Off track or on point? Side comments in focus groups with teens.

IF 3.2 1区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Qualitative Research Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2023-05-29 DOI:10.1177/14687941231176931
Lindsay C Sheppard, Rebecca Raby
{"title":"Off track or on point? Side comments in focus groups with teens.","authors":"Lindsay C Sheppard, Rebecca Raby","doi":"10.1177/14687941231176931","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Side comments and conversations in focus groups can pose challenges for facilitators. Rather than seeing side comments as problematic behavior or \"failed\" data, we argue that they can add to and deepen analyses. Drawing on focus group data with grade nine students from a study on early work, in this methodological paper we discuss three patterns. First, side comments have highlighted where participants required clarification, and illustrated their views and questions about the research process. Second, side comments added new data to our analysis, including personal reflections, connections to others' comments, and information about participants' uncertainties about the research topics. Third, these comments offered insight into peer relations and dynamics, including participants' reflections on age, and how they deployed gender relations in their discussions. Provided that their use fits within established ethical protocols, we argue that there is a place for attention to side comments, especially in focus group research with young people where adult-teen hierarchies and peer dynamics might lead young people to engage more with peers than directly respond to researchers' questions.</p>","PeriodicalId":48265,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11161323/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941231176931","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/5/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Side comments and conversations in focus groups can pose challenges for facilitators. Rather than seeing side comments as problematic behavior or "failed" data, we argue that they can add to and deepen analyses. Drawing on focus group data with grade nine students from a study on early work, in this methodological paper we discuss three patterns. First, side comments have highlighted where participants required clarification, and illustrated their views and questions about the research process. Second, side comments added new data to our analysis, including personal reflections, connections to others' comments, and information about participants' uncertainties about the research topics. Third, these comments offered insight into peer relations and dynamics, including participants' reflections on age, and how they deployed gender relations in their discussions. Provided that their use fits within established ethical protocols, we argue that there is a place for attention to side comments, especially in focus group research with young people where adult-teen hierarchies and peer dynamics might lead young people to engage more with peers than directly respond to researchers' questions.

偏离轨道还是正题?青少年焦点小组的旁注
焦点小组中的附带评论和对话可能会给主持人带来挑战。我们认为,与其将附带评论视为有问题的行为或“失败”的数据,不如将其添加到分析中并加深分析。在这篇方法论论文中,我们利用九年级学生早期工作研究的焦点小组数据,讨论了三种模式。首先,附带评论强调了参与者需要澄清的地方,并说明了他们对研究过程的看法和问题。其次,附带评论为我们的分析添加了新的数据,包括个人反思、与他人评论的联系,以及参与者对研究主题的不确定性信息。第三,这些评论深入了解了同伴关系和动态,包括参与者对年龄的思考,以及他们如何在讨论中运用性别关系。如果它们的使用符合既定的伦理协议,我们认为有必要关注旁敲侧击,特别是在针对年轻人的焦点小组研究中,成年青少年的等级制度和同伴动态可能会导致年轻人更多地与同伴接触,而不是直接回应研究人员的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.10
自引率
8.30%
发文量
60
期刊介绍: Qualitative Research is a fully peer reviewed international journal that publishes original research and review articles on the methodological diversity and multi-disciplinary focus of qualitative research within the social sciences. Research based on qualitative methods, and methodological commentary on such research, have expanded exponentially in the past decades. This is the case across a number of disciplines including sociology, social anthropology, health and nursing, education, cultural studies, human geography, social and discursive psychology, and discourse studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信