Online (distributed) focus groups

108 J. Kontio et al.
settings separate groups are needed when timezone differences are too large. The number of participants in asynchronous settings can be larger than in same-time settings, and the participants do not need as fluent typing skills. There is no need to dress-up, and people who are normally hard to recruit can participate more flexibly in their own homes or offices and even at the time that is the most suitable for them. Youth, especially, is very accustomed to communicating via the Internet.
The process needs to be even more carefully planned and administered than in face-to-face situations, and instructions need to be extremely clear and simple. The process advantages of the anonymous communication mode are practically the same as mentioned in the GSS section above. Clients may easily view the group discussion without participants being aware of their presence. However, the process is more exposed to external distractions, e.g. from family members or colleagues. Also, faster typists and those with faster Internet connections may have more influence on the discussion.
There is a no need for dedicated facilities, and in the simplest form, online focus groups can be conducted using freely available discussion board or similar
technology. With synchronous settings, it is necessary for the participants to test
Table 4
Benefits and drawbacks of GSS-mediated, face-to-face focus groups
Benefits Drawbacks+ Possibility to contribute simultaneously
− The medium is less rich (lack of body efficiency increased, everybody’s language, facial expressions etc.),
answers collected for memory text maybe misunderstood+ Supports larger groups (e.g. 15–25)
− High travelling costs (participants and more heterogeneous groups and moderators+ Possibility for anonymous contributions
− High rental costs of venue encourages confidential and honest with GSS
sharing of opinions. The comments can however be tagged to enable identification of the same person’s comments+ Group thinking (social conformity) as well
− Moderator must have expertise on as domineering are alleviated
GSS technology+ Participants feel more comfortable giving
− Not everybody is willing to use computers negative or controversial feedback+ Ideas are not evaluated based on
− A backup plan needed in case of the presenter technology breakdown+ The process usually stays focused without
− Fluent typing skills are needed varying any external distractions (and if they happen, typing speeds may have the facilitator can respond immediately) unfavourable effects on the process+ Possibility to include quick electronic
− Anonymity might induce free-riding surveys and polls, also discuss results or flaming (less discretion and tact)
and pinpoint disagreements+ Transcription expenses are eliminated,
− Not suitable if capturing body the transcripts are complete and language is vital immediately available+ Structured agenda aids in keeping
− Possibility for an anchoring effect (first time and replicating several comment maybe overtly influential)
groups with different participants+ Moderator may give instructions verbally

4 The Focus Group Method as an Empirical Tool in Software Engineering their connection to the dedicated forum in good time before the session starts. The
costs are relatively low as there are neither travelling nor transcribing costs involved see Table 5 fora summary).
Many market researchers recommend that topics related to web-based systems, information technology or the Internet are especially suitable for the
Table 5
Benefits and drawbacks of online focus groups (S or A in parenthesis if specific for synchronous or asynchronous)
Benefits Drawbacks+ No geographical limits for participation
− The medium is less rich (lack of body except that separate groups maybe language, facial expressions etc.),
needed for different time zones in S, text maybe misunderstood also rural areas reached+ No travelling costs
− Not everybody is willing to use computers+ Possibility to contribute simultaneously
− Basic (A) or fluent (S) typing skills are efficiency increased, everybody’s needed for both participants and answers collected for memory the moderator+ Also suitable for heterogeneous groups
− Moderator must have expertise on the technology+ Possibility for anonymous contributions
− Need for an Internet connection encourages confidential and honest sharing of opinions. The comments can however be tagged to enable identification of the same person’s comments+ Group thinking (social conformity) as
− Online information security risks involved well as domineering are alleviated+ Participants also feel more comfortable
− Participants should pretest the forum giving negative or controversial feedback to eliminate technical difficulties (S+ Ideas are not evaluated based on
− Max. ten participants/group for effective the presenter management of online group dynamics (S+ Supports large groups of 25–40
− Faster typers and those with faster Internet participants (A) connections may have too much influence S+ Transcription expenses are eliminated
− More difficult to verify participant identity+ Transcripts are complete and immediately
− Moderators need to know how available to assure that all participants are contributing+ Convenient as there is no need to dress up,
− Larger probability for outside distractions (Sand participation is possible from home,
office etc+ Possibility to contribute at a time that
− Youth audience requires that the moderator suits best (A) knows their chat vocabulary and use of emoticons etc+ Possibility to comeback and continue
− Anonymity might induce free-riding or discussion (A) flaming (less discretion and tact+ Reaches groups that are hard to recruit
− Not suitable if capturing body language otherwise (e.g. parents, business is vital professionals with limited time+ Incentive costs are smaller for participants
− Not suitable if there is a need to show prototypes or 3D-models, or products need to be handheld
(continued)

110 J. Kontio et al.
Table 5
(continued)
Benefits Drawbacks+ Youth is already more accustomed to
− Not suitable if client material is highly computer-mediated-communication than confidential verbal discussions+ Suitable for studying technology-
− Show rates are lower than in FTF ses- related topics sions, as participation requires a high level of motivation and interest. Moreover- recruitment is thus needed+ Clients may view the group without
− Developing rapport and gaining the trust participants being aware of their presence of the participants is demanding+ Provides social equalization and
− Physically demanding to type and egalitarian data collection read for 60–90 min virtually (S)
method as socioeconomic status, ethnicity, nationality or gender maybe unknown Techies may attempt to conduct groups, although they might lack important moderator qualifications Bulletin boards maybe too exhaustive too read, and participants may just answer their own opinions (A Bulletin boards may generate an enormous amount of text that requires extra reading and analysis time (A Pair friendships may develop (participants engage in their own dialogue and alienate the rest)
online environment. Thus, software engineering researchers should consider online focus group studies, too. Sweet (2001) concludes that the future promises many advancements for online groups including sophisticated visual aids, real-time video and sound, accurate voice recognition, and videoconferencing. We expect that the recent developments in IP-based multiparty video and audio conferencing tools will bring online practice forward in the next 5 years. Many end-users are already more familiar than business people with the utilization of web-cameras, Skype and Messenger conversations and conferences.

Download 1.5 Mb.

Share with your friends: