contexts Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research. 2016; 17 : Art. 15.

Patton M . Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2002.

Wang M, Vinall-Collier K, Csikar J, Douglas G . A qualitative study of patients' views of techniques to reduce dental anxiety. J Dent 2017; 66 : 45–51.

Lindenmeyer A, Bowyer V, Roscoe J, Dale J, Sutcliffe P . Oral health awareness and care preferences in patients with diabetes: a qualitative study. Fam Pract 2013; 30 : 113–118.

Gallagher J, Clarke W, Wilson N . Understanding the motivation: a qualitative study of dental students' choice of professional career. Eur J Dent Educ 2008; 12 : 89–98.

Tod A . Interviewing. In Gerrish K, Lacey A (editors) The Research Process in Nursing . Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2006.

Grey E, Harcourt D, O'Sullivan D, Buchanan H, Kipatrick N . A qualitative study of patients' motivations and expectations for dental implants. Br Dent J 2013; 214 : 10.1038/sj.bdj.2012.1178.

Farmer J, Peressini S, Lawrence H . Exploring the role of the dental hygienist in reducing oral health disparities in Canada: A qualitative study. Int J Dent Hygiene 2017; 10.1111/idh.12276.

McElhinney E, Cheater F, Kidd L . Undertaking qualitative health research in social virtual worlds. J Adv Nurs 2013; 70 : 1267–1275.

Health Research Authority. UK Policy Framework for Health and Social Care Research. Available at https://www.hra.nhs.uk/planning-and-improving-research/policies-standards-legislation/uk-policy-framework-health-social-care-research/ (accessed September 2017).

Baillie J, Gill P, Courtenay P . Knowledge, understanding and experiences of peritonitis among patients, and their families, undertaking peritoneal dialysis: A mixed methods study protocol. J Adv Nurs 2017; 10.1111/jan.13400.

Kvale S . Interviews . Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage, 1996.

Spradley J . The Ethnographic Interview . New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1979.

Goodman C, Evans C . Focus Groups. In Gerrish K, Lathlean J (editors) The Research Process in Nursing . pp. 401–412. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell, 2015.

Shaha M, Wenzell J, Hill E . Planning and conducting focus group research with nurses. Nurse Res 2011; 18 : 77–87.

Wang G, Gao X, Edward C . Public perception of dental implants: a qualitative study. J Dent 2015; 43 : 798–805.

Bailey E . Contemporary views of dental practitioners' on patient safety. Br Dent J 2015; 219 : 535–540.

Abrams K, Gaiser T . Online Focus Groups. In Field N, Lee R, Blank G (editors) The Sage Handbook of Online Research Methods . pp. 435–450. London: Sage Publications, 2016.

Poynter R . The Handbook of Online and Social Media Research . West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons, 2010.

Kevern J, Webb C . Focus groups as a tool for critical social research in nurse education. Nurse Educ Today 2001; 21 : 323–333.

Kitzinger J, Barbour R . Introduction: The Challenge and Promise of Focus Groups. In Barbour R S K J (editor) Developing Focus Group Research . pp. 1–20. London: Sage Publications, 1999.

Krueger R, Casey M . Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE; 2009.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Senior Lecturer (Adult Nursing), School of Healthcare Sciences, Cardiff University,

Lecturer (Adult Nursing) and RCBC Wales Postdoctoral Research Fellow, School of Healthcare Sciences, Cardiff University,

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. Gill .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Gill, P., Baillie, J. Interviews and focus groups in qualitative research: an update for the digital age. Br Dent J 225 , 668–672 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2018.815

Download citation

Accepted : 02 July 2018

Published : 05 October 2018

Issue Date : 12 October 2018

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2018.815

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

Explore articles by subject
Guide to authors
Editorial policies

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

Knowledge Base
Methodology
What Is a Focus Group? | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples

What Is a Focus Group? | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples

Published on 4 May 2022 by Tegan George . Revised on 6 February 2023.

What is a focus group, step 1: choose your topic of interest, step 2: define your research scope and hypotheses, step 3: determine your focus group questions, step 4: select a moderator or co-moderator, step 5: recruit your participants, step 6: set up your focus group, step 7: host your focus group, step 8: analyse your data and report your results, advantages and disadvantages of focus groups, frequently asked questions about focus groups.

Focus groups are a type of qualitative research . Observations of the group’s dynamic, their answers to focus group questions, and even their body language can guide future research on consumer decisions, products and services, or controversial topics.

Focus groups are often used in marketing, library science, social science, and user research disciplines. They can provide more nuanced and natural feedback than individual interviews and are easier to organise than experiments or large-scale surveys .

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Focus groups are primarily considered a confirmatory research technique . In other words, their discussion-heavy setting is most useful for confirming or refuting preexisting beliefs. For this reason, they are great for conducting explanatory research , where you explore why something occurs when limited information is available.

A focus group may be a good choice for you if:

You’re interested in real-time, unfiltered responses on a given topic or in the dynamics of a discussion between participants
Your questions are rooted in feelings or perceptions , and cannot easily be answered with ‘yes’ or ‘no’
You’re confident that a relatively small number of responses will answer your question
You’re seeking directional information that will help you uncover new questions or future research ideas
Structured interviews : The questions are predetermined in both topic and order.
Semi-structured interviews : A few questions are predetermined, but other questions aren’t planned.
Unstructured interviews : None of the questions are predetermined.

Differences between types of interviews

Make sure to choose the type of interview that suits your research best. This table shows the most important differences between the four types.

	Structured interview	Semi-structured interview	Unstructured interview	Focus group
Fixed questions
Fixed order of questions
Fixed number of questions
Option to ask additional questions

Topics favorable to focus groups

As a rule of thumb, research topics related to thoughts, beliefs, and feelings work well in focus groups. If you are seeking direction, explanation, or in-depth dialogue, a focus group could be a good fit.

However, if your questions are dichotomous or if you need to reach a large audience quickly, a survey may be a better option. If your question hinges upon behaviour but you are worried about influencing responses, consider an observational study .

If you want to determine whether the student body would regularly consume vegan food, a survey would be a great way to gauge student preferences.

However, food is much more than just consumption and nourishment and can have emotional, cultural, and other implications on individuals.

If you’re interested in something less concrete, such as students’ perceptions of vegan food or the interplay between their choices at the dining hall and their feelings of homesickness or loneliness, perhaps a focus group would be best.

Once you have determined that a focus group is the right choice for your topic, you can start thinking about what you expect the group discussion to yield.

Perhaps literature already exists on your subject or a sufficiently similar topic that you can use as a starting point. If the topic isn’t well studied, use your instincts to determine what you think is most worthy of study.

Setting your scope will help you formulate intriguing hypotheses , set clear questions, and recruit the right participants.

Are you interested in a particular sector of the population, such as vegans or non-vegans?
Are you interested in including vegetarians in your analysis?
Perhaps not all students eat at the dining hall. Will your study exclude those who don’t?
Are you only interested in students who have strong opinions on the subject?

A benefit of focus groups is that your hypotheses can be open-ended. You can be open to a wide variety of opinions, which can lead to unexpected conclusions.

The questions that you ask your focus group are crucially important to your analysis. Take your time formulating them, paying special attention to phrasing. Be careful to avoid leading questions , which can affect your responses.

Overall, your focus group questions should be:

Open-ended and flexible
Impossible to answer with ‘yes’ or ‘no’ (questions that start with ‘why’ or ‘how’ are often best)
Unambiguous, getting straight to the point while still stimulating discussion
Unbiased and neutral

If you are discussing a controversial topic, be careful that your questions do not cause social desirability bias . Here, your respondents may lie about their true beliefs to mask any socially unacceptable or unpopular opinions. This and other demand characteristics can hurt your analysis and bias your results.

Engagement questions make your participants feel comfortable and at ease: ‘What is your favourite food at the dining hall?’
Exploration questions drill down to the focus of your analysis: ‘What pros and cons of offering vegan options do you see?’
Exit questions pick up on anything you may have previously missed in your discussion: ‘Is there anything you’d like to mention about vegan options in the dining hall that we haven’t discussed?’

It is important to have more than one moderator in the room. If you would like to take the lead asking questions, select a co-moderator who can coordinate the technology, take notes, and observe the behaviour of the participants.

If your hypotheses have behavioural aspects, consider asking someone else to be lead moderator so that you are free to take a more observational role.

Depending on your topic, there are a few types of moderator roles that you can choose from.

The most common is the dual-moderator , introduced above.
Another common option is the dueling-moderator style . Here, you and your co-moderator take opposing sides on an issue to allow participants to see different perspectives and respond accordingly.

Depending on your research topic, there are a few sampling methods you can choose from to help you recruit and select participants.

Voluntary response sampling , such as posting a flyer on campus and finding participants based on responses
Convenience sampling of those who are most readily accessible to you, such as fellow students at your university
Stratified sampling of a particular age, race, ethnicity, gender identity, or other characteristic of interest to you
Judgement sampling of a specific set of participants that you already know you want to include

Beware of sampling bias , which can occur when some members of the population are more likely to be included than others.

Number of participants

In most cases, one focus group will not be sufficient to answer your research question. It is likely that you will need to schedule three to four groups. A good rule of thumb is to stop when you’ve reached a saturation point (i.e., when you aren’t receiving new responses to your questions).

Most focus groups have 6–10 participants. It’s a good idea to over-recruit just in case someone doesn’t show up. As a rule of thumb, you shouldn’t have fewer than 6 or more than 12 participants, in order to get the most reliable results.

Lastly, it’s preferable for your participants not to know you or each other, as this can bias your results.

A focus group is not just a group of people coming together to discuss their opinions. While well-run focus groups have an enjoyable and relaxed atmosphere, they are backed up by rigorous methods to provide robust observations.

Confirm a time and date

Be sure to confirm a time and date with your participants well in advance. Focus groups usually meet for 45–90 minutes, but some can last longer. However, beware of the possibility of wandering attention spans. If you really think your session needs to last longer than 90 minutes, schedule a few breaks.

Confirm whether it will take place in person or online

You will also need to decide whether the group will meet in person or online. If you are hosting it in person, be sure to pick an appropriate location.

An uncomfortable or awkward location may affect the mood or level of participation of your group members.
Online sessions are convenient, as participants can join from home, but they can also lessen the connection between participants.

As a general rule, make sure you are in a noise-free environment that minimises distractions and interruptions to your participants.

Consent and ethical considerations

It’s important to take into account ethical considerations and informed consent when conducting your research. Informed consent means that participants possess all the information they need to decide whether they want to participate in the research before it starts. This includes information about benefits, risks, funding, and institutional approval.

Participants should also sign a release form that states that they are comfortable with being audio- or video-recorded. While verbal consent may be sufficient, it is best to ask participants to sign a form.

A disadvantage of focus groups is that they are too small to provide true anonymity to participants. Make sure that your participants know this prior to participating.

There are a few things you can do to commit to keeping information private. You can secure confidentiality by removing all identifying information from your report or offer to pseudonymise the data later. Data pseudonymisation entails replacing any identifying information about participants with pseudonymous or false identifiers.

Preparation prior to participation

If there is something you would like participants to read, study, or prepare beforehand, be sure to let them know well in advance. It’s also a good idea to call them the day before to ensure they will still be participating.

Consider conducting a tech check prior to the arrival of your participants, and note any environmental or external factors that could affect the mood of the group that day. Be sure that you are organised and ready, as a stressful atmosphere can be distracting and counterproductive.

Starting the focus group

Welcome individuals to the focus group by introducing the topic, yourself, and your co-moderator, and go over any ground rules or suggestions for a successful discussion. It’s important to make your participants feel at ease and forthcoming with their responses.

Consider starting out with an icebreaker, which will allow participants to relax and settle into the space a bit. Your icebreaker can be related to your study topic or not; it’s just an exercise to get participants talking.

Leading the discussion

Once you start asking your questions, try to keep response times equal between participants. Take note of the most and least talkative members of the group, as well as any participants with particularly strong or dominant personalities.

You can ask less talkative members questions directly to encourage them to participate or ask participants questions by name to even the playing field. Feel free to ask participants to elaborate on their answers or to give an example.

As a moderator, strive to remain neutral. Refrain from reacting to responses, and be aware of your body language (e.g., nodding, raising eyebrows). Active listening skills, such as parroting back answers or asking for clarification, are good methods to encourage participation and signal that you’re listening.

Many focus groups offer a monetary incentive for participants. Depending on your research budget, this is a nice way to show appreciation for their time and commitment. To keep everyone feeling fresh, consider offering snacks or drinks as well.

After concluding your focus group, you and your co-moderator should debrief, recording initial impressions of the discussion as well as any highlights, issues, or immediate conclusions you’ve drawn.

The next step is to transcribe and clean your data . Assign each participant a number or pseudonym for organisational purposes. Transcribe the recordings and conduct content analysis to look for themes or categories of responses. The categories you choose can then form the basis for reporting your results.

Just like other research methods, focus groups come with advantages and disadvantages.

They are fairly straightforward to organise and results have strong face validity .
They are usually inexpensive, even if you compensate participant.
A focus group is much less time-consuming than a survey or experiment , and you get immediate results.
Focus group results are often more comprehensible and intuitive than raw data.

Disadvantages

It can be difficult to assemble a truly representative sample. Focus groups are generally not considered externally valid due to their small sample sizes.
Due to the small sample size, you cannot ensure the anonymity of respondents, which may influence their desire to speak freely.
Depth of analysis can be a concern, as it can be challenging to get honest opinions on controversial topics.
There is a lot of room for error in the data analysis and high potential for observer dependency in drawing conclusions. You have to be careful not to cherry-pick responses to fit a prior conclusion.

A focus group is a research method that brings together a small group of people to answer questions in a moderated setting. The group is chosen due to predefined demographic traits, and the questions are designed to shed light on a topic of interest. It is one of four types of interviews .

As a rule of thumb, questions related to thoughts, beliefs, and feelings work well in focus groups . Take your time formulating strong questions, paying special attention to phrasing. Be careful to avoid leading questions , which can bias your responses.

The four most common types of interviews are:

Focus group interviews : The questions are presented to a group instead of one individual.

Social desirability bias is the tendency for interview participants to give responses that will be viewed favourably by the interviewer or other participants. It occurs in all types of interviews and surveys , but is most common in semi-structured interviews , unstructured interviews , and focus groups .

Social desirability bias can be mitigated by ensuring participants feel at ease and comfortable sharing their views. Make sure to pay attention to your own body language and any physical or verbal cues, such as nodding or widening your eyes.

This type of bias in research can also occur in observations if the participants know they’re being observed. They might alter their behaviour accordingly.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the ‘Cite this Scribbr article’ button to automatically add the citation to our free Reference Generator.

George, T. (2023, February 06). What Is a Focus Group? | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 18 June 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/focus-groups/

Is this article helpful?

Tegan George

Other students also liked, structured interview | definition, guide & examples, semi-structured interview | definition, guide & examples, unstructured interview | definition, guide & examples.

Talk to Our counsellor: 9916082261

Book your demo
GS Foundation Classroom Program
Current Affairs Monthly Magazine
Our Toppers

Techniques of data collection depend on various factors like whether the data required is quantitative or qualitative.
The data could be primary data or secondary data.
Various techniques of data collection for questionnaire, sampling, field study, survey, case study, etc
It is a detailed account of a single social phenomenon.
Offers a holistic view on the subject.
Particular situations and incidents like riots and conflicts are more appropriate for this method as they require an in-depth study.
The case study method is a very popular form of qualitative analysis.
Pauline V. Young describes case study as “a comprehensive study of a social unit be that unit a person, a group, a social institution, a district or a community.”
Case study method results in fruitful hypotheses along with the data which may be helpful in testing them, and thus it enables the generalised knowledge to get richer and richer.
The limitation of this method : Read Bain does not consider the case data as significant scientific data since they do not provide knowledge of the “impersonal, universal, non-ethical, non-practical, repetitive aspects of phenomena.” Real information is often not collected because the subjectivity of the researcher does enter in the collection of information in a case study.
Also there is danger of false generalisation.

FOCUS GROUP TECHNIQUE

Mainly used for non-positivist research.
This is basically bringing together a group of people to have an extensive and free flowing discussion relating to the focus issue.
The moderator in the discussion keeps it on the desired focus.
The usual procedure is to tape record the conversation and analyse them later.
Usually, there is no structure or discussion pattern.
Observation bias is significant in Focus group exercise as compared to Participant Observation.

CONTENT ANALYSIS

The research method is often used in interpretative sociological research.
It is a methodology for studying the content of communication.
Earl R Babbie define it as “the study of recorded human communication such as books websites paintings and law.”
The term Content Analysis is generally applied to the analysis of written communication or visual material rather than interview data.
This technique produces quantitative data which can be processed by the computer and analysed statistically as well.
It is criticized for involving subjective judgements which may create data that are quantifiable but not valid.

Request a call back.

Let us help you guide towards your career path We will give you a call between 9 AM to 9 PM

Join us to give your preparation a new direction and ultimately crack the Civil service examination with top rank.

#1360, 2nd floor,above Philips showroom, Marenhalli, 100ft road, Jayanagar 9th Block, Bangalore
[email protected]
+91 9916082261
Terms & Conditions
Privacy Policy

Click Here To Download Brochure

Focus Groups

Differentiating between focus groups and interviews.

Learning why customers like a specific brand can seem a basic undertaking. What to ask, how to ask it, and who to ask, however, can become rather complex. From the get-go, researchers must consider the study’s intent. Is the research’s objective to average a customer’s opinion? Or is it in-depth analysis? Will the study take place in the field or a control room? Seemingly similar, focus groups and interviews can offer very different results in the same scenario. All depends on who is being questioned, and when. Before going further let’s quickly explore each research method and its strengths.

A group discussion hosted by a moderator, focus groups involve anywhere from four to eight participants. Selection of participants varies a great deal. Studies may base decisions on age group, gender, regional background or any other demographic marker. No matter the selection process, however, the aim of focus groups is to find a consensus.

Interviews consist of exploring the attitudes and responses of a sole participant. Interview answers, therefore, have the most capability to offer substantive, in-depth answers. The method is also ideal for exploring subject areas the might be deemed too controversial or sensitive for a focus group atmosphere.

Always Remember Pragmatics

While the study’s intent should always guide selection, so too should more pragmatic goals. Obtaining information is the key goal. What if, for instance, only 1 of the 3 world’s experts in a dying cultural practice respond? Though maybe seeking a focus group, any researcher would still be smart to conduct an interview. Aside from incident rates, there are a few other facets to consider.

Variety – Studies that cover a broad demographic will require the same variety in its research. While interviews can be productive in specific cases, focus groups typically allow researchers to gather insight without any detriment to accuracy.
Representation – Access is one of the most critical elements to qualitative research. Depending on response rates and availability, an interview may be the study’s one recourse.
Detail – Interviewers have more room for detail, yes, but focus groups provide a different kind of detail altogether. Depending on the study, researchers may wish to see how a consensus is made or otherwise receive input from a group.

Assessing Strengths and Similarities

While using different processes and playing to different strengths, focus groups and interviews are still have common procedures. Even more important, the level of detail that a focus group offers depends on the number of participants. The more people, the less specific the detail…at least in terms of personal input. Similarly, an interview may be too confined for properly assessing the rationale behind a customer’s opinion. Thinking of the two methods as a sliding scale, rather than as mutually exclusive, is a solid first step to figuring out how to best implement either type. Roger A. Straus offers a great chart in a post from The Research Playbook.

Focus Groups and Interviews: Faster and More Relevant Online

Focus groups, interviews, and other qualitative methods are finding new attention with the advent of technological improvements to video streaming. Quite important, since products can now develop and release in the same time span usually allocated to organizing a traditional qualitative study. The effect on interviews and focus groups is profound.

Location – Participants and researchers can interview from anywhere with an internet location, easing discourse and allowing for a better glimpse into participants everyday lives
Accessibility – Going through an online route grants research teams access to vastly more participants
Equipment – Using the internet drastically reduces the amount of necessary equipment for recording and processing data

Curious to learn more about the benefits of conducting online qualitative research? We’ll gladly walk you through it.

Sign Up for our Newsletter

How to Facilitate Meaningful Insights: Strategies for Effective Focus Group Discussions

Conducting a worthwhile focus group requires a strong purpose and well-defined objectives. This isn’t an ordinary…

How to Optimize Engagement with a Virtual Focus Group: Strategies and Tips

Creating successful engagement in virtual focus groups starts with proper planning. This involves everything from the…

Maximize the number of research projects completed by year’s end: Yes, it can be done

Ask most agencies managing enterprise-level market research (MRX) projects, and they’ll tell you they have a…

Case Study vs. Descriptive Approach to Research

What's the difference.

The case study approach and the descriptive approach are two different methods used in research. The case study approach involves in-depth analysis of a specific individual, group, or situation. It aims to provide a detailed understanding of the subject matter by examining various aspects and collecting qualitative data. On the other hand, the descriptive approach focuses on describing and summarizing a larger population or phenomenon. It involves collecting quantitative data through surveys, observations, or experiments to draw general conclusions. While the case study approach provides rich and detailed information, it is limited in terms of generalizability. In contrast, the descriptive approach allows for broader generalizations but may lack the depth and context provided by case studies. Ultimately, the choice between these approaches depends on the research objectives and the nature of the research question.

Attribute	Case Study	Descriptive Approach to Research
Research Design	Qualitative	Quantitative or Qualitative
Purpose	To explore a specific case or phenomenon in-depth	To describe and analyze a larger population or group
Data Collection	Interviews, observations, documents, etc.	Surveys, questionnaires, observations, etc.
Data Analysis	Inductive, thematic analysis	Statistical analysis, frequency distribution, etc.
Sample Size	Small, often single or few cases	Large, representative sample
Generalizability	Low, specific to the case studied	High, can be generalized to the larger population
Timeframe	Longer, in-depth investigation	Shorter, quick data collection and analysis

Further Detail

Introduction.

Research is a fundamental aspect of any scientific inquiry, aiming to gather information and gain insights into various phenomena. When conducting research, researchers employ different approaches and methodologies to achieve their objectives. Two commonly used approaches are the case study and descriptive approach. While both approaches have their unique attributes, they differ in terms of their focus, data collection methods, and generalizability.

Case Study Approach

The case study approach is a qualitative research method that focuses on in-depth analysis of a specific individual, group, or event. It aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the subject under investigation by examining its context, history, and unique characteristics. Case studies often involve multiple sources of data, such as interviews, observations, and document analysis, to gather rich and detailed information.

One of the key attributes of the case study approach is its ability to explore complex and unique phenomena that may not be easily captured by other research methods. By delving deep into a specific case, researchers can uncover intricate details and gain a holistic understanding of the subject. This approach is particularly useful when studying rare or exceptional cases, as it allows researchers to examine the intricacies and nuances that may not be apparent in larger-scale studies.

Furthermore, the case study approach enables researchers to generate new hypotheses and theories by closely examining the relationships and patterns within the case. It provides an opportunity for researchers to explore and develop new ideas, which can contribute to the advancement of knowledge in a particular field. Additionally, case studies often involve a longitudinal design, allowing researchers to track changes and developments over time.

However, it is important to note that the case study approach has limitations. Due to its focus on a specific case, the findings may not be easily generalizable to a larger population. The small sample size and unique characteristics of the case may limit the external validity of the findings. Therefore, caution should be exercised when applying the results of a case study to broader contexts.

Descriptive Approach

The descriptive approach, also known as the survey method, aims to describe and analyze the characteristics, behaviors, and opinions of a specific population or sample. It involves collecting data through questionnaires, interviews, or observations, and analyzing the responses to draw conclusions about the population under study. The descriptive approach provides a snapshot of the current state of affairs and allows researchers to identify patterns and trends.

One of the key attributes of the descriptive approach is its ability to provide a broad overview of a population or phenomenon. By collecting data from a large sample, researchers can make generalizations about the population and draw conclusions that are applicable to a wider context. This approach is particularly useful when studying large populations or when the research objective is to describe the prevalence of certain characteristics or behaviors.

Moreover, the descriptive approach allows researchers to quantify data and analyze it statistically. By using statistical techniques, researchers can identify relationships between variables, test hypotheses, and make predictions. This quantitative aspect of the descriptive approach provides a level of objectivity and allows for comparisons across different groups or populations.

However, the descriptive approach also has limitations. It may not capture the complexity and richness of individual cases or unique phenomena. The focus on generalizability may overlook important contextual factors that influence the research topic. Additionally, the reliance on self-report measures in surveys may introduce biases and inaccuracies in the data collected.

While the case study and descriptive approaches differ in their focus and data collection methods, they both contribute to the field of research in their own ways. The case study approach provides in-depth insights into specific cases, allowing researchers to explore complex phenomena and generate new hypotheses. On the other hand, the descriptive approach provides a broader overview of populations, enabling researchers to make generalizations and identify patterns.

Both approaches have their strengths and weaknesses, and the choice between them depends on the research objectives and the nature of the phenomenon under investigation. Researchers should carefully consider the specific research question, the available resources, and the desired level of generalizability when selecting the appropriate approach.

In conclusion, the case study and descriptive approaches are two distinct research methodologies that offer different perspectives and insights. The case study approach allows for in-depth analysis of specific cases, providing rich and detailed information. On the other hand, the descriptive approach provides a broader overview of populations, allowing for generalizations and statistical analysis. Both approaches have their merits and limitations, and researchers should choose the most appropriate approach based on their research objectives and the nature of the phenomenon under investigation.

Comparisons may contain inaccurate information about people, places, or facts. Please report any issues.

Increase Font Size

18 Case Study Method

Ms. Beliyaluxmi Devi

1. Introduction

2. Case Study

3 Techniques used for case studies

4 Sources of data for case studies

5 Types of case Studies

6 Advantage and limitation

Learning Objectives:

To learn what is case study and distinction from case history; identify the application of case study;
To discuss how to plan case study; and
To understand the advantage and limitation of case study
Introduction

Among the various methods of data collection, case study is certainly one popular form of qualitative analysis involving careful and complete observation of a case. A case is a social unit with a deviant behavior, and may be an event, problem, process, activity, programme, of a social unit. The unit may be a person, a family, an institution, a cultural group, a community or even an entire society (Kothari, 2014). But it is a bounded system that has the boundaries of the case. Case Study therefore is an intensive investigation of the particular unit under consideration. It is extensively used in psychology, education, sociology, anthropology, economics and political science. It aims at obtaining a complete and detailed account of a social phenomenon or a social event of a social unit. In case study, data can be collected from multiple sources by using any qualitative method of data collection like interviews, observation and it may also include documents, artifacts etc. Case study method is a type of data collection that goes in depth understanding rather than breadth. Case study can be descriptive as we observe and write in description as well as it can also be an exploratory that is we wrote what was said. Pierre Guillaume Frederic Le Play (1855), a mathematician and natural scientist, is considered as the founder of case study method as he used it for the first time in his publication Les Ouvriers Europeens.

2.1 Definitions of Case Study Methods

Case study has been defined differently by different scholars from time to time. Some of them are presented below.

Young, P.V. (1984): Case study is a comprehensive study of a social unit, be it a person, a group of persons, an institute, a community or a family.
Groode and Hatt (1953): It is a method of exploring and analyzing the life of a social unit
Cooley, C.H. (2007): Case study depends our perception and gives clear insight into life directory.
Bogardus, E. S. (1925): The method of examining specially and in detail a given situation
Robson C. (1993): A strategy for doing research which involves an empirical investigation of a particular contemporary phenomenon within its real life context using multiple sources of evidence.

So critical analysis of these definitions, reveal that case study is a method of minute and detail study of a situation concerning a social unit in an intensive and comprehensive manner in order to understand the personal as well as hidden dimensions of human life.

2.2 Characteristics of Case Study

The main characteristics of the case study are (www.studylecturenotes.com):

A descriptive study:

The data collected constitute descriptions of psychological processes and events, and of the contexts in which they occurred.
The main emphasis is always on the construction of verbal descriptions of behavior or experience but rarely quantitative data may be collected. In short case study is more of a qualitative method rather than quantitative method.
High levels of detail are provided.
The behavior pattern of the concerned unit is studied directly wherein efforts are made to know the mutual inter-relationship of causal factors.

Narrowly focused:

Typically a case study offers a complete and comprehensive description of all facets of a social unit, be it a single individual or may be a social group.
Often the case study focuses on a limited aspect of a person, such as their psychopathological symptoms.

Combines objective and subjective data:

Researchers may combine objective and subjective data. Both the data are regarded as valid data for analysis. It enables case study to achieved in-depth understanding of the behavior and experience of a single individual.

Process-oriented:

The case study method enables the researcher to explore and describe the nature of processes, which occur over time.
In contrast to the experimental method, which basically provides a stilled ‘snapshot’ of processes, case study continued over time like for example the development of language in children over time.

2.3. Difference between Case Study and Case History

The Case study method helps retaining the holistic and meaningful characteristics of real life events – such as individual life cycles, small group behavior, etc. It is like a case history of a patient. As a patient goes to the doctor with some serious disease, the doctor records the case history. Analysis of case history helps in the diagnosis of the patient’s illness (http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-case-study-and-vs-case-history).

Although most of us confuse case study and case history to be the same, however, there exists a difference between these two terms. They are being used in many disciplines and allow the researcher to be more informative of people, and events. First, let us define the word case study. A case study refers to a research method where a person, group or an event is being investigated which is used by researchers whereas a case history, on the other hand, refers to a record of data which contributes to a case study; usually case history is used by doctors to investigate the patients. This is the main difference between a case study and case history.

(i) What is a Case Study?

A case study is a research method used to investigate an individual, a group of people, or a particular phenomenon. The case study has been used in many disciplines especially in social science, anthropology, sociology, psychology, and political science. A case study allows the researcher to gain an in-depth understanding of the topic. To conduct a case study, the researcher can use a number of techniques. For example, observation, interviews, usage of secondary data such as documents, records, etc. It usually goes on for a longer period because the researcher has to explore the topic deeply.

The case study method was first used in the clinical medicine so that the doctor has a clear understanding of the history of the patient. Various methods can be used in a case study for example a psychologist use observation to observe the individual, use interview method to broaden the understanding. To create a clear picture of the problem, the questions can be directed not only to the individual on whom the case study is being conducted but also on those who are related to the individual. A special feature of case studies is that it produces qualitative data that are rich and authentic.

(ii) What is a Case History?

Unlike the case study that refers to a method, a case history refers to a record of an individual or even a group. Case histories are used in many disciplines such as psychology, sociology, medicine, psychiatry, etc. It consists of all the necessary information of the individual. In medicine, a case history refers to a specific record that reveals the personal information, medical condition, the medication that has been used and special conditions of the individual. Having a case history can be very beneficial in treatment of disease. However, a case history does not necessarily have to be connected to an individual; it can even be of an event that took place. The case history is a recording that narrates a sequence of events. Such a narrative allows the researcher to look at an event in retrospect.

Techniques used for Case Studies

The techniques of case studies includes –

(i) Observation

It is a systematic data collection approach. Researchers use all of their senses to examine people in natural settings or naturally occurring situations. Observation of a field setting involves: prolonged engagement in a setting or social situation.

(ii) Interview

It is questioning and discussing to a person for the purpose of an evaluation or to generate information. (iii) Secondary Data

Secondary data refers to data that was collected by someone through secondary sources. (iv) Documents

Any writing that provides information, especially information which is of official in nature.

(v) Records

Anything that provides permanent information which can rely on or providing an evident officially.

Sources of Data for Case Study

In case study, information may be collected from various sources. Some of the important sources include:

Life histories
Personal documents
Letters and records
Biographies
Information obtained through interviews
Observation
Types of Case Study

The following are the types of case study according to the Graham R Gibbs (2012) –

Individual case study: This study was first done by Shaw, Clifford R. (1930). In individual case study, life of a particular person, his activities and his totalities were accompanied.
Set of individual case study: Group of person that practice different culture was studies. As for instance those lives in rural area and those living in urban area there will different cases between them.
Community studies: In community studies, it may include hundreds of people from a community that picked upon for some reason.
Social Group Studies: Group of people that defined their social position, for example a group of musician or a group of drugs taker
Studies of organizations and institutions: Study for a particular organizations or an institutions
Studies of events, roles and relationships: Similar to individual case study but more focus on events, roles and relationships that involved. For example we can take the role of a housewife.

Identifying a Case Study:

Determine if a case study will answer your research question

Identify the case and find out what type of case study method or technique will be employed

When the researcher makes interpretations, the researcher should be able to learn the meaning of the case data while interpreting

How to plan a case study?

The following points are required to plan a case study such as –

Conceptual Framework: based on the theory it displays the important features of a case study and show relationships between features.

Research Questions: Consist of conceptual framework which is consisting of focused and answerable questions.

Research Design: Plan out of what to include or what not to include before data collection

Methods and Instruments: an appropriate method should be employed to answer the research question

Analysis of Data and interpretation: Collected information should be analysed using statistical tools and interpret the findings incorporating the ideas and knowledge gathered during data collection

Advantages and Limitations

6.1 Advantages of Case Study

The following are some of the advantages of case study –

a) It facilitates intensive study and in-depth analysis of a social unit which help in contradicting established theory.

b) In-depth and comprehensive information are collected through this method which helps in stimulating new research.

c) It is suitable for collecting data pertaining to sensitive areas of a social phenomenon.

d) It helps to collect details regarding the diverse habits, traits and qualities of the unit under investigation (Kothari, 2014).

e) The researcher can understand better the social change of different facets of a social unit every now and then.

f) This study can be a means to understand the past of a social unit because of its emphasis of historical analysis.

g) The researcher can used any type of methods like interview, questionnaire, documents, self-reports etc.

h) Case study enables to generalize the knowledge amusing from the information collected.

i) A real personal experience can be recorded which enlighten and reveal the real man’s inner determined.

j) The data obtained through case study is useful for formulation of hypothesis and preparation of schedule and questionnaire for such types of study and for further research (Kothari, 2014).

k) It helps in enhancing his/her experience, ability and skill in content analysis of the data.

l) It is useful for therapeutic and administrative purposes, particularly in diagnosis, treatment and therapy etc.

6.2 Limitations of Case Study

a) Case history records could be open to errors due to faulty selection of case and inaccurate observation (Kothari, 2014).

b) There are chances of inaccuracy of the data as no uniform and standardized system of recording case histories has been developed.

c) Data collected from case study usually based on several assumptions which may not be very realistic at times

d) This method is mainly qualitative rather than quantitative, hence there may be question of subjectivity.

e) It is very difficult to draw generalizations on the basis of a few cases.

f) Sampling is not possible in case study as this method can be used only in a limited unit.

g) The information collected from case study is incomparable since each informant gives his/her own opinion. Therefore, replication is not possible.

h) Since this method is fully based on the informant, sometimes the informant himself thinks that he/she have the full knowledge and the information given by them may include some fake also.

i) The investigator’s bias might distort the quality of the case study (Kothari, 2014).

j) Case Study is time-consuming and costly in certain cases.

k) This method cannot be effectively used in big and complex societies (Kothari, 2014).

Case study is an important method employed for collection of qualitative data for an in depth, intensive and comprehensive scientific study of a social unit. This social unit can be an individual, a family, a community, a group or even an entire society. Case study is quite different from the case history which focuses on the recording of personal information. Different methods of case study such as individual, community, social group, organization and events using appropriate techniques (observation, interview, secondary data like documents and records) are used based on the objectives of the research problem. The main sources of data in case studies includes life histories, personal documents, letters and records, biographies, information obtained through interviews and observation. Case studies facilitate intensive study and in-depth analysis of a social unit contradicting established theory. It helps in contradicting established theory and stimulating new research. However, difficulties arises in case studies due to a number of reasons which includes inconsistency in data, not possible to replicate the findings, interviewing key and right informants, expertise of the investigator, constant monitoring of interaction between the theoretical issues being studied and collected data, and interpretation of the data needs to be carefully considered.

IMAGES

Focus Groups
Focus Group in Market Research: Types, Examples and Best Practices
What Is Focus Group Discussion In Research Methodology
Using Surveys and Focus Groups to Evaluate Professional Development
Pros and cons of focus groups vs. interviews: an in-depth review
Focus Group: What It Is & How to Conduct It + Examples

VIDEO

Day-1 Tips for conducting Group Discussion as Innovative Teaching Practices
#Case_study_method#notes #study #psychology #PG #BEd
Group Case Study of Business Analytics Fundamentals T1 2024
Day-1 Case Study Method for better Teaching
Day-2, Case Study Method for better Teaching
Day-2 Case Study Method for better Teaching

COMMENTS

Case Studies, Interviews & Focus Groups
Focus groups are a popular method for collecting qualitative data in the social sciences. Doing Focus Groups provides a concise, practical introduction to planning and organizing successful focus groups. Barbour discusses the advantages and limitations of using group discussion and demonstrates effective methods for collecting and analyzing data.
What is a Focus Group
Step 1: Choose your topic of interest. Step 2: Define your research scope and hypotheses. Step 3: Determine your focus group questions. Step 4: Select a moderator or co-moderator. Step 5: Recruit your participants. Step 6: Set up your focus group. Step 7: Host your focus group. Step 8: Analyze your data and report your results.
What is the difference between a multiple case study and a focus group
Islamic Azad University. Multiple case studies are based on replication logic; either theoretical or literal where as focus group is one type of qualitative interview, which discuss among small ...
Chapter 12. Focus Groups
Focus groups are widely used by nonresearchers, so it is important to distinguish these uses from the research focus group. Businesses routinely employ marketing focus groups to test out products or campaigns. Jury consultants employ "mock" jury focus groups, testing out legal case strategies in advance of actual trials.
Case Study Method: A Step-by-Step Guide for Business Researchers
Although case studies have been discussed extensively in the literature, little has been written about the specific steps one may use to conduct case study research effectively (Gagnon, 2010; Hancock & Algozzine, 2016).Baskarada (2014) also emphasized the need to have a succinct guideline that can be practically followed as it is actually tough to execute a case study well in practice.
Case Study
A case study is a qualitative research method that involves the in-depth exploration and analysis of a particular case, which can be an individual, group, organization, event, or community. The primary purpose of a case study is to generate a comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the case, including its history, context, and dynamics.
What Is a Case Study?
Revised on November 20, 2023. A case study is a detailed study of a specific subject, such as a person, group, place, event, organization, or phenomenon. Case studies are commonly used in social, educational, clinical, and business research. A case study research design usually involves qualitative methods, but quantitative methods are ...
Interviews & Focus Groups
The use of focus groups is intended to collect data through interactive and directed discussions by a researcher. It is a form of qualitative research consisting of a group conversation in which prompts are given to elicit sharing data about their perceptions, opinions, beliefs, and attitudes. Researchers should select members of the focus ...
A Practical Guide to Focus-Group Research
A Case Study One case study will be used as an example of focus-group research throughout this article. Participants in the case study were undergraduate students who were asked to take part in some institutional research that was intended to inform university policy on the provision of its IT resources. The case study was published in Studies ...
What is a Focus Group? Definition, Questions, Examples and Best
A focus group, a cornerstone of qualitative research employed in market research and social sciences, gathers a select group of 6 to 10 participants. This method facilitates a guided discussion led by a skilled moderator, aiming to delve into participants' opinions, perceptions, and attitudes regarding a specific topic.
What the Case Study Method Really Teaches
What the Case Study Method Really Teaches. Summary. It's been 100 years since Harvard Business School began using the case study method. Beyond teaching specific subject matter, the case study ...
Interviews and focus groups in qualitative research: an update for the
A focus group is a moderated group discussion on a pre-defined topic, for research purposes. 28,29 While not aligned to a particular qualitative methodology (for example, grounded theory or ...
PDF Comparing the Five Approaches
The differences are apparent in terms of emphasis (e.g., more observations in ethnog-raphy, more interviews in grounded theory) and extent of data collection (e.g., only interviews in phenomenology, multiple forms in case study research to provide the in-depth case picture). At the data analysis stage, the differences are most pronounced.
What Is a Focus Group?
Step 1: Choose your topic of interest. Step 2: Define your research scope and hypotheses. Step 3: Determine your focus group questions. Step 4: Select a moderator or co-moderator. Step 5: Recruit your participants. Step 6: Set up your focus group. Step 7: Host your focus group. Step 8: Analyse your data and report your results.
Case Study; Focus Group Technique; Content Analysis (Key Points to
Particular situations and incidents like riots and conflicts are more appropriate for this method as they require an in-depth study. The case study method is a very popular form of qualitative analysis. Pauline V. Young describes case study as "a comprehensive study of a social unit be that unit a person, a group, a social institution, a ...
Case Study Methodology of Qualitative Research: Key Attributes and
A case study is one of the most commonly used methodologies of social research. This article attempts to look into the various dimensions of a case study research strategy, the different epistemological strands which determine the particular case study type and approach adopted in the field, discusses the factors which can enhance the effectiveness of a case study research, and the debate ...
Differentiating between Focus Groups and Interviews
Focus groups, interviews, and other qualitative methods are finding new attention with the advent of technological improvements to video streaming. Quite important, since products can now develop and release in the same time span usually allocated to organizing a traditional qualitative study. The effect on interviews and focus groups is profound.
Two Approaches to Focus Group Data Collection for Qualitative Health
The reasoning for such differences is that our platform to host the videoconferencing focus group was free. ... Gratton M., O'Donnell S. (2011). Communication technologies for focus groups with remote communities: A case study of research with First Nations in Canada. ... (2006). Focus group method and methodology: Current practice and recent ...
Case Study vs. Survey
A case study involves an in-depth analysis of a specific individual, group, or situation, aiming to understand the complexities and unique aspects of the subject. It often involves collecting qualitative data through interviews, observations, and document analysis. On the other hand, a survey is a structured data collection method that involves ...
PDF Comparing focus groups and individual interviews: findings from a
Individual interviews generated significantly more relevant and unique ideas than focus groups. focus groups generated more elaboration on ideas. number of useful items for both health professionals and patients, individual. instruments is affected by item-. life instrument for patients with lower-limb.
Case Study vs. Descriptive Approach to Research
The case study approach allows for in-depth analysis of specific cases, providing rich and detailed information. On the other hand, the descriptive approach provides a broader overview of populations, allowing for generalizations and statistical analysis. Both approaches have their merits and limitations, and researchers should choose the most ...
Comparing focus groups and individual interviews: findings from a
Our study sample consisted of 350 African-American men living in Durham, North Carolina. Participants were randomized into either a focus group arm or individual interview arm, and were asked the same open-ended questions about their health-care seeking behavior.
Case Study Method
This is the main difference between a case study and case history. (i) What is a Case Study? A case study is a research method used to investigate an individual, a group of people, or a particular phenomenon. The case study has been used in many disciplines especially in social science, anthropology, sociology, psychology, and political science.

Research Methods at SCS

Case Studies

What is the difference between a multiple case study and a focus group?

Popular answers (1)

Top contributors to discussions in this field

All Answers (12)

Similar questions and discussions

Related Publications

Chapter 12. Focus Groups

Focus Groups: What Are They and When to Use Them

How to Conduct a Focus Group Interview/Discussion

During the Focus Group

After the Focus Group

Advanced: Focus Groups on Sensitive Topics

Further Readings

Have a language expert improve your writing

What Is a Case Study? | Definition, Examples & Methods

Table of contents

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Cite this Scribbr article

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

What the Case Study Method Really Teaches

Partner Center

Interviews and focus groups in qualitative research: an update for the digital age

Similar content being viewed by others

Determinants of behaviour and their efficacy as targets of behavioural change interventions

Participatory action research

Digital twins for health: a scoping review

Overview of qualitative research

Types of interview

Conducting an interview

Box 1: Example of a topic guide

Focus groups

Focus group considerations

Focus group management

Author information

Corresponding author

Rights and permissions

About this article

Share this article

Quick links

Have a language expert improve your writing

What Is a Focus Group? | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples

Table of contents

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Differences between types of interviews

Topics favorable to focus groups

Number of participants

Confirm a time and date

Confirm whether it will take place in person or online

Consent and ethical considerations

Preparation prior to participation

Starting the focus group

Leading the discussion

Disadvantages

Cite this Scribbr article

Is this article helpful?

Tegan George

Request a call back.

Click Here To Download Brochure

Focus Groups

Always Remember Pragmatics

Assessing Strengths and Similarities

Focus Groups and Interviews: Faster and More Relevant Online

Sign Up for our Newsletter

How to Facilitate Meaningful Insights: Strategies for Effective Focus Group Discussions

How to Optimize Engagement with a Virtual Focus Group: Strategies and Tips

Maximize the number of research projects completed by year’s end: Yes, it can be done

Case Study vs. Descriptive Approach to Research

Further Detail

Case Study Approach

Descriptive Approach

18 Case Study Method

IMAGES

VIDEO

COMMENTS