This blog article was originally posted on When the Field is Online, a Substack blog by qualitative research methodologist and author Janet Salmons, PhD. We highly recommend visiting Janet’s blog and subscribing here.

Online focus groups take a variety of forms, each with specific communication needs that influence our choice of technological setting.

One big distinction relates to timing: do moderators and participants interact in real time, or not? Naturally there are pros and cons to each choice when choosing synchronous versus asynchronous focus groups.

Everyone is online at the same time in synchronous focus groups. This means the conversation can proceed naturally, comparable to a sit-down meeting around a table. The advantage is that participants can respond to the moderator and each other in the moment. Researchers learn about participants’ first impressions, their top-of-mind reactions to questions, prompts, or stimuli. There is an immediacy in participants’ reactions to others in the group.

A defined lapse of time between the moderator’s question and participants’ responses characterizes an asynchronous focus group. Participants in different time zones, with different commitments, can engage when it fits their respective schedules. In addition to convenience, asynchronous focus groups allow participants to reflect on the questions, and perhaps find examples or evidence to strengthen their responses.

In between, there are options for communication that allow for an elongated conversation even though the moderator and participants are not online at precisely the same time. Near-synchronous exchanges allow for more flexibility and inclusion, while keeping the conversation moving forward.

Given the purpose of the study and the geographic locations of participants, what will best fit your study? Do you want immediacy or flexibility? Do you want gut reactions or considered answers? Do you want to schedule a time, conduct the group, and move on to the next stage of the research project? Or do you want to build answers to your research questions in a sequential fashion?

 

Another consideration: will communication be primarily verbal with spoken questions and responses or primarily written? Either option is possible in synchronous or asynchronous online focus groups.

Communicating verbally comes naturally to some people and most people can speak faster than they can type. Participants listen to each other and add their own perspectives. That said, some participants might be reluctant to talk and prefer a written option. They might not all share the same first language, so prefer to take the time to read and translate. Or they might be responding in a location where it would be inappropriate to speak, or where they’d risk being overheard. Or they might not have access to the kinds of broadband-reliant tools that are used in verbal communication online.

In either case, will you use visual materials such as graphics, artwork or artifacts, videos or photographs as stimuli in the questioning, or as representations or examples shared by participants? If so, what will be used, how? As mentioned in previous posts, when visuals or media are created or selected by the researcher, they can ensure that there are no copyright restrictions or depictions of people who are not consenting participants. If visuals or media are to be created or selected by participants, researchers might not have permission to use the images with other people, in presentations, or publications. (See More Creative Research Methods and Ownership, Anonymity, and Rights in previous newsletters.)

Information and Communications Technologies (ICTs) for Focus Groups

When thinking through the options and making decisions about what will work for your study the inevitable question is: what information and communication technology tool(s) should I use? Let’s look at the communication functions of focus groups again and think about what technology tools might fit depending on whether we are leaning towards synchronous or asynchronous, primarily written or primarily verbal interactions that may or may not have a visual element.

 

In a videoconference or chat the moderator invites a multimedia exchange. When cameras are used and we can see each other, nonverbal cues provide rich data. Moderators can speak or write questions, or share an image or video that depicts the phenomenon being investigated. Shared whiteboards add visual interactions, generating mind maps or diagrams that illustrate points or show relationships. The moderator can call on participants for answers and comments to each other.

In a primarily text-based focus group the moderator can post or share written questions and prompts to guide the conversation through the set of topics central to the study. Written exchanges can include group text or chat that is synchronous or nearly so. An asynchronous group mail can offer more space for complex questions. In either case participants can include embedded images, media, or links. In a discussion forum researchers post questions and other stimuli, and participants post responses. When using such tools researchers should clarify expectations and the timeframe for responses. Do you want near-synchronous interactions, perhaps 48 hours, or asynchronous interactions over the course of a week? It is always a balancing act to decide whether more time will allow more flexibility and thought behind responses, or whether more time will mean the exchanges get lost and the immediacy of the project recedes from participants’ priorities.