Although the focus group methodology has become an increasingly popular research measure in the past 15 years, very little has been written about the ethical issues. Although the question of ethics is not unique to this approach, there are ethical issues that are specific to the focus group interview. The major issue to consider as a researcher using this technique is the potential of over disclosure by the participants, particularly if the research topic is sensitive. As researchers we are obligated to insure that participants in our studies are not harmed (physically or psychologically) by our research. To provide research participants the safest environment possible, the researcher must have an understanding and ability to apply ethical theories to their situations. This article discusses ethical theories, specific ethical concerns to focus groups, the role of the researcher in such cases, and makes recommendations for future consideration.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Brill, N. (1976). Teamwork: Working together in the human services. New York: J. B. Lippincott.
2.
Beauchamp, T. L. , & Childress, J. F. (1994). Principles of biomedical ethics (4th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
3.
Carey, M. A. (1994). The group effect in focus groups: Planning, implementing, and interpreting focus group research. In J. M. Morse (Ed.), Critical issues in qualitative research methods (pp. 225-241). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
4.
Carey, M. A. , & Smith, M. W. (1992). Enhancement of validity through qualitative approaches: Incorporating the patient's perspective. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 15(4), 107-114.
5.
Carey, M. A. , & Smith, M. W. (1994). Capturing the group effect in focus groups: A special concern analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 4(1), 123-127.
6.
Corey, G. , Corey, M. S., & Callanan, P. (1993). Issues and ethics in the helping professions. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
7.
Day, P. J. (1989). A new history of social welfare. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
8.
Deyhle, D. L. , Hess, G. A., Jr., & LeCompte, M. D. (1992). Approaching ethical issues for qualitative researchers in education. In M. D. LeCompte, W. Millroy, & J. Treissle (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research in education (pp. 597-642). New York: Academic Press.
9.
Fuller, T. D. , Edwards, J. N., Vorakitphokatom, S., & Sermsri, S. (1993). Using focus groups to adapt survey instruments to new populations: Experience from a developing country. In D. L. Morgan (Ed.), Successful focus groups: Advancing the state of the art (pp. 89-104). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
10.
Goldberg, J. E. (1989). AIDS: Confidentiality and the social worker. Social Thought, 15(3/4), 116-127.
11.
Guba, E. G. , & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
12.
Hittinger, J. P. (1989). Philosophy and the quest for ethical foundations: An overview. Social Thought, 15(3/4),18-32.
13.
Krueger, R. A. (1994). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
14.
Lipson, J. G. (1994). Ethical issues in ethnography. In J. M. Morse (Ed.), Critical issues in qualitative research methods (pp. 333-355). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
15.
Merton, R. K. , Fiske, M., & Kendall, P. L. (1990). The focused interview: A manual of problems and procedures (2nd ed.). New York: Free Press.
16.
Miles, M. B. , & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA. Sage.
17.
Mitra, A. (1994). Use of focus groups in the design of recreation needs assessment questionnaires. Evaluation and Program Planning, 17(2), 133-140.
18.
Morgan, D. L. (1988). Focus groups as qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
19.
Morgan, D. L. (1993). Future directions for focus groups. In D. L. Morgan (Ed.), Successful focus groups: Advancing the state of the art (pp. 225-244). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
20.
Morgan, D. L. , & Krueger, R. A. (1993). When to use focus groups and why. In D. L. Morgan (Ed.), Successful focus groups: Advancing the state of the art (pp. 3-19). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
21.
Sieber, J. E. (1992). Planning ethically responsible research: A guide for students and internal review boards. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
22.
Stewart, D. W. , & Shamdasani, P. N. (1990). Focus groups: Theory and practice. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
23.
Sussman, S. , Burton, D., Dent, C. W., Stacy, A. W., & Flay, B. R. (1991). Use of focus groups in developing an adolescent tobacco use cessation program: Collective norm effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 21(21), 1772-1782.
24.
Varga, A. C. (1978). On being human. New YorkPaulist.
25.
Veatch, R. M. (1981). A theory of medical ethics. New YorkBasic Books.
26.
White, G. E. , & Thomson, A. N. (1995). Anonymized focus groups as a research tool for health professionals. Qualitative Health Research, 5(2), 256-261.
27.
Young, A. (1990). Moral conflicts in a psychiatric hospital treating combat-related posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). In G. Weisz (Ed.), Social science perspectives on medical ethics (pp. 65-82). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.
28.
Zeller, R. A. (1993). Focus group research on sensitive topics: Setting the agenda without setting the agenda. In D. L. Morgan (Ed.), Successful focus groups: Advancing the state of the art (pp. 167-183). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
