An integrative approach to measurement: focus groups as a survey pretest

Springer Science and Business Media LLC - Tập 53 - Trang 897-913 - 2018
Jennifer Cyr1
1University of Arizona, Tucson, USA

Tóm tắt

This article brings the integrative mixed-methods approach into the discussion on measurement, description, and conceptualization. Specifically, it examines one fruitful combination that has received scant attention: that of focus groups and surveys. It shows that focus groups, as a survey pretest, improve the measurement validity of survey instruments in two ways. First, they are useful for contextualizing concepts, making them more comparable across space and time. Second, they are essential for operationalizing phenomena whose meaning is constituted via social processes. To demonstrate the utility of focus groups for survey work, the research note relies on existing empirical studies. Overall, it demonstrates the utility of an integrative, mixed-methods approach for conceptualization and measurement.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Abdelal, R., Herrera, Y.M., Johnston, A.I., McDermott, R.: Measuring Identity: A Guide for Social Scientists. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2009) Adcock, R., Collier, D.: Measurement validity: a shared standard for qualitative and quantitative research. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 95, 529–546 (2001) Albrecht, T.L., Johnson, G.M., Walther, J.B.: Understanding communication processes in focus group. In: Morgan, D. (ed.) Successful Focus Groups: Advancing the State of the Art, pp. 51–64. Sage, Newbury Park (1993) Almond, G.A., Verba, S.: The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations. Princeton University Press, Princeton (2015) Andersson, S., Heywood, P.M.: The politics of perception: use and abuse of Transparency International's approach to measuring corruption. Political Stud. 57, 746–767 (2009) Ayrton, R.: The micro-dynamics of power and performance in focus groups: an example from discussions on national identity with the South Sudanese diaspora in the UK. Qualitative Research, first published online, February 14, 2018 Bollen, K.: Structural Equations with Latent Variables. Wiley, New York (1989) Beatty, P.C., Willis, G.B.: The practice of cognitive interviewing. The Public Opinion Quarterly 71, 287–311 (2007) Brady, H.E., Kaplan, C.S.: Conceptualizing and measuring ethnic identity. In: Abdelal, R., Herrera, Y.M., Johnston, A.I., McDermott, R. (eds.) Measuring Identity: A Guide for Social Scientists, pp. 33–71. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2009) Brown, E., Cloke, J.: Neoliberal reform, governance and corruption in the south: Assessing the international anti-corruption crusade. Antipode 36, 272–294 (2004) Burgess, K., Levitsky, S.: Explaining populist party adaptation in Latin America: environmental and organizational determinants of party change in Argentina, Mexico, Peru, and Venezuela. Comp. Polit. Stud. 36, 881–911 (2003) Carey, M.A., Smith, M.W.: Capturing the group effect in focus groups: a special concern in analysis. Qual. Health Res. 4, 123–127 (1994) Carmines, E.G., Zeller, R.A.: Reliability and validity assessment. Sage, Thousand Oaks (1979) Chadda, M.: India: Between Majesty and Modernity. In: Johnson, R.A. (ed.) The Struggle Against Corruption: A Comparative Study. Perspectives in Comparative Politics, pp. 109–143. Palgrave Macmillan, New York (2004) Chaiken, S.: Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 39, 752–766 (1980) Collins, D.: Pretesting survey instruments: an overview of cognitive methods. Qual. Life Res. 12, 229–238 (2003) Coppedge, M.: Thickening thin concepts and theories: combining large n and small in comparative politics. Comp. Polit. 31, 465–476 (1999) Copsey, N.: Focus groups and the political scientist. In: European Research Working Paper Series 22. Edgbaston: The University of Birmingham (2008) Cyr, J.: The Pitfalls and Promise of Focus Groups as a Data-Collection Method. Sociol. Methods Res. 45, 231–259 (2016) Cyr, J.: The Fates of Political Parties: Institutional Crisis, Continuity, and Change in Latin America. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2017) Dahl, R.: Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition. Yale University Press, New Haven and London (1971) Davis, H.L., Douglas, S.P., Silk, A.J.: Measure unreliability: a hidden threat to cross-national marketing research? J. Market. 45, 98–109 (1981) Duverger, M.: Political Parties: Their Organization and Activity in the Modern State. Methuen, London (1954) Ehrlich, H.J.: The Social Psychology of Prejudice. Wiley, New York (1973) Fuller, T., Edwards, J., Vorakithphokatorn, S., Sermsri, S.: Using focus groups to adapt survey instruments to new populations. In: Morgan, D. (ed.) Successful Focus Groups: Advancing the State of the Art, pp. 89–104. Sage, Newbury Park (1993) Ghazal, R.J., Oselin, S.: Gender and the education employment paradox in ethnic and religious contexts: the case of Arab Americans. Am. Sociol. Rev. 73, 296–313 (2008) Gibson, J.L.: Does truth lead to reconciliation? Testing the causal assumptions of the South African truth and reconciliation process. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 48, 201–217 (2004) Goren, P.: Party identification and core political values. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 49, 882–897 (2005) Green, D.P., Palmquist, B., Schickler, E.: Partisan Hearts and Minds: Political Parties and the Social Identities of Voters. Yale University Press, New Haven (2002) Harkness, J.: In pursuit of quality: issues for cross-national survey research. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. 2, 125–140 (1999) Hollander, J.A.: The Social Contexts of Focus Groups. J. Contemp. Ethnogr. 33, 602–637 (2004) Inglehart, R., Welzel, C.: Political culture and democracy: analyzing cross-level linkages. Comparative Politics 36, 61–79 (2003) King, G., Murray, C.L.J., Salomon, J.A., Tandon, A.: Enhancing the validity and cross-cultural comparability of measurement in survey research. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 98, 191–207 (2004) Kircheimer, O.: The transformation of Western European party systems. In: LaPalombara, J., Wiener, M. (eds.) Political Parties and Political Development. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1966) Kitschelt, H., Hawkins, K., Luna, J.P., Rosas, G., Zechmeister, E.: Latin American Party Systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2010) Krippendorf, K.: Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2004) Krosnick, J.A.: Response strategies for coping with the cognitive demands of attitude measures in surveys. Appl. Cogn. Psychol. 5, 213–236 (1991) Krosnick, J.A., Narayan, S., Smith, W.R.: Satisficing in surveys: initial evidence. New Dir. Eval. 70, 29–44 (1996) Krueger, R.A., Casey, M.A.: Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research. Sage, Thousand Oaks (1994) Krysan, M., Couper, M.P., Farley, R., Forman, T.A.: Does race matter in neighborhood preferences? Results from a video experiment. Am. J. Sociol. 115, 527–559 (2009) Leyens, J.P.H., Yzerbyt, V.Y., Schadron, G.: Stereotypes and Social Cognition. Sage, London (1994) Lijphart, A.: The comparable-cases strategy in comparative research. Comp. Polit. Stud. 8, 158 (1975) Lijphart, A.: The structure of inference. In: Almond, G., Verba, S. (eds.) The Civic Culture Revisited, pp. 37–56. Sage, Newbury Park (1980) Locke, R.M., Thelen, K.: Apples and oranges revisited: contextualized comparisons and the study of comparative labor politics. Politics Soc. 23, 337–367 (1995) Luna, J.P., Zechmeister, E.: Political representation in Latin America: a study of elite-mass congruence in nine countries. Comp. Polit. Stud. 38, 388–416 (2005) Lupu, N.: Brand dilution and the breakdown of political parties in Latin America. World Polit. 66, 561–602 (2014) Mainwaring, S., Torcal, M.: Party system institutionalization and party system theory after the third wave of democratization. In: Katz, R.S., Crotty, W. (eds.) Handbook of Party Politics. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2006) MacWilliams, M.C.: Who decides when the party doesn’t? Authoritarian voters and the rise of Donald Trump. PS. Polit. Sci. Polit. 49, 716–721 (2016) Morgan, D.: Focus groups. Ann. Rev. Sociol. 22, 129–152 (1996a) Morgan, D.: Focus groups as qualitative research. Sage, Thousand Oaks (1996b) Morgan, D.: Introduction. In: Morgan, D. (ed.) Successful Focus Groups: Advancing the State of the Art, pp. 9–15. Sage, Newbury Park (1993) O’Brien, K.: Improving survey questionnaires through focus groups. In: Morgan, D. (ed.) Successful Focus Groups: Advancing the State of the Art, pp. 105–117. Sage, Newbury Park (1993) Pettigrew, T.F.: Social psychological perspectives on Trump supporters. J. Soc. Polit. Psychol. 5(1), 107–116 (2017) Posner, D.N.: Institutions and Ethnic Politics in Africa. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2005) Sambanis, N., Shayo, M.: Social identification and ethnic conflict. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 107, 294–325 (2013) Samuels, D., Zucco, C.: The power of partisanship in Brazil: evidence from survey experiments. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 58, 212–225 (2014) Saris, W.E.: The Effects of Measurement Error in Cross Cultural Research. In: Harkness, J. (ed.) Cross-Cultural Survey Equivalence, pp. 67–84. Zentrum für Umfragen, Methoden und Analysen -ZUMA-, Mannheim (1998) Savigny, H.: Focus groups and political marketing: science and democracy as axiomatic? Br. J. Polit. Int. Relat. 9, 122–137 (2007) Scheuch, E.K.: Social context and individual behavior. In: Dogan, M., Rokkan, S. (eds.) Quantitative Ecological Analysis in the Social Sciences, pp. 133–156. The MIT Press, Cambridge (1969) Seawright, J.: Multi-method Social Science: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Tools. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2016) Seligson, M.A.: The renaissance of political culture or the renaissance of the ecological fallacy? Comp. Polit. 34, 273–292 (2002) Shayo, M.: A model of social identity with an application to political economy: nation, class, and redistribution. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 103, 147–174 (2009) Smith, T.W.: Developing comparable questions in cross-national surveys. In: Harkness, J.A., Van de Vijver, F.J.R., Mohler, P.P. (eds.) Cross-cultural survey methods, pp. 69–92. Wiley-Interscience, Hoboken (2003) Stewart, D.W., Shamdasani, P.N.: Focus Groups: Theory and Practice. Sage, Thousand Oaks (1990) Stewart, D.W., Shamdasani, P.N., Rook, D.W.: Group depth interviews: focus group research. In: Bickman, L., Rog, D.J. (eds.) The Sage Handbook of Applied Social Research Methods, pp. 589–616. Sage, Los Angeles (2009) Subramanian, S.V., Jones, K., Kaddour, A., Krieger, N.: Revisiting Robinson: the perils of individualistic and ecologic fallacy. Int. J. Epidemiol. 38, 342–360 (2009) Tashakkori, A., Teddlie, C.: Quality of inferences in mixed methods research: Calling for an integrative framework. In: Bergman, M.M. (ed.) Advances in Mixed Methods Research: Theories and Applications, pp. 101–119. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2008) Torgerson, W.S.: Theory and Methods of Scaling. Wiley and Sons, New York (1958) Tourangeau, R.: Cognitive sciences and survey methods. In: Jabine, T.B., Straf, M.L., Tanur, J.M., Tourangeau, R. (eds.) Cognitive Aspects of Survey Methodology: Building a Bridge between Disciplines, pp. 73–100. National Academy Press, Washington (1984) Vygotsky, L.: Mind in Society. Harvard University Press, London (1978) Weinreb, A.A.: The limitations of stranger-interviewers in rural Kenya. Am. Sociol. Rev. 71, 1014–1039 (2006) Yanow, D.: Constructing “Race” and “Ethnicity” in America: Category-Making in Public Policy and Administration. ME Sharpe, Inc, Armonk (2002) Zeller, R.A., Carmines, E.G.: Measurement in the Social Sciences: The Link Between Theory and Data. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1980)