Focus Group Research — Group Interview Method
Also known as: focus group discussion, FGD, group interview, Odak Grup Araştırması
Focus group research is a qualitative data-collection method in which a trained moderator guides structured discussions with homogeneous groups of six to ten participants to explore ideas, attitudes, and perceptions on a defined topic. Developed from sociological roots in the 1940s and systematised for applied research by Krueger and Casey, the method leverages group interaction as a data source — revealing not just what people think, but how they negotiate and articulate views in a social setting.
Key highlights
- Group interaction produces richer, more nuanced data than solo interviews — participants respond to each other, not just to the researcher.
- Efficient for collecting diverse perspectives from multiple people in a single session.
- Well suited to exploratory work where hypotheses have not yet formed and the researcher needs to understand how people frame a topic in their own language.
- Flexible enough for sensitive topics when the group shares relevant experiences, as social support can encourage disclosure.
Intuition
This section is available to Pro members. Upgrade to Pro
How it works
This section is available to Pro members. Upgrade to Pro
When to use it
Focus groups suit exploratory and descriptive research questions where understanding depth of opinion, shared meaning, or group-level social dynamics matters more than statistical representativeness. They are well suited to health, social science, education, and business contexts. The method requires a moderator guide and recording infrastructure, a minimum of six participants per group, and at least two to three separate sessions to allow comparison across groups. When fewer than ten total participants are available, an in-depth interview or case study is preferable because dynamic discussion cannot emerge at that scale.
Strengths & limitations
- Group interaction produces richer, more nuanced data than solo interviews — participants respond to each other, not just to the researcher.
- Efficient for collecting diverse perspectives from multiple people in a single session.
- Well suited to exploratory work where hypotheses have not yet formed and the researcher needs to understand how people frame a topic in their own language.
- Flexible enough for sensitive topics when the group shares relevant experiences, as social support can encourage disclosure.
- Findings are not statistically representative; the method is not designed for generalisation to populations.
- Group dynamics can suppress minority views — dominant speakers or social desirability pressure may silence dissent.
- Requires a skilled moderator; poor facilitation yields shallow data or allows group think to take over.
- Logistics (recruitment, scheduling, recording, transcription) are demanding relative to survey methods.
Common pitfalls
This section is available to Pro members. Upgrade to Pro
Applications
This section is available to Pro members. Upgrade to Pro
Frequently asked
How many focus groups do I need?
Krueger and Casey recommend a minimum of two to three groups per audience segment. Conduct additional groups until you reach theoretical saturation — when new sessions stop producing novel themes. A single group is never sufficient for drawing conclusions.
How large should each group be?
Six to ten participants is the standard range. Below six, the dynamic exchange that gives focus groups their value tends not to emerge. Above ten, the moderator struggles to involve everyone and the session risks becoming fragmented.
Can focus groups be conducted online?
Yes. Video-conferencing platforms support synchronous online focus groups, and asynchronous online forums have also been used. Online formats can ease recruitment across geography but may reduce the spontaneity of in-person group dynamics and make non-verbal observation harder.
How are focus group findings analysed?
The most common approach is thematic analysis of verbatim transcripts: transcripts are coded, codes are grouped into themes, and themes are compared across groups. The unit of analysis is the group, not the individual — meaning aggregate patterns and dynamic exchanges matter more than counting individual responses.
Sources
- 1.Krueger, R.A. & Casey, M.A. (2014). Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research (5th ed.). Sage.ISBN 978-1483365244
You have read it. What now?
Cite this page
ScholarGate. (2026, June 1). Focus Group. ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/qualitative/focus-group