Designing and Implementing an Effective Tobacco Counter-Marketing Campaign
Table 3.1: Pros and Cons of Formats for Focus Groups and Individual Interviews
Face to Face
• The session is more convenient for participants and observers.
• Nonverbal reactions can’t be assessed.
• Participants can easily include people in rural areas or small towns, as well as the home- bound.
• It’s more difficult to get reactions to visuals. (They can be sent ahead of time, but you still have less control over exposure.)
• Relative anonymity may result in more frank discussion of sensitive issues.
• Participants can be distracted by their surroundings.
• There may be noise interference from callers’ environments.
Moderator/interviewer and participants are in one room, usually around a table; observers (mem- bers of the research team) are behind a one-way mirror.
Moderator/interviewer and participants are on a conference call; observers listen.
Body language can be assessed.
Observers can be present with- out distracting participants.
If the session is videotaped, it can be shared with others who couldn’t attend.
Participants give undivided
Responders lose anonymity.
The session has higher travel expenses because of multiple locales.
The session may be a logistical challenge in rural areas or small towns.
Internet Chat Sessions
Moderator and partici- pants “chat” while observers read.
A complete record of session is instantly available.
Relative anonymity may result in more frank discussion of sensitive issues.
The session is useful only for participants comfortable with this mode of communication.
The relatively slow pace limits topics that can be covered.
There’s no way to assess whether part- icipants meet recruitment criteria.
Body language or tone of voice can’t be assessed.
It’s more difficult to get reactions to visual presentations. (They can be sent ahead of time, but you still have less control over exposure.)
Participants can be distracted by their surroundings.
Chapter 3: Gaining and Using Target Audience Insights