to tell you about what I do to feel well . . .’’ and ‘‘Now I’m going to tell you about things that support me in doing things so I feel well . . .’’ The open letters were evaluated together with five adolescents in advance and were shown to be adequate. The students kept their letters; they were not included in the data collection. We constructed a guide with questions concerning health promotion, for example ‘‘What do you do to feel well?’’ and ‘‘What supports you to keep a healthy behavior?’’ In accordance with the recommendations of Redmond and Curtis (2009), follow-up questions were posed to obtain richer material. One individual interview was per- formed to evaluate the interview guide in advance and it was shown to be sufficient. The focus group discussions were conducted in a room without dis- tractions at the students’ school during the school day. Two researchers without professional connec- tions with the students performed the focus group interviews. The first author acted as a moderator, supporting the discussion, and the second author wrote field notes, which were useful when transcrib- ing the discussions. When the focus groups were performed, the researchers adopted a neutral ap- proach towards the opinions of the informants to avoid influencing the material (Holloway & Wheeler, 2010). The interviews lasted between 40 and 60 min; they were sound-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data analysis The transcribed data material from the focus group discussions were analysed as a whole. An induc- tive qualitative approach was used (Elo & Kynga¨s, 2008). The qualitative latent content analysis was mainly inspired by Granheim and Lundman (2004) and we used the following procedure: (1) The written material was first read through several times to obtain a sense of the overall data. (2) In the next step the codes and the related text were collected and sorted into prelimin- ary categories. During this process, the first author strove to be close to the text. (3) By going back and forth between the pre- liminary categories, the codes and the text categories were identified. (4) The underlying meaning of the categories was finally interpreted and formulated into themes. Steps 2 and 3 were performed with support of N’Vivo software. All authors took an active part in the analysis of the data. Trustworthiness of the Swedish adolescents and health promotion results was addressed through reasoning in the group and through the performance of stepwise reanalysis, leading to refinement of themes. The preliminary results were also discussed with colleagues with experience of working with qualitative methods. Ethical considerations Adolescents belong to a group that is considered especially vulnerable in society; therefore conducting research in collaboration with them presents many challenges (Rogers, Kinsman, Santelli, & Silber, 1999). Confidentiality was guaranteed and ensured by analyzing the material on a group level to ensure that no individuals could be identified. All of the adolescents agreed to participate on a voluntary basis and their autonomy was maximized by con- ducting discussions in focus groups. At the begin- ning of each focus group, the students were asked not to disseminate any information they obtained during the focus group discussion. Focus groups can be considered to be ethically appealing because people can have their say under conditions that are more familiar than an individual interview and participants can choose not to speak when the group strays into sensitive areas (Raby, 2010). Focus groups can give weight to the participants’ opinions, lessening the influence of the moderator since the participants are influenced by each other (Dahlin-Ivanoff & Hultberg, 2006). The age-based power imbalance between the researcher and the respondent is also less apparent than it would be in a one-to-one situation since the children are more numerous (Wilkinson, 1998). The transcribed ma- terial and audio recording are locked up to prevent unauthorized persons gaining access to them. The research ethics committee in Umea˚, Sweden ap- proved the study before the start of the research project (date of issue: February 11, 2011, applica- tion registration number: dnr 2010-337-31 O¨). Results The results were formulated into one main theme and three subthemes (Table I) and quotes from the focus groups are used to illustrate the conclusions drawn. The quotes are labeled with M for mod- erator, the number of focus group (1 6) and the number of participant (1 7). Being competent, ambivalent and creative at the same time The main theme consisted of three subthemes: being a digital native for better and for worse, knowing what’s healthy and sometimes doing it, Citation: Int J Qualitative Stud Health Well-being 2012; 7: 17726 - http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/qhw.v7i0.17726 3 (page number not for citation purpose)