Voevodins' Library _ "Focus Groups" 3rd edition / Richard A. Krueger & Mary Anne Casey ... Interview, People, Discussion, Decision Making, Development, Single-Category Design, Multiple-Category Design, Double-Layer Design, Broad-Involvement Design, Audience, Written Plan, Questioning Route, Categories of Questions, Opening Questions, Introductory Questions, Transition Questions, Key Questions, Ending Questions, Campaign, Strategies for Selecting Participants, Sampling Procedures for Focus Groups, Moderating Skills, Moderator, Discussion, Head Nodding, Question, Analysis Strategies, Long-Table Approach, Using the Computer to Help Manage the Data, Rapid Approach, Sound Approach, Principles of Reporting, Written Reports, Narrative Report, Top-Line Report, Bulleted Report, Report Letter to Participants, Oral Reports, Styles of Focus Group Research, Telephone Focus Groups, Internet Focus Groups, Media Focus Groups Voevodin's Library: Interview, People, Discussion, Decision Making, Development, Single-Category Design, Multiple-Category Design, Double-Layer Design, Broad-Involvement Design, Audience, Written Plan, Questioning Route, Categories of Questions, Opening Questions, Introductory Questions, Transition Questions, Key Questions, Ending Questions, Campaign, Strategies for Selecting Participants, Sampling Procedures for Focus Groups, Moderating Skills, Moderator, Discussion, Head Nodding, Question, Analysis Strategies, Long-Table Approach, Using the Computer to Help Manage the Data, Rapid Approach, Sound Approach, Principles of Reporting, Written Reports, Narrative Report, Top-Line Report, Bulleted Report, Report Letter to Participants, Oral Reports, Styles of Focus Group Research, Telephone Focus Groups, Internet Focus Groups, Media Focus Groups



Voyevodins' Library ... Main page    "Focus Groups" 3rd edition / Richard A. Krueger & Mary Anne Casey




Texts belong to their owners and are placed on a site for acquaintance

Q. How Do You Determine Validity?
A. We look at our procedures to determine whether we have used procedures that ensure that the results are trustworthy. Our research team was concerned about the quality of the information and that the results be an accurate reflection of how the participants felt and thought about the topic. We've taken several steps to ensure accuracy of the results.
We pilot tested the questions to ensure that they were understood. We listened to participants when designing the study to understand the conditions needed for free and open sharing. We used a team of moderators who were appropriate for the situation because of their training, experiences, background, and sensitivity. We listened carefully to participants, observed how they answered, and sought clarification on areas of ambiguity. Then, at the conclusion of each focus group, we asked participants to verify our summary comments. We used systematic analysis procedures. In summary, we've followed accepted protocol to ensure that results are trustworthy and accurate.
Background
Essentially this is a question about trusting or judging the results. In the positivistic tradition, it has been important to determine validity because a test or instrument was created to measure something, and occasionally, it would measure the wrong thing. In these quantitative studies, the instrument was a proxy for what was really measured. By contrast, in focus group research, there are no proxies. Words of the participant are used to find out participants' feelings, thoughts, or observations about the topic of discussion. The researcher is able to draw on multiple sources of information that are not normally available to the quantitative researcher. The focus group researcher observes the answers and has an opportunity to follow up and probe to amplify or clarify the response. Moreover, the focus group researcher tan feed back the key points and seek verification from participants.

Thoughts
We are coming to the conclusion that validity is overemphasized in qualitative research. Instead, one should concentrate on good practice.
The goal of the researcher is to understand the respondents' points of view and to be able to communicate these to the audience. For this to occur, a researcher must be concerned with conducting quality studies. Good practices are described in Chapters 2 through 7 and include planning, asking questions, moderating, finding participants, analyzing, and reporting. These actions aren't meant to be lockstep, cookie-cutter procedures but rather guiding principles that inform researcher behavior. They must be modified and adjusted as the environment and situation warrant.
In summary, we suggest that the researcher worry less about the traditional concerns of validity and instead be ready to answer the following question: What are you doing to ensure that you have followed the steps associated with quality research?

<< Isn't This Soft Research?
Can You Generalize? >>