I n t r o d u c t i o n t o 

C on duc t i ng

Focus Groups

S o c i a l S c i e n c e T o o l s f o r C o a st a l P r o g r a m s
Social Science Tools for Coastal Programs

Introduction to Conducting Focus Groups

About This Publication

Some of the most challenging decisions in coastal management stem from 

the relationship between people and the environment. The National Oceanic 

and Atmospheric Administration’s Coastal Services Center provides technical 

assistance to coastal management officials addressing complex human-based 

problems. “Introduction to Conducting Focus Groups” is the fifth in a series of 

publications developed to bring information to this audience about the use of social 

science tools in their field of work. For additional information about social science 

tools and applications, please visit www.csc.noaa.gov/cms/human_dimensions/.

About the NOAA Coastal Services Center

The Coastal Services Center, an office within the federal government’s National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), works with state and local 

programs devoted to the wise management of our nation’s coastal resources. The 

NOAA Coastal Services Center provides these programs with tools, training, 

and expertise that might otherwise be unavailable. To learn more about the 

products and services available from this agency, visit www.csc.noaa.gov.
Table of Contents

Focus Groups: An Introduction.......................................................................................1

Focus Groups and Surveys: A Mixed Methods Approach...........................................2

Focus Group Weaknesses...........................................................................................2

Preparing for the Focus Group........................................................................................3

Consider the Degree of Structure...............................................................................3

Selecting Participants.................................................................................................3

Selecting a Moderator ................................................................................................4

Developing Effective Questions.......................................................................................5

Planning the Session .......................................................................................................7

Analyzing the Data .........................................................................................................9

Qualitative Data Analysis Checklist...........................................................................12

Summary ........................................................................................................................13

References .......................................................................................................................14

1

Focus Groups: An Introduction

To be an effective steward of a region’s coastal resources, it is important to 

know as much as possible about the thoughts and perceptions of the region’s 

citizens. A focus group is a good tool to use, because a focus group requires a 

relatively small portion of time from a much smaller number of people than is 

the case with many other social science methods. These efficiencies are usually 

particularly appreciated when public information and engagement is required.

The focus group as a data collection technique is widely used in the natural resource 

management field, though the technique’s origins come from market research. The 

typical objective of a focus group is not consensus or debate, but rather to generate ideas 

and provide opportunities for stakeholders to express feelings about a particular topic.

Formal focus groups have been around since the 1940s, and during this 

time they have been used for an array of purposes (Höijer 2008).

•	 Stimulate new ideas and concepts for both the researcher and the participants

•	 Learn about impressions of product and service 

effectiveness, or management issues

•	 Learn general information about a specific topic

•	 Generate new hypotheses for future research opportunities

•	 Help develop sound quantitative research approaches

•	 Learn how respondents communicate about topics of interest 

(what words they use, what concepts they understand, etc.)

•	 Enhance the utility of survey content and delivery mechanisms

•	 Determine what additional research tools may be 

useful for follow-up information collection

•	 Better interpret previously obtained quantitative information

This document is an introduction to key elements and practices that will 

increase the success of a focus group effort. Topics covered in this publication 

include focus group basics, preparing for the focus group, developing effective 

questions, planning the focus group session, and analyzing the data.

While this publication provides basic information about putting together 

a focus group project, the researcher or facilitator will play a critical 

role in determining the ultimate effectiveness of the effort.
2

Focus Groups and Surveys: A Mixed Methods Approach

A common practice is to use focus groups in combination with other social science 

methods. One of the most common pairings is with surveys (Morgan 1996). Listed 

below are three of the most common tactics for the combined use of these methods.

•	 Most commonly, the survey serves as a primary method and the focus 

group serves a secondary, yet preliminary role. Specifically, the focus 

group is used to help develop effective survey questions. Information 

acquired in a focus group can reveal specific issues of interest, language 

and terminology used by the population of interest, and new ideas that may 

have never been discovered. Such items can help a survey better resonate 

with a target population, subsequently yielding higher quality data.

•	 Another approach uses the focus group as a primary method and a 

survey to guide its application. More specifically, the survey is used to help 

target specific populations for inclusion in the focus group and narrow 

the topics to be addressed. While research suggests this to be an effective 

approach, there are few published studies that incorporate this tactic.

•	 A third approach again uses the survey as a primary method, while the 

focus group is used to assist in interpreting survey results. Often, survey 

data can be a bit confusing, raising such questions as how to interpret 

neutral ratings or why respondents answer “no opinion” on a certain 

topic. Focus groups can help clarify such perplexing information.

Focus Group Weaknesses

As with any research method, focus groups are not without weaknesses. Challenges 

associated with focus groups are most often attributed to two main factors: 

the facilitator and the basic nature of group discussions (Calder 1977). 

•	 Research suggests that group discussion can cause participant 

attitudes to become more extreme, which could in turn result in 

greater unification of group opinions or polarize participants.

•	 Focus groups require self-disclosure of information by participants, but 

the views and values of participants may render certain topics off limits. 

Participants may also convey information that may portray themselves 

“more favorably,” which could slightly distort gathered information.

•	 Emotionally charged issues may result in argument.

A skilled facilitator and adequate advance planning can lessen and possibly eliminate 

some of these weaknesses.
3

Preparing for the Focus Group

Focus group information is gathered in a setting where participants are free to interact 

with other group members. While group interactions create a more natural, conversational 

feel than experienced in one-on-one interviews, the focus group still generally maintains 

a certain degree of structure and control via the moderator, questions, and procedures.

Consider the Degree of Structure

Social scientists differ over the degree of structure and standardization needed in cases 

where more than one focus group is being conducted.

Focus groups commonly follow a fixed design, which includes a formalized set of 

questions and procedures. This allows the information collected to be compared against 

the results of additional focus groups if needed. A notable shortcoming of a fixed approach 

is that the researcher must remain loyal to the questions and approaches selected in the 

initial planning phase of project design, which can cause difficulty and frustration once 

the focus group session begins. A truly “fixed” design can restrict the facilitator’s ability 

to explore issues as freely or deeply as he or she might like when the opportunity arises, 

which seems to defeat the purpose of using a “qualitative” approach to data collection.

Undoubtedly, a certain degree of standardization is required to yield good quality 

results. However, the degree of standardization is often left to the discretion of the 

researcher, which means he or she can incorporate minor changes while the focus 

group is in progress to accommodate any unique or unforeseen circumstances.

Selecting Participants

Social scientists also differ over the optimal number of respondents to include in 

a focus group. Estimates generally range from six to twelve individuals who are 

homogeneous to a specific variable (e.g., gender, age range, educational level). Too few 

people may not generate enough active conversation, while too large a group may lead 

to some participants not having an opportunity to express themselves. Though not 

always possible, it is ideal to select participants who do not know one another, which 

may encourage them to speak more freely and not censor certain information.
4

Duration of the focus group is another point of debate. Suggestions range from a 

brief 30 minutes to 2.5 hours in length. A more generally agreed-upon time frame 

is 1.5 to 2 hours in length.

“Segmentation” of participants is another issue. In the field of marketing research, 

target audiences are segmented into smaller subgroups according to specific, 

categorical attributes (e.g., gender, job title). Segmentation therefore means more 

than one focus group (i.e., one focus group session per population segment), with the 

typical number being four to six in a given research project. The criteria by which a 

population is segmented focus directly on the questions and objectives of the study.

The practice of segmentation has distinct advantages, the first of which is that it 

builds an element of comparison into the project from the very beginning. When 

engaging a heterogeneous group, it may be difficult afterwards to determine how 

specific population segments felt about discussed topics. Segmentation helps take 

much of this guesswork out of the analysis. A second advantage is that segmentation 

has the ability to enhance the discussion by providing a common thread across 

participants in the group. These commonalities can be used to focus conversation 

and enhance the organization of information. One notable disadvantage of 

segmentation, however, is that it can lead to a much larger number of groups. It is 

important to consider project resources before any segmentation efforts begin.

Selecting a Moderator

Securing an effective moderator for the focus group is very important. Moderating 

is a skill that may be perceived as being easy, but this task requires skill and 

experience to be effective. Leaders need a balance of time management skills 

and flexibility, the ability to probe deeply into topics that arise, and the 

experience to effectively manage diverse personalities. An added bonus is for the 

moderator to have at least a basic awareness of the subject at hand to further 

engage participants and improve the quality of resulting information.

In many instances, the project leader or researcher serves as the focus group 

moderator, but this is not always the case. The project leader may not have the 

experience necessary to lead the session, or may impose certain biases on the 

group that reflect desired outcomes. In these instances, it is critical to find 

another individual who can be an effective moderator for the focus group. 
5

Developing Effective Questions

Social methodological research has provided great insight into how best to 

develop and arrange questions to be used in focus groups. While there are various 

approaches, certain common elements exist in the process. The following is 

a general sequence that is followed in the question-development process.

1. Revisit the project goals.

While it seems like an obvious first step, it is important to consider project goals before 

developing the focus group questions. With your goals and objectives in hand, consider 

the following elements.

•	 What information will specifically benefit this project (as opposed 

to fulfilling the moderator’s own personal interests)?

•	 What are the high-priority items on which information is needed?

2. Determine what information is currently available.

A great benefit to focus group participants and researchers is to seek out information 

that currently exists before developing the list of questions. As with most 

professional fields, coastal managers are a very busy group, and time is a precious 

commodity. Minimizing redundancy of topics and questions helps to reduce 

the level of “fatigue” associated with focus groups and surveys. If the researcher 

has a clear understanding of what information is currently available, then fewer 

questions and public engagement activities may be required over time, increasing 

the potential for public compliance with similar, future engagements.

3. Draft a preliminary list of questions.

With a clear understanding of the project objectives and a firm knowledge of currently 

available information, draft a comprehensive list of questions. At this point, do not 

limit the length or number of questions. This can be done later. The most important 

element of this step is to put these thoughts on paper to evaluate and prioritize.
6

4. Elicit feedback on the draft questions.

Once a preliminary collection of questions has been drafted, it is important 

to have the questions reviewed by other members of the project team, or 

potentially by someone outside of the project team. This step is an important 

one, since it will help decide which questions are most important and which 

items are candidates for omission. This process is like a pilot survey, since 

the project team will also see if the questions are easy to understand and are 

interpreted as intended. This feedback will be valuable in the following step.

5. Revise the list of questions.

At this point, revisit the list of questions and consider the feedback obtained in the 

previous step. It is here that the final focus group questions will begin to surface. As 

the feedback is incorporated, the number of questions under consideration should 

become fewer. The following suggestions were adapted from Krueger (2000).

•	 Use only open-ended questions.

– “What do you think about the proposed shoreline management law?”

– “Where do you get relevant information on this proposed law?”

– “What problems do you see associated with this law?”

•	 Avoid dichotomous questions, since they yield minimal response.

– “Are you in favor of proposed shoreline management law?” (Yes/No)

– “Should the fisheries, habitat, or water quality office be responsible for the law?”

•	 “Why” is seldom asked. As an alternative, consider asking about specific 

components that directly relate to the project.

•	 Use “think back” questions to provide contextual information. Highlight a past 

event or a past experience common to all participants. Avoid questions that put 

the focus on the future.

•	 Use a variety of questions that will encourage participant involvement. Questions 

may include perceptions, preferences, rating scales, and case examples.

•	 Order questions in a sequence that goes from general to highly specific.

•	 Budget time for unanticipated questions.

6. Seek final approval of the question list.

Have the questions reviewed one final time by the project team or professional and peer 

reviewers. This is an opportunity to make any final modifications before moving forward 

with the focus group session.
7

Planning the Session

Ample planning for the focus group engagement is crucial for a successful outcome. 

Once the question-development process is complete, it is time to identify a venue for 

the focus group session. The site should be convenient to participants, as well as provide 

a point of neutrality. For example, if participants may be against a local ordinance 

to be discussed, it might not be a good idea to hold the focus group in a government 

office building. Also consider that the focus group does not have to occur in a formal 

boardroom setting. A casual atmosphere, such as in someone’s home, will also work.

When a venue for the session has been secured, it is a good idea to invite the desired 

participants as soon as possible, since a series of focus groups can take anywhere from 

a couple of weeks to several months to complete. The timeframe is heavily dependent 

on the availability of participants, since the focus group session should be scheduled 

at a day and time that is ideal for participants. It may be necessary to identify ideal 

times from each participant and then determine a time that works best for the group.

When inviting participants, consider the level of detail provided to them. It is usually 

a good idea to inform candidates of the goal of the focus group in general terms, 

but not the specific discussion topics and questions. This will prevent participants 

from becoming sensitized to the subject matter between the time of the invitation 

and the session. Providing a basic level of information will satisfy curiosity and 

ensure that potential participants are interested and willing to participate.

After making decisions about the participants, it is time to focus on the session itself. 

The most useful resource for mapping out the required logistics is through a process 

agenda. The process agenda is the schedule used by the moderator and others involved in 

staffing the session and should highlight all materials, activities, and associated timing. 

The agenda should include all activities from the preparation time needed to organize the 

meeting space to the debrief session. The following is a general list of items to include in 

the process agenda.

•	 Prepare room and all equipment and supplies

– Sample tasks: arrange tables as needed, set up flip charts to capture 

notes, set up tape recorder, set up laptop for note taking, arrange 

chairs so that participants can see each other, provide name tags
8

•	 Welcome participants as they enter the room.

– Sample tasks: have attendees sign in, distribute any relevant 

handouts, direct them to refreshments, invite them to be seated

•	 Focus group session formally begins

•	 Process overview

– Sample tasks (by researcher or moderator): welcome participants 

and thank them for attending, review purpose for the session, 

introduce moderators, provide a brief overview of the focus 

group process, establish any ground rules to encourage positive 

participation, have participants briefly introduce themselves

•	 Moderator begins focus group questions

•	 Session debrief (an opportunity for the moderator to ensure all 

points have been captured effectively and comprehensively)

– Sample tasks: highlight key points of discussion, answer any final 

questions, describe how results will be used, inform participants if 

(and how) study results will be made available, thank participants 

for their participation, remain in the room until everyone leaves
9

Analyzing the Data

Once data have been collected, it’s time to think about how the results will be reported. 

The following is a systematic approach to the analysis and data interpretation (adapted 

from Taylor-Powell and Renner 2003).

1. Get to know the data – In this preliminary step, the objective is for the investigator 

to become as familiar as possible with the data holdings. This may take a considerable 

amount of time, depending on the volume of information available. If the focus 

group sessions have been recorded (which is recommended), it is useful to transcribe 

the recordings. Listening to the recordings several times and noting the tone (pauses, 

enthusiasm, reluctance) projected by the respondent would become part of the notes, 

along with other impressions (Krueger 2002).

It is important to record these impressions as soon as possible so that critical 

information will not be lost or forgotten. At the same time, also consider the 

usefulness of all data points, since a high volume of data does not guarantee useful 

information. Potential biases of the moderator should also be considered. It is 

important to explain all possible limitations up front to provide a realistic account 

of what the data may explain (or not explain). By concealing such information, the 

strength of the findings and the leading organization’s reputation could be tarnished. 

2. Focus on the analysis – Revisit the project’s purpose and goals. Write down key 

information needs. How should the analysis be focused—by question or topic, 

or by case or group?

3. Categorize information – The purpose is to give meaning to words and phrases. 

Identify trends, general themes, and patterns, including ideas, concepts, behaviors, 

terminology, or phrases used. Organize data into categories that summarize and 

bring meaning to the text. This is the crux of qualitative analysis. This can be 

labor-intensive!
10

4. Identify patterns – When the analysis is underway, connections within 

the text will begin to appear. It is important to take note of the various 

themes and pay close attention to any subtleties that may be important 

to the analysis. The following bullets contain a few pointers.

•	 Within a single category – All the data that pertain to a particular theme 

(category) should be assembled. What are the key ideas being expressed? What 

are the similarities in the way people responded, including the subtle variations? 

Writing a summary that answers these questions for each category is helpful.

•	 Larger or combined categories – Leaders may wish to combine categories 

to form larger, super categories. Doing this usually means working up 

from the more specific categories to larger ideas and concepts. This 

approach helps people see how the parts relate to the whole.

•	 Relative importance – To determine importance, researchers may 

want to count the number of times a theme comes up, or the number 

of times a unique respondent refers to certain themes. These counts 

can provide a rough estimate of relative importance. They are not 

statistically significant, but can reveal general patterns in the data.

•	 Relationships – Two or more themes may occur together consistently in the 

data. An example would be “beach safety” and “police.” From this it might be 

concluded that safe beaches are primarily perceived as a result of frequent police 

patrols. Relationships can help explain why something occurs. Be careful not to 

assume strict cause-and-effect relationships, since this is rarely the case. Seldom 

is human behavior so simple! At the same time, pay attention to statements 

that do not fit into specific themes. This information can often be valuable.
11

5. Interpretation – In this step, researchers should clearly articulate what has been 

learned. This will offer a richness and meaning to the analysis. Some general 

questions to guide the interpretation include the following: what does all this 

information mean? What are the most important aspects? What new information 

has been learned? What are the main points with which the reader should be 

made familiar? Above all, what are the users of this information most interested 

in learning? It is sometimes helpful to include descriptive case examples to 

illustrate key points and display the data in a practical context. Finally, consider 

the use of models with arrows and boxes to display how multiple pieces fit 

together and where gaps exist and greater engagement may be required.

Above all, avoid the use of generalization. Qualitative data are not intended to 

be generalized across populations. Rather they are meant to provide subjective 

insight into the perspectives within a particular population of interest. To avoid 

generalization, select direct quotes carefully if using them in the report. Direct 

quotes are often effective in providing context and meaning, but they can be easily 

misused to exaggerate success or to oversell a particular point, which leads to study 

bias. Be up front about the purpose for using a specific quote and state it within the 

report. Provide enough text to allow the reader to understand the context in which 

it was conveyed. Confidentiality and anonymity are often of critical importance. It 

is very important to consider the consequences of someone figuring out who said 

what! Be sure to get permission to use quotes. It is also helpful to check with others 

on the project team about their opinions regarding the use of selected quotes. 
12

Qualitative Data Analysis Checklist

1. Get to know the data

 Read and familiarize yourself with the information

 Write down impressions

 Describe the integrity and quality of the information

 Explain the limitations

2. Focus on the analysis

 Write down key information needs that are based on goals

 Decide how to focus the analysis (by question? by group? other?)

3. Categorize information

 Identify and write down any trends or themes that present themselves

 Organize your data into these categories

4. Identify connections

 Consider combining similar categories to strengthen data groupings

 Consider the relative importance level of each category, based on goals

 Identify any connections or relationships between categories

5. Interpret the data

 Describe, in depth, what has been learned

 Draw attention to the main points

 Consider what information is most useful for the end user
13

Summary

For coastal programs that want to use a focus group to collect information 

about a target audience, this document provides information about the primary 

components of a successful focus group process. The document pays particular 

attention to the benefits and limitations of this social science tool and the numerous 

considerations when planning a focus group. While the cost and overall degree 

of effort vary according to the specific project, focus groups represent a useful, 

practical, and rewarding data collection method. The frequent use of this tool has 

shown it to be a highly collaborative process for participants and an opportunity 

for the project leader to gain multiple perspectives on the topic of interest.
14

References

Calder, B.J. 1977. “Focus Groups and the Nature of Qualitative Marketing 

Research.” Journal of Marketing Research. Volume 14. Number 3. Pages 353 to 364.

Clark, J.K., and Stein, T.V. 2004. “Applying the Nominal Group 

Technique to Recreational Planning on Public Natural Areas.” Journal 

of Park and Recreation Administration. Volume 22. Pages 1 to 22.

Cox, K.K., J.B. Higginbotham, and J. Burton. 1976. “Applications of Focus Group 

Interviews in Marketing.” The Journal of Marketing. Volume 40. Pages 77 to 80.

DiCamillo, J.A. 1995. “Focus Groups As a Tool for Fish and Wildlife Management: 

A Case Study.” Wildlife Society Bulletin. Volume 23. Number 4. Pages 616 to 620.

Dixon, J. 2005. “Focus Group Facilitation.” White Paper from the 

Centre for Higher Education Quality, Monash University.

Fern, E.F. 1982. “The Use of Focus Groups for Idea Generation: The Effects 

of Group Size, Acquaintanceship, and Moderator on Response Quantity and 

Quality.” Journal of Marketing Research. Volume 19. Number 1. Pages 1 to 13.

Folch-Lyon, E., and J.F. Trost. 1981. “Conducting Focus Group Sessions.” 

Studies in Family Planning. Volume 12. Number 12. Pages 443 to 449.

Gay, L.R. 1996. Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis 

and Application. Prentice-Hall. Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Gibbs, A. 1997. “Focus Groups.” Social Research Update. Winter. Volume 19. Pages 1 to 8.

Green, L., M. Fullilove, D. Evans, and P. Shepard. 2002. “’Hey Mom, 

Thanks!’: Use of Focus Groups in the Development of Place-Specific Materials 

for a Community Environmental Action Campaign.” Environmental 

Health Perspectives. Volume 110. Number 2. Pages 265 to 269.
15

Höijer, B. 2008. “Ontological Assumptions and Generalizations in Qualitative (Audience) 

Research.” European Journal of Communication. Volume 23. Number 3. Pages 275 to 294.

Hsu, C., and B.A. Sandford. 2007. “The Delphi Technique: Making Sense of 

Consensus.” Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation. Volume 12. Pages 1 to 8.

Krueger, R.A. 2000. Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research. 

Sage Publications. Thousand Oaks, CA.

Krueger, R.A. 2002. “Analysis: Systematic Analysis Process.” Website. Accessed 

March 10, 2008, at www.tc.umn.edu/~rkrueger/focus_analysis.html.

Merton, R.K., and P.L. Kendall. 1946. “The Focused Interview.” The American Journal 

of Sociology. Volume 51. Number 6. Pages 541 to 557.

Morgan, D.L. 1992. “Designing Focus Group Research.” In Tools for Primary 

Care Research. Sage Publications. Thousand Oaks, CA.

Morgan, D.L. 1996. “Focus Groups.” Annual Review of Sociology. Volume 22. 

Pages 129 to 152.

Myers, G. 1998. “Displaying Opinions: Topics and Disagreement in 

Focus Groups.” Language in Society. Volume 27. Pages 85 to 111.

Sussman, S., D. Burton, C.W. Dent, A.W. Stacy, and B.R. Flay. 1991. “Use of Focus 

Groups in Developing an Adolescent Tobacco Use Cessation Program: Collective Norm 

Effects.” Journal of Applied Social Psychology. Volume 21. Number 21. Pages 1772 to 1782.

Taylor-Powell, E., and M. Renner. 2003. “Analyzing Qualitative 

Data.” University of Wisconsin–Extension. Madison, WI. Accessed 

March 14, 2009, at http://learningstore.uwex.edu/pdf/G3658-12.pdf.
2234 South Hobson Avenue

Charleston, SC 29405-2413

www.csc.noaa.gov

2009