Reporting and analyzing interactional data collected during focus groups can be a significant challenge for qualitative health researchers. In this article, the authors explore the use of humor among focus group participants as one area of interaction and negotiation that is methodologically interesting and theoretically insightful. They explore discussions about service user involvement in medical education across eight focus groups consisting of medical educators, medical students, and service users. The findings suggest that humor can be used among focus group participants to maintain solidarity, navigate coping strategies, and negotiate power. Not only is humor useful when exploring new concepts, it can also be an indication of wider views that might not be explicit in an analysis of focus group members’ comments alone. The authors urge qualitative health researchers to examine interactions among focus group participants, and their analysis of humor illustrates how this can be achieved.
Billig, M. (2005). Laughter and ridicule: Towards a social critique of humor. London: Sage.
2.
Bonaiuto, M., Castellana, E., & Pierro, A. (2003). Arguing and laughing: The use of humor to negotiate in group discussions. Humor, 16(2), 183-223.
3.
Boxer, D., & Cortes-Conde, F. (1997). From bonding to biting: Conversational joking and identity display. Journal of Pragmatics, 27(3), 275-294.
4.
Crawford, M. (2003). Gender and humor in social context. Journal of Pragmatics, 35(9), 1413-1430.
5.
Department of Health. (1999). Patient and public involvement in the New NHS. Leeds, UK: Author.
6.
Duggleby, W. (2005). What about focus group interaction data? Qualitative Health Research, 15, 832-840.
7.
Farquhar, C. (1999). Are focus groups suitable for “sensitive” topics? In R. S. Barbour & J. Kitzinger (Eds.), Developing focus group research: Politics, theory and practice (pp. 47-63). London: Sage.
8.
Felton, A., & Stickley, T. (2004). Pedagogy, power and service user involvement. Journal of Psychiatry and Mental Health Nursing, 11(1), 89-98.
9.
Freeman, M. (2006). Nurturing dialogic hermeneutics and the deliberative capacities of communities in focus groups. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(1), 81-95.
10.
General Medical Council. (2003). Tomorrow’s doctors: Recommendations on undergraduate medical education. London: Author.
11.
Gouin, R. R. (2004). What’s so funny?: Humor in women’s accounts of their involvement in social action. Qualitative Research, 4, 25-44.
12.
Greenbaum, T. L. (1998). The handbook for focus group research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
13.
Griffiths, L. (2002). Humor as resistance to professional dominance in community mental health teams. In S. Nettleton & U. Gustafsson (Eds.), The sociology of health and illness reader (pp. 322-333). Cambridge, UK: Polity.
14.
Hay, J. (2000). Functions of humor in the conversations of men and women. Journal of Pragmatics, 32(6), 709-742.
15.
Hendry, G., Schrieber, L., & Bruce, D. (1999). Patients teach students: Partners in arthritis education. Medical Education, 33, 674-677.
16.
Hyden, L. C., & Bulow, P. H. (2003). Who’s talking: Drawing conclusions from focus groups—Some methodological considerations. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 6(4), 305-321.
17.
Jefferson, G. (1985). An exercise in the transcription and analysis of laughter. In T. A. Van Dijk (Ed.), Handbook of discourse analysis (Vol. 3, pp. 25-34). London: Academic Press.
18.
Kilminster, S., Morris, P., Simpson, E., Thistlethwaite, J., & Ewart, B. (2004). Using patients experiences in medical education: First steps in inter-professional training? In T. Warne & S. McAndrew (Eds.), Using patient experience in nurse education (pp. 104-124). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
19.
Kitzinger, J. (1994). The methodology of focus groups: The importance of interaction between research participants. Sociology of Health and Illness, 16(1), 103-121.
20.
Kitzinger, J., & Barbour, R. S. (1999). Introduction: The challenge and promise of focus groups. In R. S. Barbour & J. Kitzinger (Eds.), Developing focus group research: Politics, theory and practice (pp. 1-20). London: Sage.
21.
Knight, L. V., & Rees, C. E. (in press). “Enough is enough, I don’t want any audience”: Exploring medical students’ explanations of consent-related behaviours. Advances in Health Sciences Education.
22.
Litoselliti, L. (2003). Using focus groups in research. London: Continuum.
23.
Martin, R. A. (2004). Sense of humor and physical health: Theoretical issues, recent findings and future directions. Humor, 17(1), 1-19.
24.
Mulkay, M. (1988). On humor. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
25.
O’Toole, M. S., Ohlsen, R. I., Taylor, T. M., Purvis, R.Walters, J., & Pilowsky, S. (2004). Treating first episode psychosis—The service users’ perspective: A focus group evaluation. Journal of Psychiatry and Mental Health Nursing, 11(3), 319-326.
26.
Rees, C. E., Knight, L. V., & Wilkinson, C. E. (in press). “User involvement is a sine qua non, almost, in medical education”: Learning with rather than just about health and social care service users. Advances in Health Sciences Education.
27.
Ritchie, J., & Spencer, L. (1994). Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In A. Bryman & R. G. Burgess (Eds.), Analysing qualitative data (pp. 173-194). London: Routledge.
28.
Saraglou, V., & Anciaux, L. (2004). Liking sick humor: Coping styles and religion as predictors. Humor, 17(3), 257-277.
29.
Sayre, J. (2001). The use of aberrant medical humor by psychiatric unit staff. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 22(7), 669-689.
30.
Sinclair, S. (1997). Making doctors: An institutional apprenticeship. Oxford, UK: Berg.
31.
Stringer, E. (2004). Focus groups. In C. Bassett (Ed), Qualitative research in healthcare (pp. 6-29). London: Whurr.
32.
Traulsen, J. M., Almarsdóttir, A. B., & Björnsdóttir, I. (2004). Interviewing the moderator: An ancillary method to focus groups. Qualitative Health Research, 14, 714-725.
33.
Wiles, J. L., Rosenberg, M. W., & Kearns, R. A. (2005). Narrative analysis as a strategy for understanding interview talk in geographic research. Area, 37(1), 89-99.
