The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Understanding Focus Group Discussions
Abstract
Abstract This book addresses the challenges associated with conducting and writing focus group research. It provides detailed guidance on the practical and theoretical considerations in conducting focus group discussions. The author describes how a methodology section is read and evaluated by others, such as journal reviewers or thesis advisors. The book provides readers with guidance on specific aspects of presenting research findings, such as structuring narrative accounts, developing an argument, using quotations, reporting focus group interaction, visual presentation formats, and strategies for grounding study results. The author describes the challenges in assessing focus groups and details practical strategies for assessing scientific rigor. The book includes case study examples of field research across a range of disciplines and international contexts. The book concludes with an overview of current debates relating to the evaluation of qualitative research, suggesting ways to critique the research design, methodology and results of focus group research.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
In-Person Versus Online Focus Group Discussions: A Comparative Analysis of Data Quality
Woodyatt, C. R., Finneran, C. A., & Stephenson, R. (2016) · Qualitative Health Research · doi:10.1177/1049732316631510 · Cited by 323
Prieto‐Sandoval, V., Jaca, C., Santos, J., Baumgartner, R. J., & Ormazabal, M. (2019) · Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management · doi:10.1002/csr.1761 · Cited by 322
The Role of Religion, Spirituality and/or Belief in Positive Ageing for Older Adults
Malone, J., & Dadswell, A. (2018) · Geriatrics · doi:10.3390/geriatrics3020028 · Cited by 197
Drinking Water Security Challenges in Rohingya Refugee Camps of Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh
Akhter, M., Uddin, S. M. N., Rafa, N., Hridi, S. M., Staddon, C., & Powell, W. (2020) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su12187325 · Cited by 68
Kresin, S., Kremer, K., & Büssing, A. G. (2024) · Science Education · doi:10.1002/sce.21855 · Cited by 32
Metadata
- Authors
- Hennink, M. M., & Leavy, P.
- Venue
- Oxford University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press
- Published
- 2014-01-30
- OpenAlex
- W4245145619
- Cited by
- 324
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 6.43
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Understanding Focus Group Discussions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199856169.001.0001
- The paper
- Hennink, M. M., & Leavy, P. (2014). Understanding Focus Group Discussions. Oxford University Press eBooks. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof%3Aosobl/9780199856169.001.0001
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.