Situational Factors in Focus Group Studies: A Systematic Review
The aim of this study was to see how contextual factors are expressed, used, and analyzed in data collected in focus group discussions (FGDs). The study includes an assessment of how the methodological reporting of contextual factors might influence and improve the trustworthiness of articles. Artic...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
SAGE Publishing
2013-02-01
|
| Series: | International Journal of Qualitative Methods |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691301200116 |
| _version_ | 1818314405099601920 |
|---|---|
| author | Arne Orvik MPolSc Lillebeth Larun PhD Astrid Berland MSc Karin C. Ringsberg PhD |
| author_facet | Arne Orvik MPolSc Lillebeth Larun PhD Astrid Berland MSc Karin C. Ringsberg PhD |
| author_sort | Arne Orvik MPolSc |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The aim of this study was to see how contextual factors are expressed, used, and analyzed in data collected in focus group discussions (FGDs). The study includes an assessment of how the methodological reporting of contextual factors might influence and improve the trustworthiness of articles. Articles reporting workplace health, stress, and coping among health professionals were identified in a systematic review and used in the analysis. By using Vicsek's framework of situational factors for analysis of focus group results as a starting point, we found that contextual factors were most frequently described in the method sections and less frequently in the results and discussion sections. Vicsek's framework for the analysis of focus group results covers six contextual and methodological dimensions: interactional factors, personal characteristics of the participants, the moderator, the environment, time factors, and the content of FGDs. We found that the framework does not include a consideration of psychological safety, ethical issues, or organizational information. To deepen the analysis of focus group results, we argue that contextual factors should be analyzed as methodological dimensions and be considered as a sensitizing concept. Credibility, confirmability, dependability, and transferability can be strengthened by using, reporting, and discussing contextual factors in detail. The study contributes to elucidating how reporting of contextual data may enrich the analysis of focus group results and strengthen the trustworthiness. Future research should focus on clear reporting of contextual factors as well as further develop Vicsek's model to enhance reporting accuracy and transferability. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-13T08:49:07Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-4fa17d9806d64a41ac05b8b687e64977 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1609-4069 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-13T08:49:07Z |
| publishDate | 2013-02-01 |
| publisher | SAGE Publishing |
| record_format | Article |
| series | International Journal of Qualitative Methods |
| spelling | doaj.art-4fa17d9806d64a41ac05b8b687e649772022-12-21T23:53:24ZengSAGE PublishingInternational Journal of Qualitative Methods1609-40692013-02-011210.1177/16094069130120011610.1177_160940691301200116Situational Factors in Focus Group Studies: A Systematic ReviewArne Orvik MPolScLillebeth Larun PhDAstrid Berland MScKarin C. Ringsberg PhDThe aim of this study was to see how contextual factors are expressed, used, and analyzed in data collected in focus group discussions (FGDs). The study includes an assessment of how the methodological reporting of contextual factors might influence and improve the trustworthiness of articles. Articles reporting workplace health, stress, and coping among health professionals were identified in a systematic review and used in the analysis. By using Vicsek's framework of situational factors for analysis of focus group results as a starting point, we found that contextual factors were most frequently described in the method sections and less frequently in the results and discussion sections. Vicsek's framework for the analysis of focus group results covers six contextual and methodological dimensions: interactional factors, personal characteristics of the participants, the moderator, the environment, time factors, and the content of FGDs. We found that the framework does not include a consideration of psychological safety, ethical issues, or organizational information. To deepen the analysis of focus group results, we argue that contextual factors should be analyzed as methodological dimensions and be considered as a sensitizing concept. Credibility, confirmability, dependability, and transferability can be strengthened by using, reporting, and discussing contextual factors in detail. The study contributes to elucidating how reporting of contextual data may enrich the analysis of focus group results and strengthen the trustworthiness. Future research should focus on clear reporting of contextual factors as well as further develop Vicsek's model to enhance reporting accuracy and transferability.https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691301200116 |
| spellingShingle | Arne Orvik MPolSc Lillebeth Larun PhD Astrid Berland MSc Karin C. Ringsberg PhD Situational Factors in Focus Group Studies: A Systematic Review International Journal of Qualitative Methods |
| title | Situational Factors in Focus Group Studies: A Systematic Review |
| title_full | Situational Factors in Focus Group Studies: A Systematic Review |
| title_fullStr | Situational Factors in Focus Group Studies: A Systematic Review |
| title_full_unstemmed | Situational Factors in Focus Group Studies: A Systematic Review |
| title_short | Situational Factors in Focus Group Studies: A Systematic Review |
| title_sort | situational factors in focus group studies a systematic review |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691301200116 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT arneorvikmpolsc situationalfactorsinfocusgroupstudiesasystematicreview AT lillebethlarunphd situationalfactorsinfocusgroupstudiesasystematicreview AT astridberlandmsc situationalfactorsinfocusgroupstudiesasystematicreview AT karincringsbergphd situationalfactorsinfocusgroupstudiesasystematicreview |