Page 217 -

8.6 Interviews vs focus groups 205

Interactive focus groups present researchers with several logistical and manage-
ment challenges. As conversation takes time, focus groups might be limited to a
relatively small number of questions—fewer than you would cover in comparable
interviews. Conflicts may arise, particularly in focus groups involving controversial
topics. Participants may be unwilling to discuss topics involving potentially sensi-
tive information—perhaps relating to health care or finances—in a group setting.
Individual interviews might be more appropriate for discussion of these topics.
Particularly talkative and opinionated participants can monopolize conversations,
crowding out other viewpoints. If this happens, you will need to find a diplomatic
way to ask chatterboxes to yield the floor. Simply cutting them off brusquely may
give offense and discourage further participation. Disrespectful conduct can cause
similar problems. When conducting a focus group, you must be careful to avoid
power struggles or other confrontations with participants, as such battles can sabo-
tage the whole process (Brown, 1999).
Group dynamics can impose certain limits on the extent to which you can gener-
alize from focus group results. Although you'll know when people disagree strongly
enough to speak up, you may not know how to interpret silence. Participants who sit
quietly may agree with expressed opinions or they may simply be opting out of the
conversation.
Extracting useful data from a focus group requires skillful facilitation. You need
to manage personality conflicts, encourage participation from all participants, keep
the conversation going, monitor the clock, and work through your list of questions,
all the while collecting the data that is at the heart of your effort. With a roomful of
participants to manage, this can be quite a challenge. Fortunately, this need not fall
on only one person's shoulders. A focus group might have two moderators: someone
who is skilled in running such groups can work alongside an HCI researcher who is
familiar with the problem at hand (Brown, 1999). Together, these collaborators can
work together to ensure successful data collection.
The selection of focus group participants can be an art in itself. Should your par-
ticipants represent multiple backgrounds and perspectives, or would a more homog-
enous group be appropriate? What about familiarity—do you want participants who
are unknown to each other or groups consisting of friends or colleagues? Participants
in homogenous groups have common backgrounds and experiences that may help
promote discussion and exchange, giving you viewpoints that represent this shared
context. In some cases, you may not be able to find a broadly diverse group of par-
ticipants. If you are developing a system for use by a narrowly defined group of
experts—such as brain surgeons or HCI researchers—your groups are likely to be
1
largely homogenous, at least in the relevant respects. Homogenous groups have the
disadvantage of narrowing the range of perspectives. For projects that aim to support

1 There may be significant racial, ethnic, gender, and age diversity in any group of brain surgeons or
HCI researchers. However, from the perspective of tools designed to support their professional activi-
ties, their shared training and experiences are likely to be much more important than any demographic
diversity.