The performance of online focus groups has been extensively documented, but the extant research primarily emphasised the online typing method. In contrast, other potential methods have received little attention, especially online audio. Using a range of objective and subjective measures, this study compares the effectiveness of online audio and face-to-face (FTF) methods. The statistical results indicate that more information, better quality of answers, greater group interaction, greater satisfaction and more openness were generated in online audio than in FTF discussions. Meanwhile, the same level of equality of participation is found when using online audio discussions. Additionally, national culture could have moderating effects on performance of a specific communication method. Overall, we conclude that the online audio method could be a valid alternative to focus group research.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArcherJ.L. (1980) Self disclosure. In: WegnerD.M. & VallacherR. (eds) The Self in Social Psychology.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2.
AugerP.BarnirA. & GallaugherJ. (2003) Strategic orientation, competition, and internet-based electronic commerce.Information Technology and Management, 4, 2–3, pp. 139–164.
3.
BarkiH. & PinsoneaultA. (2001) Small group brainstorming and idea quality: is electronic brainstorming the most effective approach?Small Group Research, 32, 2, pp. 158–205.
4.
BondsM.WanK.LeungK. & GiacaloneR. (1985) How are responses to verbal insults related to cultural collectivism and power distance?Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 16, 1, pp. 111–127.
5.
BordiaP. (1997) Face-to-face versus computer-mediated communication: a synthesis of the experimental literature.Journal of Business Communication, 34, 1, pp. 99–120.
6.
Carr-ChellmanA. & DuchastelP. (2000) The ideal online course.British Journal of Educational Technology, 31, 3, pp. 229–241.
7.
ClapperD. & MasseyA. (1996) Electronic focus groups: a framework for exploration.Information and Management, 30, 1, pp. 43–50.
EastonG.EastonA. & BelchM. (2003) An experimental investigation of electronic focus groups.Information and Management, 40, 8, pp. 717–727.
10.
EdmundsH. (1999) The Focus Group Research Handbook.Lincolnwood, IL: NTC Business Books/Contemporary Publishing.
11.
FernE. (2001) Advanced Focus Group Research.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
12.
FrankeR.HofstedeG. & BondM. (1991) Cultural roots of economic performance: a research note.Strategic Management Journal, 12, S1, pp. 165–173.
13.
GreenbaumT. (1996) A moderator's view of focus group videoconferencing.Marketing Research Review, June/July, pp. 24–25.
14.
GreenbaumT. (2000) Focus group vs online.Advertising Age, 71, 14, February, p. 34.
15.
HairJ.AndersonR.TathamR. & BlackW. (2006) Multivariate Data Analysis.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
16.
HandfieldR. & NicholsE. (2002) Supply Chain Redesign: Transforming Supply Chains into Integrated Value Systems.Upper Saddle River, NJ: FT Press.
17.
HiltzS.R.JohnsonK. & TuroffM. (1987) Experiments in group decision making: communication process and outcome in face-to-face versus computerized conferences.Human Communication Research, 13, 2, pp. 225–252.
18.
HofstedeG. (1980) Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values.Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
19.
JamesK.LinB. & TanJ. (2000) Healthcare marketing and internet technology management.International Journal of Healthcare Technology and Management, 2, 1–4, pp. 233–245.
20.
JoinsonA. (2001) Self disclosure in computer-mediated communication: the role of self-awareness and visual anonymity.European Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 2, pp. 177–192.
21.
KellyJ. & LovingT. (2004) Time pressure and group performance: exploring underlying processes in the Attentional Focus Model.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 2, pp. 185–198.
22.
MannC. & StewartF. (2000) Internet Communication and Qualitative Research: A Handbook for Researching Online.London: Sage Publications.
23.
McKennaK. & BarghJ. (1998) Coming out in the age of the internet: identity ‘demarginalization’ through virtual group participation.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 3, pp. 681–694.
24.
McLeodP. (1992) An assessment of the experimental literature on electronic support of group work: results of a meta-analysis.Human–Computer Interaction, 7, 3, pp. 257–280.
25.
MilesM.B. & HubermanA.M. (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook (2nd edn). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
26.
MillerT. & DicksonP. (2001) On-line market research.International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 5, 3, pp. 139–167.
27.
MorganD.L. (1997) Focus Groups as Qualitative Research (2nd edn). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
28.
NakataC. & SivakumarK. (1996) National culture and new product development: an integrative review.Journal of Marketing, 60, 1, pp. 61–72.
OlaniranB. (1994) Group performance in computer-mediated and face-to-face communication media.Management Communication Quarterly, 7, 3, pp. 256–281.
31.
OlaniranB. (1996) A model of group satisfaction in computer-mediated communication and face-to-face meetings.Behavior and Information Technology, 15, 1, pp. 24–36.
32.
OzerM. (2003) Using the internet in new product development.Research Technology Management, 46, 1 (January–February), pp. 10–16.
33.
ParentM.GallupeR.B.SalisburyW. & HandelmanJ. (2000) Knowledge creation in focus groups: can group technologies help?Information and Management, 38, 1, pp. 47–58.
34.
RajaieR.HandleyM. & EstrinD. (2000) Architectural considerations for playback of quality adaptive video over the internet.Proceedings of the Eighth IEEE International Conference on Networks, Singapore, 5–8 September, pp. 204–209.
35.
ReidD.J. & ReidF. (2005) Online focus groups: an in-depth comparison of computer-mediated and conventional focus group discussions.International Journal of Market Research, 47, 2, pp. 131–162.
36.
RobsonC. (2002) Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and Practitioner-Researchers.Oxford: Blackwell.
37.
SchindlerR.M. (1992) The real lesson of New Coke: the value of focus groups for predicting the effects of social influence.Marketing Research, 4, 4 (December), pp. 22–27.
38.
SchneiderS.J.KerwinJ.FrechtlingJ. & VivariB. (2002) Characteristics of the discussion in online and face-to-face groups.Social Science Computer Review, 20, 1, pp. 31–42.
39.
SinkD.W. (1991) Focus groups as an approach to outcomes assessment.American Review of Public Administration, 21, 3, pp. 197–204.
40.
SolomonM.B. (1996) Targeting trendsetters: cyberstudies capture the perceptions and insights of early adopters.Marketing Research, 8, 9, pp. 9–11.
41.
SpickardA.AlrajehN.CordrayD. & GiganteJ. (2002) Learning about screening using an online or live lecture.Journal of General Internal Medicine, 17, 7, pp. 540–545.
42.
StrausS. (1996) Getting a clue. The effects of communication media and information distribution on participation and performance in computer-mediated and face-to-face groups.Small Groups Research, 27, 1, pp. 115–142.
43.
StrausS. (1997) Technology, group process, and group outcomes: testing the connections in computer-mediated and face-to-face groups.Human–Computer Interaction, 12, 3, pp. 227–266.
44.
StraussA. & CorbinJ. (1990) Basics of Qualitative Research.Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
45.
SweetC. (2001) Designing and conducting virtual focus groups.Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 4, 3, pp. 130–135.
46.
TseA.C.B. (1999) Conducting electronic focus group discussions among Chinese respondents.Journal of the Market Research Society, 41, 4, pp. 407–415.
47.
UnderhillC. & OlmstedM.G. (2003) An experimental comparison of computer-mediated and face-to-face focus groups.Social Science Computer Review, 21, 4, pp. 506–512.
48.
ValacichJ. and SchwenkC. (1995) Devil's advocacy and dialectual inquiry effects on face-to-face and computer-mediated group decision making.Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 63, 2, pp. 158–173.
WolfinbargerM. & GillyM. (2001) Shopping online for freedom, control, and fun.California Management Review, 43, 2, pp. 34–55.
54.
WuY.BalasubramanianS. & MahajanV. (2004) When is a preannounced new product likely to be delayed?Journal of Marketing, 68, 2, pp. 101–113.
55.
YangK. (1981) Social orientation and individual modernity among Chinese students in Taiwan.Journal of Social Psychology, 113, 2, pp. 159–170.
56.
ZhangT. & KuoC. (2001) Audio content analysis for online audiovisual data segmentation and classification.IEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio Processing, 9, 4, pp. 441–457.
57.
ZieglerR.DiehlM. & ZijlstraG. (2000) Idea production in nominal and virtual groups: does computer-mediated communication improve group brainstorming?Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 3, 2, pp. 141–158.
