Ravalier PhD Theis.pdf - Anglia Ruskin Research Online

157
2e.1) Critique of Focus Groups
As with the use of any research technique there have been numerous positive and negative comments made
by various researchers about the use of focus group methodologies. There are many potential advantages to the
use of focus groups, chief of which is that when conducted correctly focus groups stress the exchange of
information via open and honest discussions of respondent knowledge, views and beliefs (Hoffman et al., 2002).
Therefore the importance and truth of knowledge as understood and relayed by the participant are gathered.
Additionally, Vaughn et al. (1996) describe individuals as important information sources as they can have the
ability to discuss in critical detail their own knowledge, views and beliefs.
However Chioncel et al. (2003) argue that despite the numerous instructions and precise requirements which
are set out describing how to conduct focus group research, there is a lack of definitive studies on the
methodological aspects, and more precisely the validity and reliability of use. Upon review of the literature
however (e.g. see Smith, 2009; Wliilg, 2008; Chioncel et al., 2003), a method of working for the focus groups was
developed which took into account a variety of different topics. Validity of outcomes were affirmed via participants
'member checking' Dr Andrew McVicar's hand-written focus group notations, as well as the notes and discussions
recorded by Jermaine Ravalier on the flipchart at the front of the room. Reliability of outcome was determined by
comparing focus group outcomes to those from the log and individual interview phases, as well as giving