The Devil's Advocate: A Strategy to Avoid Groupthink and Stimulate Discussion in Focus Groups

Abstract

The focus group is an increasingly popular qualitative research method in health research to gain insight into complex problems. Concerns have been expressed about how best to stimulate free and open discussion; especially on controversial issues and/or when the group comprises people with different power and status. A potential pitfall of the focus group technique is group-think: the impact of censoring and conforming as described by such social psychologists as Irving Janis. The article describes an evaluation of a method to reduce groupthink and stimulate creativity and controversy in focus groups that analyzed consultation between an Australian federal government department and its communities. The article recommends to researchers using focus groups the selective use of devil's advocates to reflect different perspectives to groups, to ask questions in a different way, to introduce new questions, and to avoid groups arriving at premature solutions.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Carey, M. A. , & Smith, M. W. (1994). Capturing the group effect in focus groups: A special concern in analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 4(1), 123-127.

Crabtree, B. E. , & Miller, W. F. (Eds.). (1992). Doing qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Folch-Lyon, E. , & Trost, J. F. (1981). Conducting focus group sessions. Studies in Family Planning, 12(12), 443-449.

Fortana, A. , & Frey, J. H. (1994). Interviewing: The art of science. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 361-376). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hawe, P. , Degeling D. , & Hall, J. (1990). Evaluating health promotion. Sydney: MacLennan and Petty.

Janis, I. L. (1982). Groupthink: Psychological studies of policy decisions and fiascoes (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Khan, M. E. , & Manderson, L. (1992). Focus groups in tropical diseases research. Health Policy and Planning, 7(1), 56-66.

Krueger, R. A. (1994). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Merton, R. K. (1987). The focused interview and focus groups: Continuities and discontinuities. Public Opinion Quarterly, 51, 550-556.

10.

Merton, R. K. , Fiske, M. , & Kendall, P. L. (1956). The focused interview. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.

11.

Morgan, D. L. , & Krueger, R. A. (1994). 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.

12.

Murphy, B. , Cockburn, J. , & Murphy M. (1992). Focus groups in health research. Health Promotion Journal of Australia, 2(2), 37-40.

13.

The new shorter Oxford English dictionary. (1993). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

14.

The Oxford encyclopedic dictionary. (1991). New York: Oxford University Press.

15.

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

16.

The Random House college dictionary (1st ed.). (1975). New York: Random House.