focus group research in marketing

• Pollfish School
• Market Research
• Survey Guides
• Get started

What is a Focus Group and How to Use it in Your Market Research

Chances are, you’ve come across focus groups if you’ve looked into market research or other forms of research. 

The term focus group is often used as one of the key methods to gather qualitative research , in the market research sphere. Although not quite an interview, this hands-on approach spurs discussions between research participants, which have the potential to go into great depth on a subject of study.

As such, using this technique allows businesses to gain critical insights into their target market, along with all of its segments. 

These insights help you hone in on your marketing, branding, advertising and other business processes.

Focus groups can be conducted with other research methods , such as survey research and more.

That’s why you ought to familiarize yourself with this type of research technique. Luckily, this lengthy guide goes into the weeds of this form of research , allowing you to gain an exhaustive understanding and decide whether you should carry out this kind of research method.

This thorough guide explains what a focus group is, how to use it, how it works, its advantages and shortcomings, how it ranks against survey research and more. 

Table of Contents: What is a Focus Group and How to Use it in Your Market Research

The role of the moderator, focus group size, the focus group approach, participant discussions, focus group participants, post-research document of findings.

• Data Democratization in Post-Focus Group Research

How long does a focus group last?

The environment of the study, the types of questions used in focus groups, when to use a focus group, how online surveys are superior.

• Benefits That Are Second to None

Reach the Masses and Conduct Quantitative Research

Quantitative + qualitative data = a complete market research experience, no need to worry about recruitment, granular respondent targeting, anonymity, privacy and no social pressures, focus groups vs. an online survey platform: the verdict, defining focus groups.

Let’s begin with the heart of the matter: what is a focus group ? A focus group is a small group of people selected based on their specific shared characteristics, to take part in a discussion for market research , or other types of research . 

Focus groups are a kind of primary research . Unlike market research software , which is one of the most popular tools for conducting research in the present day, a focus group does not take place digitally—not before Covid, that is . Now, many events, whether they are research-related or otherwise, take place via online meetings. 

At any rate, focus groups occur with all members in one conjoint session , whether it’s in-person or over the internet. Researchers can opt to include a single or multiple focus group sessions, should they require further studies on the same topic or group of participants.

Focus groups are one of the main techniques of qualitative research , which delves into a wide variety of phenomena. These include: 

• Motivations 
• Reasoning behind actions
• Sentiments 

All of these aspects and topics of discussion can focus on the participants about various stimuli, such as current events, past events, plans, fears, culture, etc. 

Unlike quantitative data, which works to find the “what” and generate statistics, qualitative data aims at understanding a topic in greater depth.

Focus groups are composed of a small number of people who take part in a studied conversation alongside a moderator. The moderator is one of the main researchers assigned to this kind of study.

The role of the moderator is to ask questions, manage the discussion, make sure everyone speaks up and take notes on the discourse, which are later used to analyze it . Essentially, the moderator is a kind of host in this scenario.

Their role is multi-pronged , as they wear different hats in the study. The degree of their involvement in the study may depend on the other actors involved, typically other researchers who are part of the focus group or the larger research study. 

In addition, their roles may differ based on the other market research techniques their organization uses, whether it includes survey research , concept testing, experimental research , or others.

The following lists the different aspects of the role of the focus group moderator:

• Discussion driver
• Interviewer
• Post-session and on-site analyst

The typical size of a focus group ranges between 5-10 people. 5-7 is the ideal amount of focus group participants , as these groups are purposely kept small. 

That’s because when there are more than seven people present, it is difficult for every member to speak about a topic , or issue, and especially, to answer a specific question. It would also be difficult for the moderator to control a larger group and ensure everyone provides their insights. Additionally, some topics become irrelevant to continue discussing after the seventh person weighs in. 

This method provides an interactive approach for research participants to share their viewpoints and experiences and for researchers to collect critical data on their subjects.

In direct opposition to quantitative market research , focus groups do not involve crunching large numbers or making assumptions based on large quantities. Instead, they focus on a small group of participants who represent different market segments and customer personas . 

In keeping with the qualitative research approach, the moderator uses open-ended questions. The moderator may also use multiple-choice questions, but those are almost always followed up with questions to explain the reasoning behind choosing a particular answe r. 

Thus, these discussions are typically filled with questions that delve into the “why” and “how,” as they seek to uncover context and motivations.

The purpose of this qualitative research methodology is to gain a wealth of insights into customer behavior , customer preferences , attitudes, beliefs and more, by way of a hands-on approach. 

As such, the focus group method is intended to reap key insights from the discussion generated among participants . During the discussion, the participants are not solely encouraged to respond to questions the moderator asks  but to engage in conversations with other participants.

In doing so, participants are prompted to reflect on their memories and draw from their own experiences. 

The discussion of the focus is based on a pre-selected topic . This is usually tied to a larger market research campaign , which may be part of another business campaign, such as the strategic planning process , a marketing objective, a consumer insights campaign and more. 

In market research specifically, the participants of a focus group are members of a business’s or in broader studies, an industry’s target market . This is the broad range of customers who are most likely to buy from a business and are typically the targets of marketing campaigns.

The shared characteristics of the study can be based on demographics, psychographics, geographic location and firmographics . Firmographics characteristics are those that involve business, as such, they would be included in a B2B focus group. This is a study on other businesses, typically those who are clients of a business.

Demographic factors include characteristics such as gender, age range, ethnicity, income, education level, marital status, number of children and other such factors. These can include geographic locations, although geographical factors are considered a separate category in market segmentation .

Post-Focus Group Research

After the interview or set of interviews in this study, the moderator gathers the research and summarizes it. They may conduct their analysis or consult with other researchers on their team.

It is usually the other researchers who are better suited to understand and explain certain communication styles, and body language as well as to conduct further descriptive research . As such, there may be several rounds of analyses on the data from the focus group

Thus, in post-focus group research, which refers to post-interview research , there is usually a team of researchers involved in analyzing the group’s discussion and the data it produced. 

After conducting an analysis, the researchers, including the moderator, will consult with one another to turn the raw data and analyzed research into a presentable document. This document should include the following:

• The purpose of the focus group study
• Demographics
• Psychographics
• Geographies
• Firmographics (if business personnel were studied)
• Key findings
• Explanations of key beliefs, sentiments, opinions, or thoughts
• This should include comparing them on a higher level, as each participant can represent a different segment of a target market.
• These can include statistics drawn from other market research methods, such as using an online survey tool , other non-focus group interviews and even sources of secondary research.
• This should include what the researchers plan to do next with the data, especially about other team members.
• After all, most data and research campaigns should be actionable. You wouldn’t want your efforts and highly-coveted data to sit idly and gather dust.
• This should be concise and round off the study.
• It should include a few of the most important findings, along with the plan of action and next steps.

They would then share it with other members of their organization . This often depends on the purpose of the focus group study. 

For example, if it was for marketing purposes, the research would be primarily shared with the marketing team. If it was for customer development , it would be shared with the product team and so on. 

Data Democratization in Post-Focus Group Research 

There are going to be some cases in which the topic scrutinized in this kind of study doesn’t neatly correlate with a single department. This is perfectly fine, as certain business practices can be conducted cross-departmentally, or for the business at large.

This is where the democratization of data comes in. This concept refers to the practice and condition in which everybody in an organization has access to data. In such an environment there are no team members hindering access to the data. As such, there should be no bottlenecks preventing people from either using the data or understanding it.  

This points to the need for the data to be both highly accessible and understandable . This underscores the i mportance of creating the post-research document mentioned in the previous section.

It is this document that serves as the go-to source for examining a business’s focus group study , and most importantly, putting the study to good use . This means the actions the focus group yields will go beyond those outlined in the plan of action section in the study’s main document. 

Instead, in a democratized data environment, other team members, those who aren’t researchers or analysts, can analyze the data as well. This ability allows them to partake in the data for the decision-making process . 

This is important for all companies, as data goes unused in too many businesses. Even though  more companies are investing in customer data, up to 80% of all data goes unused . You wouldn’t want to waste your money and efforts on churning out data that goes unused. 

As such, data democratization is a must in all market research campaigns, including docs groups. 

How Focus Groups Work

Focus groups use a specific methodology to clear away any ambiguity. As aforementioned, the small group that makes up a focus group comprises 5-7 people . 

The participants are pre-recruited, similar to the mechanism for gaining research participants used in survey panels . They are enlisted based on shared characteristics, which are considered the subject of market research.

To reiterate, these characteristics include demographics, psychographics, purchase history, shopping behaviors, and other factors.  

The qualifications that researchers use to recruit participants often bind the participants to a brand’s target market. However, brands can also study people outside their target market to learn how other consumers think and possibly gain them as customers. 

Focus group discussions vary; they can involve feedback on a product, experience, or marketing campaign . They can also be used to discuss consumers’ opinions on different matters, such as pop culture, news and politics, especially if they relate to a brand’s industry. 

The discussions are led by a moderator , who prompts questions and talking points. The moderator sets the conversation in motion, along with acting as the researcher. As such, the moderator also notes their observations. 

The length, both in terms of questions and the discussion of the interviews themselves will vary. It is up to the moderator to decide whether they’ve gleaned enough information from the participants or not before moving on to another question or topic or ending the session .

Typically, these discussions involve using 10-12 questions to draw out responses on key topics that underpin the overall market research campaign. The discussion takes about 30 to 90 minutes.

A focus group environment should be o pen-minded as participants can have varying and even oppositional opinions. No one should be made to feel threatened or silenced, as every insight matters.

Focus groups are NOT to be conducted in the same way as interviews . They are far more interactive, but most importantly, they are not carried out on a one-on-one basis . Instead, they are group-focused activities, in which participants speak with each other instead of solely with an interviewer. 

As such, the participants may influence each other , possibly swaying the minds of some members, or reinforcing someone’s opinions. Some participants will draw opposition or even aversion to their responses from others, possibly from the moderators themselves. 

This is because they’re in the same broader target market, they are all individuals who hold their own opinions and convictions. 

Regardless , the moderator should not input any of their opinions or beliefs into the discussion and be as neutral as possible . They should assume this neutrality even if they severely disagree with any of the participants. 

Since focus groups are small, researchers often conduct several (3-4) of them, which includes hosting several interviews per focus group, across different geographic locations. This way they can reap the maximum amount of insights and satisfy all of their research campaigns.

The Pros and Cons of Focus Groups

This market research method offers several advantages. These will help propel you to understand your customer base or subject matter much better. They will also help carry your research to completion. But, they have a few drawbacks as well. Researchers and businesses ought to consider both before choosing this research method.

• Researchers can probe the deep feelings, perceptions and beliefs of their intended subjects.
• When members are engaged, they provide invaluable information that removes any obscurities surrounding a topic.
• They generate results fairly quickly, as each session lasts no more than 90 minutes.
• Researchers can study body language, facial expressions and other non-verbal signs.
• Not all questions need to be premeditated, as they can be produced based on the direction of the conversation.
• Given that this is a discussion, you may discover even more insights than you had originally planned, including on other adjacent topics.
• The thoughts of a small group that fits a target market are useful but are not representative of a larger population.
• Recruitment will take a significant portion of the time.
• Traversing different geographic areas, if need be, is also time-consuming.
• Some members will be dominant while others will contribute less to the discussion.
• Certain participants can sway the discussion, even making it veer towards irrelevant territories. 
• They can’t be used for quantitative research. 
• They are therefore subject to social pressures and acquiescence bias , in which respondents tend to select positive responses or those with positive connotations. 
• As such, there is a lack of accuracy, as these groups are not anonymous. 

The moderator of a focus group should ask specialized questions to reap as much intelligence as possible. While this format is generally flexible, there are still certain question types that you should incorporate. These will help you hatch the questions you’ll need. 

Here are the four types of questions that are most applicable to a focus group , along with question examples:  

• Engagement questions
• These questions are designed to ease participants into the discussion by introducing themselves, 
• These are easy questions posed early on to introduce the participants to each other, to make them more at ease, and to acquaint them with the main topic at hand. 
• Tell us a bit about yourself.
• What do you generally think about ads in this industry?
• What do you think of this ad campaign?
• Exploration questions
• These questions probe deeper into the topic to get a feel of the participants’ feelings about it. 
• These questions are to be asked after participants begin to ease into the conversation and become more active in it.
• Why do you feel that way?
• Have you seen better examples of this type of ad campaign?
• What would be a better way to go about it?
• Why do you feel this way about this [social] issue?
• Follow-up questions
• These are used to gain a better understanding of a previous question answered, or a previous topic addressed. 
• These allow the moderator to get into the nitty-gritty of participants’ feelings and motivations.
• How do you go about this issue?
• Why do you feel this way?
• Is there anything that would change your mind about [this issue, method, way, etc]?
• How can this brand improve on serving [you, releasing a campaign, etc]?
• Exit questions
• These questions help conclude the session and should be asked when the moderator is certain that the group has expressed everything they can on the topic.
• They should be used to get confirmation on certain notions.
• Are you sure these are the best approaches?
• Is there anything else on this topic you’d like to add?

Do you need a focus group? If you do, you’ll need to know when to use them, which is rooted in the reason behind conducting them in the first place. As such, the when is closely tied to the why and how.

In short, knowing when to use a focus group depends on what you need it for. This will require you to turn to your research campaigns and needs. The following presents a few key moments and reasonings for when you should use this kind of research technique:

• To better understand the results of primary quantitative research or secondary quantitative data about qualitative aspects.
• Whenever you need to gain an explanation of something, whether it’s a phenomenon, a thing of the past, something current, something you still don’t understand.
• When you seek a more interactive research method as opposed to a textual or digitally-based one.
• When you require information about behaviors, motivations and other phenomena that are too complex for a questionnaire alone to reveal.
• In this case, the senior center already has a batch of possible participants to choose from, being the members of the center.
• In this case, the club can choose from a wide range of students at the college. They can promote their group via signs, a booth, email, etc.

Focus Groups Vs Online Surveys

Now that you’ve learned about the ins and outs of focus groups, it’s time to see how they stack up with another research method: online surveys . It’s key to compare them closely when you decide on the best research method you wish to conduct.

A focus group is a suitable method to garner qualitative research . It is far more interactive than seeking and providing written responses. So how do focus groups measure up against online surveys? 

This method is useful for finding deep insights into a topic. It allows researchers to get as granular as possible, since they are speaking with the research subjects themselves and can ask anything that they didn’t include in a survey.

The following expounds on why online surveys provide researchers with more meaningful results and a more comprehensive market research experience. Use these insights to compare with the benefits of focus groups to determine the better option for your research needs.

Benefits that are second to none

An online survey platform , however, offers benefits that are second to no other market research method . That is because surveys offer more definitive results about a population  since they are not limited to 10 or fewer research participants.

A potent online survey tool allows you to reach thousands of people — in just one survey alone.

This means surveys are the most apt tool for conducting quantitative research, something that a focus group cannot do . 

What’s more, is that surveys can include open-ended questions and follow-up questions (depending on the online survey platform you use). This proves that surveys can also forge qualitative market research. 

Thus , online survey platforms grant you the power to conduct both quantitative and qualitative research, giving you the most holistic research experience possible.

Additionally, there is no recruitment element. The survey platform is the recruiter in this case, as it allows only qualified respondents to take part in a survey . 

You can create respondent requirements that are as granular as you wish, covering every minute detail of a customer profile and reaching any population. 

This is because a strong online survey platform enables researchers to select precise respondent criteria , the kind that goes far beyond demographic selections alone.

That is because the screener portion of an online survey allows you to ask specific questions and only permits respondents who chose particular answers to take the survey.  

When taking an online survey, respondents cannot be swayed by other participants as they would in a focus group as surveys are lone activities. Therefore, respondents take them in privacy. 

Most importantly, survey software grants responders anonymity . There is no anonymity in a focus group, so more reserved members will feel less inclined to speak about certain things. 

Additionally, when domineering respondents are present, it adds another layer of difficulty to the reticent participants , especially when it comes to speaking about views that are contrary to those of a dominant member.

However, with the anonymity of a survey, respondents are free to speak their minds. As such, surveys too can provide qualitative details — so long as researchers include open-ended questions.

So which is the better research technique? The answer is, it depends on your needs. Most often a focus group is used in tandem with other market research methods. As such, we recommend using both online surveys and focus groups for your research campaigns.

Here’s why:

Researchers can use a focus group to their advantage when they seek deeper insights into the perceptions and thoughts of various business matters. 

Whether you’re testing out a new product idea, seeking the sentiment on an ad campaign, trying out new messaging, or seeking insights for any other purpose, a focus group is a useful method. However, they are but one market research method; as such they can and often are used with other market research techniques. 

However, survey research is one of the most powerful forms of research , in that it empowers researchers to probe into anything and reach relatively anyone (should the survey platform allow it). 

A strong online survey tool will deploy your survey to the most popular websites and apps , and take no more than 2 days to gather the number of respondents you input. In addition, it can send your survey to specific individuals through specific online channel s , such as social media, email, or landing pages. Your survey platform would need to offer the Distribution Link feature to do this.

In addition, the online survey platform you choose should allow you to create logic in your survey, that is, to route respondents to appropriate follow-up questions based on the answer they provide to a question . Choose a platform that offers advanced skip logic to do this. 

All in all, researchers who are serious about conducting market research campaigns should use surveys alongside any other research method , including that of a focus group. It provides quantitative data, which focus groups do not, along with a wide breadth of key features and capabilities to complete any market research campaign. 

Frequently asked questions

What is a focus group.

A focus group is a small group of survey research subjects, typically composed of 6-10 participants who take part in a moderated discussion about a particular topic. The participants are chosen based upon similar characteristics.

What is the moderator’s role in a focus group?

The moderator of a focus group leads the discussion by asking questions, proposing talking points, studying the responses and taking notes on the findings. The moderator keeps the conversion flowing and ensures that the discussion remains amicable, even when discussing sensitive topics or opposing opinions.

How can focus groups support a qualitative research project?

Focus groups are used in qualitative research to help gain a deeper understanding of the motivations behind the behavior, attitudes, or feelings of a group of people. By directly addressing a portion of the sample population, researchers can delve into the “why” or “how” behind data that has already been collected.

What are some of the benefits of a focus group?What are some of the disadvantages of focus groups? Focus groups are conducted with a smaller group of people, therefore the recruitment phase can take longer and the thoughts of the group may not represent the larger population. In addition, it is possible that stronger voices can dominate the conversation and influence or obscure the findings.

Focus groups allow for the exploration of deep feelings and opinions, can provoke thoughtful insights, provide quick results, allow researchers to study non-verbal signals that accompany the discussion, and can result in unexpected information.

What are some of the disadvantages of focus groups?

Focus groups are conducted with a smaller group of people, therefore the recruitment phase can take longer and the thoughts of the group may not represent the larger population. In addition, it is possible that stronger voices can dominate the conversation and influence or obscure the findings.

Do you want to distribute your survey? Pollfish offers you access to millions of targeted consumers to get survey responses from $0.95 per complete. Launch your survey today.

Privacy Preference Center

Privacy preferences.

• (855) 776-7763

Training Maker

All Products

Qualaroo Insights

ProProfs.com

• Sign Up Free

Do you want a free Survey Software?

We have the #1 Online Survey Maker Software to get actionable user insights.

Focus Group in Market Research: Types, Examples and Best Practices

Focus Group is one of the critical components of market research. It is an interactive group discussion method where selected participants share their thoughts on a particular product, service, or other things. 

Suppose you are planning to launch a new product in the market. But before that, you want to undertake extensive market research to understand customers’ thoughts and opinions. Although surveys and questionnaires are helpful to a certain extent in conducting in-depth research, it’s not practical to extract enough actionable insights into a customers’ thought process or feelings. Moreover, they can’t provide quantitative data about the subject.

By conducting a focus group, you can understand what your target audience will like, so you can incorporate those elements into it before launching the product in the market. Or how much they are ready to spend so you can set the pricing accordingly. 

This blog will discuss what a focus group is, its advantages, examples, and how to conduct one for your next research.

Let’s start.

What Is a Focus Group?

A focus group is one of the most popular and effective market research methods of gathering qualitative data through group interaction. It consists of a small group of people (usually 6-10) and a moderator to participate in a discussion. People are selected based on shared characteristics like geographic location, age group, ethnicity, shopping behavior, shopping history, or other such factors. The participants share their thoughts and feelings on the particular subject so the researcher can collect valuable data and make informed decisions.

The purpose of conducting a focus group is to understand a topic, whether it is a product, service, belief, perception, or anything in greater depth. It is used to identify people’s opinions, attitudes, sentiments and explore the reasons behind these.

Characteristics of Focus Groups

For focus research to be effective, it is essential to have the following given characteristics:

• Small-Group of People

Usually, focus groups consist of 6-10 people. The group needs to be small in size to make a valuable contribution to the discussion. Large groups can hinder the focus discussion as some people may dominate the conversation, and others might not present their thoughts.

• Homogenous Group

It is crucial for focus groups to have a degree of homogeneity. Specific topics can only be explored in greater depth when there is homogeneity among the participants about usage or attitudes toward the product. The participants can be similar in terms of demographic, geographical,  psychographic, purchase behavior, attitude, or any other criteria that suit your research.

• Open-Ended Questions

Focus Group consists of pre-decided open-ended questions that enable participants to share their thoughts and feelings about the subject. For example, “what do you think about the features of this product?” It is important not to include close-ended questions like “Yes” or “No” as this will not result in open-ended, free-flowing discussion among the participants. 

• Qualitative Data

Another essential characteristic of the focus group is that it offers qualitative data that is comprehensive in nature and not numerical. It provides a platform for in-depth discussion. Also, there is a lot more than the group interview. Essentially, it involves sharing first-hand opinions and experiences by participants. 

Types of Focus Group

Basically, there are 7 types of focus groups. Based on your research, you can select any type. Let’s have a look at them:

• Two-Way Focus Group

It involves two groups; each group with its own moderator. One group discusses the topic while the other group listens and observes them. Then, the second group discusses the subject by observing the thoughts of the first group. This arrangement aims to facilitate more discussion and additional insights about the particular topic. 

• Dual-Moderator Focus Group

In this type of opinion group, two moderators are used. One moderator ensures smooth execution of the session, the other guarantees that each question is covered in the discussion.

• Dueling Moderator Focus Group

Just like the Dual-Moderator focus group, it also involves two moderators. The difference is that both moderators purposefully take opposite sides of the topic to explore both sides of an issue and generate new insights regarding the subject.

• Client-Participant Focus Group

In this type of arrangement, a client who asked to conduct the focus group is also sitting as a participant with the group. It gives the client more control over the discussion, and he can lead the qualitative discussion wherever he wants to.

• Respondent Moderator Focus Group

In this type of focus group, the researcher asks some participants to act as moderators for a temporary period to avoid unintentional bias. This type of arrangement changes the groups’ dynamics and makes people more open and honest with their answers.

• Mini Focus Group

In contrast to a regular research focus group with 6-10 people, a mini focus group has only 4-5 people. This type of event is suitable when a more intimate approach is needed as ordered by the client and subject matter. 

• Online Focus Group

Using a teleconference or the internet, the remote or online focus group brings together people from different places who might not meet in person. Here, participants interact through a video call, and the moderator asks the questions and leads the conversation.

How to Conduct a Focus Group

As discussed above, not all focus groups are the same. But there are some general steps that you can follow that help gather data from customers efficiently. Let’s discuss how to run a focus group:

1. Set Your Focus Group Objectives

Before you select the focus group participants, it is crucial to determine what you want to achieve from this activity. Why are you conducting this survey? For example, do you want to launch a new product or service? Or want to study in detail about your existing customers? Setting clear specific objectives will help you efficiently plan your focus group.

2. Select the Right Audience and Moderator

Establishing clear goals will help you decide the right target audience for focus groups. You need to select the people who have adequate knowledge of the topic so that they can add a valuable contribution to your group research. 

It is also equally necessary to select the right moderator. Your moderator should understand the topic, ensure participation from all members, and that group discussion is steering in the right direction that aligns with research objectives.

3. Choose Time and Venue

You can either conduct focus groups offline or online mode. Having a group discussion online will have greater flexibility as more people worldwide will be able to join the focus grouping from the comfort of their homes. If you decide to get together in person, make sure to select the location that is easy to find and access and is large enough to accommodate your participants in one space, like a meeting room or hall. 

Also, ensure to select the proper time when your target audience will be available. For instance, if your focus group requires professionals, you should go for weekends or after work hours. 

4. Write The Questions

The objective of conducting a focus group is to gather rich information. Hence, it is crucial to write the survey questions engagingly before you actually complete the event. Ensure to keep the questions open-ended with no particular answer implied. You can start questions with words like “how,” “why,” and “what” to get more participation from participants. For instance, “How do you feel about using this product?”

5. Conduct the Session and Analyze the Data

The next step is conducting the focus groups. While following the list of topics to be covered is vital, the moderator should also remain open-minded and allow participants to speak about the things that they believe are significant. Make sure to record or document the entire conversation that will help you analyze the data and make conclusions. 

Focus Group Research Best Practices

Running a successful focus group requires a lot of careful planning. So, if you’re new to this concept, you can follow the below tips to best utilize this qualitative research method .

• Have a Clear Strategy

For a focus group to be successful, it is important to have a clear plan before inviting the participants. You should be clear in your approach what end-result you want to achieve. For instance, you want qualitative data regarding the launch of new products or the effect of change in the pricing of existing products.

• Ask Important Questions in the Beginning

Usually, the participants are most focused at the beginning of the event. So, try to ask the most crucial focus group questions at the event’s start and steer the conservation in the direction that matches the research objectives. This will also ensure that all the essential questions are covered before the time runs out.

• Use Ice Breaker Questions

You can ask the participants to introduce themselves or ask quick icebreaker questions at the beginning of the event. It will help people ease up and interact more with other participants during the focus group discussions. 

• Select the Convenient Venue

It is vital to select a public place for the focus group discussion that is easy to access, well connected by public transport, and has good parking. It will ensure that participants arrive on time without facing any significant difficulties. You can also provide clear instructions on reaching the location to your audience before the event.

• Create a Relaxing Environment

Participants will speak openly and freely only when they feel comfortable. Ensure to set a comfortable temperature in the hall/room, proper seating space, and arrange water bottles for everyone. You can also offer light snacks if you think the discussion will take more than 1 hour. 

• Try to Interact More With Quiet Participants

In a focus group, some individuals may sometimes dominate the topic, so make sure to approach quiet participants directly so you can gain insights from everyone. You don’t have to be demanding; simply go around the room and direct particular focus group questionnaires to specific people.

• Keep the Duration Short

In general, the longer your focus group runs, the less interested people are likely to be in it. This can make it more challenging for people to come up with creative ideas or have a lively debate. Try to keep it short by not exceeding 1-2 hour duration.

Focus Group Examples

A Focus group is used in various fields to collect quantitative data about a subject. It is used in situations where public opinions guide an action. Let’s look at some of the focus group examples:

Focus Group in Political Field

Suppose a political party is interested to know how the working population would react to change in a specific policy. They can conduct the focus group research method in this scenario, where they can select some of the respondents who will act as the representative sample of a population. By observing the respondents discussing those policies, market researchers would analyze the data and report their findings to the party.

Focus Group in Marketing Field

Focus groups are also used in the Marketing and Sales domain. For example, a marketing firm wants to launch a new cosmetic product for its female customers. So, they will conduct the focus group of females, where they will discuss what features are essential for them, how much they are willing to pay for those benefits, which product they are currently using, why they like it, and what problems they face while using the product. The researcher can collect in-depth data based on these discussions and draw a suitable conclusion.

Focus Group Question Examples

Focus group questions fall into four categories, each of which is discussed below.

Introductory Questions

Introductory Questions are usually open-ended questions that are asked at the beginning of the focus group. The purpose of these questions is to stimulate the members to interact with each other and set the tone of the discussion. You can use introductory focus group questions to drive the discussion in the way you want it to go.

• Today we are here to discuss product X. What are your thoughts about it?
• When was the last time you used product X?
• What is your favorite brand of product X? Why?
• How often do you use this product?
• From where did you hear about product X?
• What do you like the best about product X?
• What do you not like about product X?

Exploration Questions

As the name suggests, these questions explore the subject more deeply. They stimulate responses from the audience that offer detailed insight into what they think of the particular topic. Exploration questions should be structured to draw out as much information from members as possible. Let’s discuss some focus group questions examples in this case.

• What will you like to change about product X?
• What first comes to your mind when you think of product X?
• Why have you stopped using product X?
• What do you like about brand X as compared to brand Y?
• Has your usage of product X declined or increased in the last three years?
• What are your specific expectations while selecting this product?
• If brand X is not available in the market, which brand will you choose and why?

Follow-up Questions

After exploration questions are asked, follow-up questions are used to collect specific insights to clarify anything that is unclear or to invite more participation from participants. Let’s discuss some of the focus group examples for follow-up questions.

• How can product X be improved?
• You said …………………….. about product X. What do you mean by that?
• Can anyone else relate to this (Name) experience?
• What is it about product X that makes you feel this way?
• Is there anyone in the group that doesn’t feel this way about product X?
• What are the chances that you will recommend this product to others?

Exit Questions

After all the pre-decided topics have been covered, you can ask exit questions to ensure that nothing has been left unsaid. Make sure that your participants don’t leave the event with any lingering doubt. Exit questions are designed in a way to wrap the event. Let’s discuss some focus group questions examples in this case.

• Is there anything else that you would like to add about product X?
• Would you like to discuss any other topic related to the product?
• Anything else that you feel essential has not been covered during the discussion?
• We discussed in detail about brand X but not Y. Would you like to add anything about brand Y?

Advantages of Focus Group

The best part of focus groups is their interactive nature. It allows participants to interact and discuss topics in detail that offers rich qualitative data. Focus Groups are beneficial because they provide an alternate way of collecting data from target consumers without using surveys that only produce quantitative data. Getting into the minds of customers is extremely difficult. But the focus group research method provides an engaging way to gather first-hand information of customer thoughts, opinions, and perception of your brand, service, or product.

Also, focus groups are flexible by design. You can understand what customers feel about the subject by their body language and way of speaking. Moreover, you can steer the discussion to match your research objectives to collect the information you want.

Ready to Collect Qualitative Data to Obtain Rich Customer Insight?

By now, you must have understood the importance of a focus group. There is no better way to collect in-depth customer insights than conducting this extensive market research method. Focus groups can be utilized in different fields where the action is based on the customer’s opinion. It is an excellent way to get into a customer’s head. 

Focus groups can also be combined with other research methods like interviews and surveys to make it more effective. Based on the type of research and data you need, a focus group can be used with other research methods to offer actionable insights. You can use a robust survey tool to quickly deploy your survey and combine it with a focus group for efficient results.

About the author

Emma David is a seasoned market research professional with 8+ years of experience. Having kick-started her journey in research, she has developed rich expertise in employee engagement, survey creation and administration, and data management. Emma believes in the power of data to shape business performance positively. She continues to help brands and businesses make strategic decisions and improve their market standing through her understanding of research methodologies.

Popular Posts in This Category

50+ NPS Survey Questions Examples for Every Scenario

How to Create Popup Surveys for Your Website

How to Use Surveys for Content Marketing

10 Best Customer Experience Management Software in 2024

How to Calculate Customer Effort Score to Grow Your Business

How to Analyze Survey Data Like a Pro

What Is a Focus Group and How to Conduct It? (+ Examples)

Appinio Research · 14.09.2023 · 19min read

Have you ever wondered how businesses gain deep insights into consumer behavior, preferences, and opinions? Introducing focus groups—a powerful tool that unlocks the authentic voices of participants and reveals invaluable qualitative data. In this guide, we'll walk you through every step of the focus group process, from meticulous planning and skillful moderation to insightful analysis and actionable recommendations. Whether you're a researcher, marketer, or decision-maker, this guide equips you with the knowledge and strategies to harness the potential of focus groups and make informed, impactful decisions.

What is a Focus Group?

At its core, a focus group is a structured conversation involving a small group of individuals who share their thoughts, feelings, and experiences regarding a particular subject. The primary purpose of a focus group is to uncover nuanced insights that might not emerge through other research methods . You're essentially providing a platform for participants to express themselves freely, leading to a richer, more holistic understanding of the topic.

Why are Focus Groups Important in Market Research?

Focus groups play a pivotal role in market research . They allow you to delve into consumers' motivations, desires, and pain points, helping businesses tailor their products and services to better meet customer needs. Unlike quantitative data, focus groups provide qualitative context, shedding light on "why" people feel the way they do.

Focus groups serve as invaluable tools for gaining insights into people's opinions, attitudes, and perceptions. They bring together a diverse group of participants to engage in open discussions on a specific topic, offering qualitative data that goes beyond quantitative surveys. 

Benefits of Conducting Focus Groups

Conducting focus groups offers a range of benefits that contribute to informed decision-making and improved outcomes:

• Rich Insights: Focus groups elicit detailed responses, offering a deeper understanding of participants' perspectives.
• Real-time Interaction: Observing participants' interactions in real-time provides valuable non-verbal cues that text-based surveys can't capture.
• Group Dynamics: Group discussions can stimulate new ideas as participants bounce thoughts off each other.
• Uncovering Unconscious Factors: Focus groups can reveal subconscious opinions or emotions that participants might not even be aware of.
• Flexible Approach: The open-ended nature of focus groups allows for unexpected insights to emerge.

How to Set Up a Focus Group?

Before you embark on your focus group journey, thorough planning and meticulous preparation are crucial to ensuring the success of your sessions. Let's delve deeper into each step of this vital phase.

1. Identify Research Objectives

Research objectives serve as the compass guiding your focus group sessions. Clearly define what you aim to achieve through these discussions. Are you seeking insights into customer preferences, testing a new product concept, or exploring perceptions of a brand? Align your objectives with the overarching goals of your research to maintain focus and relevance.

2. Select Participant Demographics

Choosing the right participants is instrumental in obtaining diverse and representative insights. Consider the characteristics that are relevant to your research objectives. These may include:

• Income level

By selecting participants who mirror your target audience, you enhance the accuracy and applicability of your findings.

3. Recruit Participants

Effective participant recruitment is crucial for the success of your focus groups. Utilize various channels such as social media, online forums, email lists, and professional networks. Craft clear and compelling recruitment messages that communicate the focus group's purpose and participation benefits. Ensure that participants are genuinely interested, reliable, and willing to engage in open discussions.

4. Create Discussion Guidelines

Discussion guidelines provide structure to your focus group sessions while allowing for spontaneous conversations. Clearly outline the scope of the discussion, the key topics you intend to cover, and any specific areas of interest. Having a flexible framework ensures that discussions remain on track while permitting organic exploration of the subject matter.

5. Choose a Skilled Moderator

The role of the moderator is pivotal in shaping the dynamics and outcomes of your focus group. Opt for a skilled moderator who possesses strong facilitation and interpersonal skills. The moderator should be capable of guiding discussions, managing group dynamics, and ensuring that all participants have an equal opportunity to contribute. A skilled moderator can navigate unexpected twists in the conversation and encourage deeper insights.

How to Design a Focus Group?

Designing your focus group sessions requires thoughtful consideration of various elements to create an environment conducive to rich discussions.

1. Determine Group Size

The size of your focus group impacts the quality of interactions and the depth of insights. Aim for a balance between having a sufficiently diverse group and maintaining a manageable discussion. Generally, a group of 6 to 10 participants is optimal, allowing for a variety of viewpoints without overwhelming the conversation.

2. Select the Location

The choice of location plays a significant role, particularly for in-person focus groups. Select a comfortable and neutral venue that minimizes distractions and fosters open dialogue. If virtual sessions are more practical, ensure that the online platform is user-friendly and accessible to all participants, regardless of their technical proficiency.

3. Set the Duration

The duration of your focus group session impacts participant engagement and the quality of insights. Sessions typically last between 1 to 2 hours, striking a balance between allowing participants to delve into the topic without exhausting their attention spans. Longer sessions may lead to participant fatigue, which can hinder the quality of responses.

4. Prepare Stimuli (if applicable)

If your research involves presenting stimuli such as visuals, prototypes, or samples, careful preparation is essential. Ensure that your material is ready and relevant to the discussion topics. Stimuli can serve as conversation starters and tangible references for participants, enriching the depth of their responses.

5. Develop Open-Ended Questions

Crafting open-ended questions is an art that drives meaningful conversations. These questions encourage participants to openly share their thoughts, feelings, and experiences. Avoid closed-ended or leading questions, as they limit the scope of responses. Developing thoughtful and open-ended prompts creates opportunities for participants to express themselves authentically.

As you move forward with your focus group journey, remember that every aspect of planning and designing contributes to the quality of insights you'll gain. Your meticulous preparation sets the stage for rich, valuable discussions that uncover nuances and perspectives that quantitative data alone can't provide.

How to Conduct a Focus Group?

With your meticulous planning in place, it's time to bring your focus group to life. Conducting a focus group involves skillful facilitation, attentive moderation, and the ability to navigate diverse perspectives.

Let's explore the intricacies of this process and how to ensure a successful session.

Icebreaker Activities

Begin your focus group session with engaging icebreaker activities. Icebreakers serve multiple purposes, from easing participants into the conversation to creating a comfortable atmosphere for open sharing.

Some common icebreaker activities include:

• Introduction Round: Have each participant introduce themselves, sharing their name, background, and a fun fact related to the topic.
• "Two Truths and a Lie": Participants share two factual statements and one false statement about themselves, prompting discussion as others guess the lie.

Establishing Group Norms

Setting clear group norms from the outset creates a respectful and productive discussion environment. Norms ensure participants feel valued, heard, and safe sharing their viewpoints.

• Active Listening: Encourage attentive listening by asking participants to refrain from interrupting while others speak.
• Respectful Interaction: Emphasize the importance of respectful disagreement and constructive feedback.
• Confidentiality: Stress that participants should keep the discussion content confidential, fostering an environment of trust.
• Equal Participation: Encourage balanced participation by ensuring everyone has a chance to share their thoughts.

Moderator's Role and Techniques

The role of the moderator is pivotal in guiding discussions while maintaining a balanced and focused conversation. A skilled moderator employs various techniques to facilitate meaningful interactions:

• Active Listening: The moderator listens attentively to participants' responses, demonstrating that their opinions are valued.
• Probing: The moderator asks follow-up questions to dig deeper into participants' responses and uncover underlying motivations.
• Reflection: Summarizing participants' contributions shows that their thoughts are being accurately captured.
• Redirecting: If discussions veer off-topic, the moderator gently guides the conversation back to the main subject.

Encouraging Balanced Participation

Balanced involvement ensures that all participants have the opportunity to contribute. Some individuals naturally dominate discussions, while others might hesitate to speak up.

Techniques to encourage balanced participation include:

• Direct Questions: Address specific questions to participants who haven't spoken much, inviting their input.
• Round-Robin Sharing: Go around the group, giving each participant a chance to share their thoughts on a particular topic.
• Thought Pairing: Ask participants to pair up and share their perspectives with a partner before sharing with the larger group.

Probing for Deeper Insights

As discussions progress, employing probing techniques helps uncover deeper insights beneath surface-level responses. Probing involves asking follow-up questions that encourage participants to elaborate on their thoughts and feelings:

• "Why" Questions: Ask participants to explain the reasoning behind their opinions. For example, "Why do you think this approach would be effective?"
• "Tell Me More" Prompt: Encourage participants to elaborate by simply asking them to share more details about a specific point they made.
• Hypothetical Scenarios: Present hypothetical scenarios related to the topic and ask participants how they would respond, leading to more nuanced insights.

By skillfully employing these techniques, you can create an environment where participants feel comfortable expressing their opinions and where discussions naturally flow, leading to in-depth insights that you can later analyze.

How to Collect Focus Group Data?

With your focus group sessions successfully conducted, the next phase involves extracting meaningful insights from the rich discussions. We'll look at popular data collection and analysis methods to ensure that your findings are both accurate and actionable.

Recording and Transcribing Sessions

Recording focus group sessions is essential to capture participants' responses in their own words and preserve the nuances of the conversation.

• Recording: Use audio or video recording equipment to capture the entire discussion. Ensure that participants are comfortable with being recorded and understand the purpose of the recording.
• Transcribing: Transcribe the recorded sessions verbatim. Transcriptions provide a textual version of the discussions, which is easier to review and analyze.

Identifying Key Themes and Patterns

As you review the transcribed discussions, focus on identifying emerging themes and patterns. Themes are recurring topics or ideas that participants discuss, while patterns involve the connections between these themes. Look for insights that align with your research objectives.

• Open Coding: Start with open coding, where you assign preliminary labels to sections of the text corresponding to certain themes.
• Axial Coding: Organize the open codes into broader categories or themes, establishing relationships between them.
• Selective Coding: Refine the codes further, focusing on the most significant themes and their connections.

Coding and Categorizing Responses

Coding and categorization involve systematically organizing participants' responses based on identified themes and patterns. This process allows you to aggregate and compare the data, making it easier to draw conclusions.

• Codebook Development: Create a codebook that outlines the themes, definitions, and examples for each code.
• Applying Codes: Read through the transcribed data and apply the relevant codes to sections corresponding to each theme.
• Categorization: Group similar codes together to form categories that encapsulate broader concepts.

Using Qualitative Analysis Software

Qualitative analysis software can streamline the process of coding, categorization, and data management. Platforms like Appinio offer features that enhance the efficiency and accuracy of your analysis:

• Code Management: Software allows you to easily create, apply, and modify codes.
• Search and Retrieval: Quickly search for specific keywords or themes within the transcribed data.
• Visualization: Some tools provide visual representations of the data, making it easier to identify patterns and trends.

Extracting Actionable Insights

From the coded and categorized data, you can extract actionable insights that inform decision-making. These insights are drawn from the participants' perspectives and can lead to improvements in products, services, or strategies:

• Quoting Participant Responses: Use direct quotes from participants to illustrate key points and provide authenticity to your findings.
• Patterns and Trends: Identify overarching patterns and trends that provide a holistic understanding of participants' opinions.
• Identify Opportunities: Look for opportunities for innovation, improvements, or addressing pain points that participants highlight.

By meticulously analyzing the transcribed data and extracting meaningful insights, you bridge the gap between raw conversation and actionable recommendations that can drive positive change.

How to Analyze Focus Group Data?

As you move into the interpretation and reporting phase of your focus group research, you'll synthesize the gathered insights into a coherent narrative. Here's how you can effectively interpret and communicate your findings to various stakeholders.

1. Summarize Findings

Summarizing the key findings of your focus group sessions provides a concise overview of the insights gathered. Focus on the most salient themes, patterns, and opinions that emerged during the discussions. This summary sets the stage for more in-depth exploration in the subsequent sections.

2. Relate Findings to Research Objectives

Connect the dots between your findings and the initial research objectives you established. Highlight how each identified theme or pattern addresses specific research goals. This linkage reinforces the relevance of your insights and underscores the value of your focus group research.

3. Provide Rich Descriptions

Enrich your report with detailed descriptions of participants' responses. These descriptions add depth and context to your findings, helping stakeholders understand the nuances of participants' opinions and perspectives. Paint a vivid picture of the discussions to ensure your audience gains a comprehensive understanding.

4. Incorporate Participant Quotes

Incorporating direct quotes from participants adds authenticity and humanizes your findings. Quotes allow stakeholders to hear participants' voices firsthand, making the insights more relatable. Select quotes that encapsulate key points, emotions, or unique perspectives shared during the focus group discussions.

5. Make Data-Driven Recommendations

Formulate actionable recommendations based on the insights extracted from your focus group data. These recommendations should be grounded in the participants' perspectives and aligned with your research objectives. Whether refining a marketing strategy, modifying a product feature, or enhancing customer service, your recommendations should be informed and practical.

How to Lead a Focus Group?

Conducting focus groups comes with its own set of challenges. By adhering to best practices, you can navigate these challenges effectively and ensure the integrity of your research.

• Ensure Objectivity and Impartiality: Maintain objectivity throughout your focus group research. As the moderator, your role is facilitating discussions, not influencing outcomes. Avoid expressing personal opinions or steering the conversation in a particular direction.
• Minimize Groupthink and Bias: Be vigilant about group dynamics that might lead to groupthink, where participants conform to the majority opinion. Encourage diverse viewpoints and foster an environment where participants feel comfortable expressing dissenting views.
• Deal with Dominant Participants: In some focus groups, specific individuals may dominate the conversation. Gently redirect the discussion to ensure all participants have an equal contribution opportunity. Use techniques like directly addressing quieter participants for their input.
• Address Sensitive Topics: When discussing sensitive topics, create a supportive and nonjudgmental environment. Approach these discussions with empathy and use considerate language. Clearly communicate that participants are free to share their thoughts without fear of judgment.
• Adapt to Virtual Focus Groups: Virtual focus groups offer convenience but present unique challenges. Ensure participants are comfortable with the technology and provide clear instructions for joining the virtual session. Be prepared to troubleshoot technical issues that may arise.

Navigating these best practices and challenges ensures that your focus group research is conducted ethically, rigorously, and effectively.

Focus Group Examples

Let's explore how focus groups can be applied across various domains to extract valuable insights and drive informed decisions.

Example 1: SaaS Product Development

Imagine a SaaS company aiming to enhance its project management software. To gather insights for improvements, they conduct a focus group with current users:

• Planning: The company identifies research objectives, including user experience enhancement and feature preferences.
• Participants: They recruit a diverse group of existing users, ranging from freelancers to project managers.
• Discussion: The focus group discusses pain points, desired features, and overall user satisfaction.
• Analysis: The company analyzes transcribed discussions, identifying recurring themes like seamless collaboration and customizable dashboards.
• Insights: These insights lead to data-driven decisions, resulting in feature updates like improved collaboration tools and a user-customizable interface.

Example 2: Business Strategy Alignment

A retail chain considers expanding its product offerings. To align their business strategy with customer preferences, they conduct a focus group:

• Planning: The company defines research objectives to understand customer preferences and potential demand.
• Participants: They select a mix of loyal and potential new customers from various demographics.
• Discussion: The focus group explores participants' shopping habits, preferences, and thoughts on the proposed products.
• Analysis: The company identifies patterns, discovering that participants value eco-friendly products and unique offerings.
• Insights: Equipped with insights, the retail chain refines its expansion strategy to include sustainable products and innovative offerings, resonating with customer expectations.

Example 3: Academic Research

An academic researcher is exploring attitudes toward online learning. They decide to use focus groups to delve into students' perspectives:

• Planning: The researcher outlines research objectives centered around understanding students' experiences with online learning.
• Participants: A mix of online and in-person students with varying academic backgrounds and preferences.
• Discussion: The focus group conversations revolve around challenges, advantages, and suggestions for enhancing online education.
• Analysis: The researcher uncovers recurring themes, such as the importance of interactive content and effective communication.
• Insights: The researcher contributes to developing more engaging online courses, prioritizing interactive elements and clear communication channels.

These examples showcase the versatility of focus groups in capturing nuanced insights across diverse domains. Whether it's shaping software features, refining business strategies, or informing academic research, focus groups provide a platform to tap into authentic participant perspectives, resulting in well-informed decisions and strategies.

Focus groups are not just discussions—they're windows into understanding, catalysts for improvement, and sources of innovation. Following the steps outlined in this guide, you've gained the tools to orchestrate meaningful conversations, extract nuanced insights, and translate those insights into actionable recommendations. Remember, each participant's voice adds a unique brushstroke to the canvas of insights, and your role as a skilled moderator brings those brushstrokes to life.

As you venture into focus groups, approach each session with curiosity and openness. Listen actively, probe gently, and navigate group dynamics with finesse. Whether you're fine-tuning a marketing campaign, shaping the next product iteration, or charting the course for your organization's future, the authentic perspectives gathered through focus groups will guide your way. Embrace the art of facilitation, savor the richness of discussion, and let the insights gained propel you toward confident decisions and successful outcomes. Your commitment to the power of dialogue ensures that participants' voices continue to shape meaningful change.

How to Conduct a Focus Group online in Minutes?

Discover the revolutionary way to conduct focus groups and gain invaluable insights in just minutes. Appinio , a dynamic real-time market research platform, empowers companies to tap into consumer perspectives swiftly and effectively.

By handling the research and technology complexities, Appinio frees you to focus on what truly matters – swift, data-driven decision-making. Uncover the excitement of seamless integration, intuitive processes, and lightning-fast answers to fuel your business success.

Why Appinio?

• Transformative Speed: From questions to insights in minutes, Appinio ensures rapid access to the consumer pulse.
• Seamless Integration: Integrate real-time consumer insights seamlessly into everyday decision-making.
• Empower Your Choices: Embrace the power of data-driven decisions without the hassle of traditional research methods.

Join the loop 💌

Be the first to hear about new updates, product news, and data insights. We'll send it all straight to your inbox.

Get the latest market research news straight to your inbox! 💌

Wait, there's more

16.05.2024 | 30min read

Time Series Analysis: Definition, Types, Techniques, Examples

14.05.2024 | 30min read

Experimental Research: Definition, Types, Design, Examples

07.05.2024 | 29min read

Interval Scale: Definition, Characteristics, Examples

• Our Process
• Research & Strategy
• Student Ambassadors
• On Campus Media
• Digital Reach
• Experiential / Events
• Student Nano Social Influencers
• Case Studies
• Campus Insider

The Ultimate Focus Group Marketing Guide: Definition, Benefits & More

Struggling to understand your customers’ deepest thoughts? Focus groups have been unlocking consumer insights since the 1940s. Our ultimate guide offers you key tactics to tap into what really makes your audience tick through effective focus group marketing.

Dive in and discover how!

Key Takeaways

• Focus groups provide qualitative insights by bringing together 6 – 10 people to discuss and give feedback on topics, helping marketers understand consumer behavior and opinions.
• They originated in the mid – 20th century for sociological studies and have evolved with technology, now including virtual formats that expand reach across locations.
• The role of a skilled moderator is crucial to guide discussions, maintain engagement, and ensure every participant has a voice during the focus group session.
• Best practices include establishing clear ground rules before discussion, seeking diverse participant representation, using co-creation for idea development, and involving clients to add credibility.
• Consider alternatives to focus groups when statistical data is required or when time constraints demand quicker research methods.

Table of Contents

What is a Focus Group?

A focus group is a research powerhouse, assembling selected individuals to deep dive into opinions and attitudes about products or services, providing marketers with invaluable qualitative insights.

This dynamic tool has evolved over the years to become a crucial element in gauging consumer response before market strategies are carved in stone.

Definition and History

A focus group is a market research method that gathers people to discuss and provide feedback on products, marketing campaigns, or ideas. It presents a dynamic way to collect qualitative insights from participants through interactive group discussions.

Typically, the discussion happens under the guidance of a moderator who steers the conversation towards critical talking points while ensuring everyone has an opportunity to share their thoughts.

The origins of focus groups trace back to sociological studies and opinion polling in the mid-20th century. Social scientist Robert Merton is often credited with developing this technique during World War II when it was used to assess the effectiveness of propaganda.

Since then, marketers have harnessed focus groups for consumer behavior analysis, concept testing, and gathering consumer insights crucial for product positioning and market segmentation.

This method has expanded over time with technological advancements allowing online focus groups and virtual formats that accommodate broader participation across geographical locations.

Focus Group Format

In a focus group, typically 6-10 people come together to discuss and give feedback on specific topics or products. The session often takes place in a comfortable room with one-way mirrors for observers.

Each group follows a structured format that includes an introduction by the moderator, who explains the purpose of the discussion and sets out any rules. Participants are then encouraged to openly share their thoughts, which creates valuable qualitative insights into consumer behavior.

The moderator plays a crucial role throughout; they keep the conversation on track while ensuring everyone has an opportunity to speak. Audio or video recordings capture everything said so that nothing is missed during analysis.

Tools like whiteboards or projectors may be used to stimulate discussion and showcase concepts for participant reaction. This interactive group setup allows for dynamic exchanges between participants, sparking deeper discussions about market segmentation, product positioning, and customer insights.

Pros and Cons

After discussing the format of focus groups, it’s important to weigh their advantages and disadvantages to better understand their role in market research.

Moving forward, understanding how to run a focus group effectively is crucial for harnessing these benefits while mitigating the drawbacks.

How to Run a Focus Group

Diving into the heart of qualitative market research, we uncover the steps necessary to steer a focus group from inception to insightful conclusion. It’s about orchestrating an environment conducive to candid conversation and extracting valuable nuggets of truth that can pivot your marketing strategy in real-time.

Choosing a Topic

Selecting an engaging topic is vital for the success of a focus group. The chosen subject must resonate with your participants and align with the objectives of your market research.

It should delve into areas where you seek qualitative insights, such as consumer behavior or product positioning. Aim to identify gaps in your understanding or aspects of consumer feedback that could significantly influence your marketing strategy.

Pick a theme that encourages interactive group discussion and keeps everyone invested throughout the session. This ensures that each participant has ample opportunity to contribute their unique perspectives, leading to richer data analysis later on.

Once the topic is set, you’ll move on to crafting questions designed to probe deeply into participants’ thoughts and experiences.

Preparing Questions

Once you’ve pinpointed the topic, crafting questions for your focus group comes next. These questions are vital tools that guide the interactive group discussion toward valuable insights.

Make sure they are open-ended to encourage participants to share their thoughts in detail. Your inquiries should tap into consumer behavior and explore different aspects of product positioning and brand perception.

Design every question with a clear purpose in mind, aiming to gather qualitative research data that highlights market segmentation issues or identifies customer insights during product testing.

Questions must be structured in a way that prevents confusion and keeps the conversation on track for actionable feedback. Avoid leading or biased wording which could skew the results; instead, prioritize clarity and neutrality to ensure authentic responses from your target audience.

Recruiting and Scheduling Participants

Recruiting the right participants for a focus group is crucial. Scheduling them effectively ensures a smooth market research process.

• Identify your target audience to make sure the feedback is relevant and insightful.
• Use various channels such as social media, email campaigns, or recruitment agencies to find potential participants.
• Screen candidates with surveys or quick phone calls to verify they match your market segmentation criteria.
• Provide clear information about the focus group’s purpose and what will be expected from the participants.
• Offer incentives that appeal to your demographic, whether it’s cash, gift cards, or products.
• Schedule sessions at different times to accommodate diverse schedules and increase attendance rates.
• Confirm participation with reminders via email or text messages as the date approaches.
• Prepare backup participants in case of last – minute dropouts to keep your focus group fully staffed.
• Ensure that privacy policies are explained and consent forms are sent out ahead of time for a seamless start during the actual event.
• Use online scheduling tools for virtual focus groups to manage time differences and technical setup.

The Role of the Moderator

The moderator serves as the navigator of a focus group, ensuring the conversation stays on course and every voice is heard. They create an inviting atmosphere where participants feel comfortable sharing their honest thoughts and reactions.

It’s the moderator’s job to probe deeper into responses for clearer understanding while keeping discussions lively yet focused. Their skill in asking the right questions at just the right time can unearth valuable consumer insights that might otherwise remain hidden.

A skilled moderator effectively manages group dynamics, preventing any one participant from dominating and encouraging quieter members to contribute. They’re adept at reading non-verbal cues, sensing when someone has more to add or if a topic shift is needed to maintain engagement.

By balancing between guiding the discussion and letting it flow naturally, moderators play a crucial role in gathering comprehensive feedback critical for market research success.

Facilitating the Discussion

Facilitating the discussion in a focus group is like conducting an orchestra; every voice counts, and harmony is key. A skilled moderator guides participants through interactive group discussions, ensuring everyone has the chance to share their thoughts.

They keep conversations on track and probe deeper into consumer behavior and insights without influencing responses with their own opinions or biases.

Effective facilitation involves listening actively, asking open-ended questions that encourage qualitative insights, and managing dynamics so that dominant personalities don’t overshadow quieter members.

This approach leads to rich data analysis and helps uncover valuable feedback for product testing and market segmentation. Up next: establishing ground rules ensures every session hits the right note.

Best Practices for Running a Successful Focus Group

4. Best Practices for Running a Successful Focus Group: To harness the full potential of focus group marketing, it’s crucial to hone in on strategies that foster effective communication and participant engagement.

Discover how fine-tuning the dynamics of your focus groups can lead to richer insights and more actionable results, setting the stage for informed decision-making in your marketing efforts.

Establishing Ground Rules

Establishing ground rules is a critical step in focus group marketing to maintain clear, productive discussions. Before the interactive group discussion begins, lay out expectations for participant behavior.

This includes guidelines on how to respect each other’s opinions, when to speak, and listening attentively without interrupting. Clear instructions foster an environment where qualitative insights can flourish.

Make sure everyone understands the importance of confidentiality and honesty during the session. Stress that there are no wrong answers, encouraging open communication among all participants.

Ground rules help ensure feedback is genuine and useful for market research, giving facilitators the data they need for in-depth analysis and helping with product positioning and consumer insights later on.

Seeking Equal Representation

Ensuring your focus group includes a diverse range of participants is critical for gaining comprehensive insights. It’s about tapping into a variety of perspectives that reflect your target audience’s demographics, such as age, gender, ethnicity, and socio-economic status.

This approach not only enriches the discussion but also helps prevent any one viewpoint from dominating. The goal is to capture the full spectrum of consumer feedback by having equal representation.

Carefully vet potential members to construct a well-rounded group that mirrors your market segmentation. This method bolsters the credibility of your focus group findings and leads to more accurate reflections of consumer behavior and preferences in your data analysis.

Such meticulous recruitment can ultimately guide better product positioning and marketing strategy development based on robust customer insights.

Using Co-Creation for Idea Development

Imagine a room where customers and creators brainstorm together. This is co-creation for idea development at work in focus groups. By involving your target audience directly in the creative process, you tap into their insights and get real-time feedback on new concepts or products.

It’s not just about listening to consumer opinions; it’s empowering them to become part of the solution, shaping ideas as they form.

Facilitators encourage participants to share their experiences and perspectives, leading to more innovative and user-centered ideas. Co-creating with consumers can uncover needs that might not have been obvious before, giving businesses an edge in product positioning and market segmentation.

Throughout this process, brands create deeper connections with their audience by acknowledging their contributions in developing solutions that resonate on a personal level.

Involving the Client for Credibility

Bringing the client into focus group discussions can significantly increase the credibility of the findings. Clients provide a unique perspective, ensuring that customer feedback aligns with business objectives and market positioning.

Their presence often adds weight to the conversation, as participants know their insights are valued and directly influence real-world decisions. Including clients also allows them to witness firsthand consumer behavior and reactions, which can be eye-opening and invaluable for refining marketing strategies.

Engaged clients during these sessions help bridge the gap between what consumers want and what businesses offer. They get a deeper understanding of market segmentation and consumer insights, fostering better product positioning.

This collaboration is vital for building trust with participants who feel their input is taken seriously by decision-makers. As they contribute to concept testing and interactive group discussions, clients leverage qualitative research in ways that surpass traditional data analysis, turning raw feedback into actionable strategies for brand positioning.

When Not to Use Focus Group Marketing

Involving clients can bolster a focus group’s credibility, yet there are scenarios where this marketing method may not be the best fit. For instance, if you’re after quantifiable data to support large-scale business decisions, focus groups might fall short.

They offer qualitative insights but lack the statistical weight needed for broader market analysis. It’s also important to avoid using focus groups when confidentiality is paramount, as controlling information among participants can be challenging.

Suppose time constraints are tight and quick decisions need to be made; in that case, focus group marketing could slow you down due to the scheduling and preparation involved. Moreover, with sensitive topics or issues prone to strong opinions, a group setting might inhibit honest feedback as individuals become reluctant to share their true thoughts amid peer pressure.

Benefits of Focus Group Marketing

Dive into the dynamic world of focus group marketing where nuanced conversations bring forth a treasure trove of insights, shaping products and strategies with real-world input. Uncover how this approach not only fine-tunes your market understanding but also fosters a collaborative space for innovation and immediate customer feedback.

In-depth Insights

In-depth insights are the gold mine of focus group marketing. By engaging in interactive group discussions, marketers unearth the subtleties of consumer behavior that surveys might miss.

These qualitative insights reveal what customers truly think and feel about a product or service. They go beyond surface-level reactions to explore deeper emotions and complex opinions that influence buying decisions.

Focus groups serve as a real-time lab for concept testing and brand positioning. Participants often feed off each other’s comments, leading to more nuanced feedback on market research efforts.

This dynamic allows companies to pinpoint specific aspects of their marketing strategy that resonate with their target audience or highlight areas needing improvement before a large-scale rollout.

Rapid Feedback

Focus groups prove invaluable for quick feedback on products, services, or marketing campaigns. The interactive group discussion format allows companies to present ideas and immediately gather consumer reactions and thoughts.

This direct line of contact with the target audience can lead to adjustments in real-time, unlike other market research methods that may take weeks or even months.

Moderators skillfully guide conversations to ensure feedback gathering is thorough and relevant. Real-time reactions from participants help businesses understand consumer behavior more accurately than quantitative data might reveal.

As focus group marketing feeds into product testing and concept testing, it paves the way for co-creation and idea development—essential elements for any robust marketing strategy.

Co-creation and Idea Development

After receiving rapid feedback, focus group marketing takes an exciting turn with co-creation and idea development. This stage transforms passive participants into active collaborators.

Engaging your target audience in the creation process unlocks a treasure trove of consumer insights and innovative concepts. By working together, companies and consumers shape products or services in real-time, ensuring that the end result resonates well with the market.

Co-creation sessions within focus groups can spark a burst of creativity and lead to unique product positioning opportunities. Participants feel valued as their input directly influences market offerings, fostering a sense of ownership and loyalty toward the brand.

Through this synergy of thoughts and experiences, businesses garnish fresh perspectives on consumer behavior, making it easier to tailor marketing strategies that hit home with their target demographic.

Client Involvement

Client involvement in focus group marketing is not just beneficial; it’s essential for authentic insights. Clients bring their firsthand understanding of the product or service, allowing them to provide valuable context during discussions.

They can clarify any misunderstandings on the spot and witness consumer behavior and preferences firsthand, which can be eye-opening. This direct observation enables clients to grasp subtle nuances that might not be as clear through second-hand reports.

Encouraging clients to actively engage with participants also builds rapport and trust – a key aspect of qualitative research like this. It helps ensure that the feedback gathered aligns closely with actual customer experiences, leading to more accurate market segmentation and product positioning strategies.

When clients ask questions or contribute to interactive group discussions, they glean deeper consumer insights than they could from data analysis alone, making client involvement a powerful component of market research process success.

When to Use (and Not Use) a Focus Group

Determining the right occasion for a focus group can be crucial for its success – it’s all about picking the perfect time for this qualitative tool to shine. On the flip side, recognizing when alternatives might serve your research needs better is just as essential to avoid missteps in your marketing strategy.

When to Use a Focus Group

Focus group discussions shine when you need deep insights into consumer behavior. They tap directly into customer thoughts and feelings, offering qualitative research that surveys can’t match.

• Use a focus group when launching a new product to gauge initial reactions and preferences. This helps tailor your marketing strategy before hitting the market.
• Organize focus group sessions for concept testing of advertisements, logos, or branding to see how they resonate with your target audience.
• Apply this method when seeking to understand the emotional triggers behind consumer decisions, which can fine-tune product positioning.
• Opt for a focus group approach if market segmentation is required. They help identify distinct customer profiles within broader markets.
• Engage in interactive group discussions when you need rapid feedback on issues or crises affecting brand perception.
• Utilize focus groups during product testing phases to observe how users interact with your product and what improvements could be made.
• Plan a virtual focus group for convenience and broader geographical reach if conducting in – person sessions are logistically challenging.
• Lean towards these gatherings when detailed consumer feedback is crucial for complex decision – making processes in business development.
• Choose this market research process when you aim to facilitate co – creation and idea development among consumers and stakeholders.

Alternatives to Focus Groups (such as online surveys)

Focus groups offer a unique insight into consumer behavior, but they aren’t the only method available for market research. Let’s explore some effective alternatives that can complement or sometimes replace focus groups in gathering valuable customer feedback.

• Online Surveys: These are quick to distribute and can reach a wide audience at a relatively low cost. Questions can be multiple-choice, open-ended, or a mix of both, allowing for quantitative data analysis along with some qualitative insights.
• In-depth Interviews: Personal one-on-one interviews provide detailed information about individual consumer preferences and experiences. Interviewers can adjust questions in real-time to probe deeper based on responses.
• Social Media Monitoring: Brands actively listen to unsolicited consumer opinions on social platforms. This approach captures real-time, organic customer insights without the need for formal questioning.
• Customer Feedback Forms: Placed at various points of service or embedded within websites, these forms invite customers to share their experiences immediately after an interaction.
• Observation Techniques: Watching how consumers interact with products in a natural setting yields first-hand information on usability and user experience that might not come up in discussion-based research.
• Online Communities and Panels: Engaging with a community over time allows companies to build rapport and gather continuous feedback from a dedicated group similar to an ongoing virtual focus group.
• Experimental Methods: Controlled experiments like A/B testing help determine the effectiveness of different marketing approaches directly impacting consumer behavior.

How to Choose the Right Method

Selecting the right method for market research hinges on your goals and resources. If you’re after qualitative insights to understand consumer behavior or product positioning, a focus group might be just what you need.

This approach allows for interactive group discussions that can reveal in-depth feedback about customer preferences and reactions.

On the other hand, if speedy results are critical or your target audience is widely dispersed, online surveys or a virtual focus group could serve better. They offer rapid feedback from a broader participant base at potentially lower costs.

Consider also how directly involved you want clients in the process; real-time sessions, whether physical or virtual, let them observe market segmentation and consumer insights unfolding live before their eyes.

Moving forward, evaluate these factors against your objectives to determine which market research method aligns best with your marketing strategy needs.

Harness the power of collective insight with focus group marketing. Dive deep into consumer thoughts and shape your products to fit their desires perfectly. Make every discussion count towards building stronger market strategies.

Stand out in a crowded marketplace by listening intently to the voices that matter most — your customers’. Propel your brand forward with the wisdom gleaned from interactive, dynamic focus groups.

1. What is focus group marketing?

Focus group marketing involves gathering people to discuss and give feedback on products or services.

2. Why are focus groups important for businesses?

Focus groups help businesses understand customer opinions and improve their products based on real feedback.

3. Can anyone join a focus group?

Yes, many different people can join a focus group as long as they fit the criteria set by the company conducting it.

4. How long does a typical focus group last?

A typical focus group discussion lasts between one to two hours.

5. Do I get paid for participating in a focus group?

Participants often receive compensation like money or gift cards for joining and contributing to a focus group.

Related Posts

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Root out friction in every digital experience, super-charge conversion rates, and optimize digital self-service

Uncover insights from any interaction, deliver AI-powered agent coaching, and reduce cost to serve

Increase revenue and loyalty with real-time insights and recommendations delivered to teams on the ground

Know how your people feel and empower managers to improve employee engagement, productivity, and retention

Take action in the moments that matter most along the employee journey and drive bottom line growth

Whatever they’re are saying, wherever they’re saying it, know exactly what’s going on with your people

Get faster, richer insights with qual and quant tools that make powerful market research available to everyone

Run concept tests, pricing studies, prototyping + more with fast, powerful studies designed by UX research experts

Track your brand performance 24/7 and act quickly to respond to opportunities and challenges in your market

Explore the platform powering Experience Management

• Free Account
• For Digital
• For Customer Care
• For Human Resources
• For Researchers
• Financial Services
• All Industries

Popular Use Cases

• Customer Experience
• Employee Experience
• Net Promoter Score
• Voice of Customer
• Customer Success Hub
• Product Documentation
• Training & Certification
• XM Institute
• Popular Resources
• Customer Stories
• Artificial Intelligence

Market Research

• Partnerships
• Marketplace

The annual gathering of the experience leaders at the world’s iconic brands building breakthrough business results, live in Salt Lake City.

• English/AU & NZ
• Español/Europa
• Español/América Latina
• Português Brasileiro
• REQUEST DEMO
• Experience Management
• Focus Groups

Try Qualtrics for free

The definitive guide to focus groups.

15 min read Interested in focus groups but not sure where to start? Use our definitive guide to grasp the essentials and learn how you can leverage focus groups to better know your audience.

Written by : Will Webster

Fact Checked by : Karen Goldstein

What is a focus group?

Focus groups are a type of qualitative research that bring together a small group of people representing a target audience. In a conversation usually guided by a moderator, this group will discuss a specific topic, products, services or concepts in a controlled environment.

The purpose of focus groups is to have a relaxed, open-ended conversation to gain insights that may not be possible from a survey or individual interview. They’re a very valuable tool in the research toolkit.

Free eBook: 2024 global market research trends report

Focus group roles

In any focus group there are typically three main roles being played.

When should a focus group be used?

Focus groups are a very popular type of research method that’s used in virtually every sector, from tech to academia, and marketing to political science.

Focus groups are a great choice if you want to go deep into a particular topic. If surveys are a brilliant tool for understanding what someone feels about something, focus groups help us to explore why – which is why the two work great in tandem. Focus groups give us an opportunity to capture the human element – the emotions and non-verbal cues that numbers often miss – and help us to explore underlying motivations.

Here are some of the most common focus group use cases.

New product or concept testing

If you’ve got a new product or concept in the works, a focus group can provide valuable feedback before you launch it into the market. You can get a sense of how people might react to it, what they like or dislike, and any improvements they might suggest.

In fact, focus groups are often used by brands to improve on and even co-create products in real time, with concepts discussed and iterated over the course of the session.

Understanding customers better

Focus groups are a great market research tool to help you better understand why customers think and behave the way they do. If, for example, a product isn’t selling as expected, a focus group with your customers can shine light on their barriers to purchase.

Beyond current customers, businesses can also use focus groups to better understand new prospects and bring their target customer segments to life.

Marketing and advertising

Before you invest a lot of money into a marketing or advertising campaign, you could use a focus group to test your messaging and visuals. Once any tweaks are made, you should be left with a campaign that will better resonate with your target audience.

Exploratory research

Focus groups are great when you don’t know what you don’t know. If you’re entering a new market or targeting a new customer segment, they can help you explore and understand the landscape.

When quantitative data isn’t enough

Sometimes, numbers and stats don’t tell the whole story. If you have quantitative data but want to delve deeper into the ‘why’ and ‘how’, focus groups are a great way to do that.

Focus groups can provide rich, qualitative insights that quantitative research methods might miss. But it’s important to remember that they aren’t right for every situation.

If you need to make definitive conclusions about a large population, a quantitative survey will be a better option. The same applies if you’re focusing on sensitive topics that people may not feel comfortable discussing in a group setting, such as financial or health matters.

At the end of the day, the best research method for your use case really depends on your specific goals, who you’re collecting insights from and the nature of the information you’re seeking.

Types of focus groups

Focus groups can take different forms depending on the objectives of the study, the participants, and the nature of the topic being discussed. Ranging from the common to the seldom used, here are the different types of focus group methods.

One-way focus groups

The classic focus group format: a moderator leads a discussion among a group of participants about a particular topic.

Two-way focus groups

Here one group watches another , observing the discussion, interactions and conclusions. This format is used to provide additional insights and a deeper understanding of the topic.

Dual-moderator focus groups

A focus group with two moderators. One ensures the session runs along smoothly; the other makes sure all topics are covered. The aim of this format is to create a more comprehensive discussion.

Dueling-moderator focus groups

Like dual moderator focus groups in that there are two moderators, but here the moderators take opposing viewpoints on the topic. The purpose of this format is to help the participants consider and discuss a wider range of points.

Respondent-moderator focus groups

Where one respondent – or several – plays the role of moderator. This format counters the unintentional bias that can come from a single moderator, and encourages variety in the discussion,

Mini focus groups, dyads and triads

Exactly as they sound, mini focus groups involve fewer participants than usual. These smaller groups – typically made up of 4 to 5 participants – are well suited to complex topics.

There are also focus groups involving two participants and a moderator – known as dyads – and groups with three participants and a moderator, which are known as triads.

Remote focus groups

An online focus group. This format is a great way to give your research a wider geographical reach and access a greater pool of people.

How to run a focus group: Step-by-step guide

The focus groups that generate the best insights are often those that are planned best. Here’s our guide for every step of the process.

1. Research and define your goal

The first step is to identify what you want to learn from the focus group. Are you testing a new product or exploring consumer behavior? Maybe you’re seeking feedback on a marketing campaign or getting to know a new target market?

2. Choose a moderator

If planning is the key ingredient for a great focus group, a good moderator is a close second.

The moderator is the most important person in the room, and needs to be someone who can facilitate discussions, manage a group of strangers, and keep the conversation on track and be able to elicit the feedback desired..

3. Choose a location

The most important consideration here is how you create a comfortable, non-judgmental environment where participants feel safe to share their thoughts and opinions.

And you also need to answer the big question: in-person or online? In-person sessions typically enable better conversation and group chemistry, while online focus groups give you access to a much bigger, broader pool of potential participants.

4. Recruit the right participants

Next, work out who you need to participate in the focus group to reach your goal. Whatever your target audience is, you want the respondents to meet the baseline criteria – noting that the ideal size for a focus group is typically between 6 and 8 participants, and that none of your participants should know each other.

Once you’ve worked out who you want there, you need to recruit them. This is often done via ads, invitations to your CMS database or a third party. Incentives, like cash or gift cards, are typically used to encourage participation.

5. Create a discussion guide

In tandem with step four, it’s time for the moderator to develop a document that will guide the discussion. Based on your research goal or goals, this guide should include a list of focus group questions or topics you want to cover during the session, and strike a good balance between structured and flexible – so you can gather the data you need while not discouraging spontaneous conversation.

6. Conduct the focus group

The big day has arrived. With everything in place, all you need to do is make sure that every participant is given an opportunity to speak.

Don’t forget to record the focus group (with the participants’ consent) and make efforts to capture non-verbal cues from participants.

7. Debrief and iterate

Debrief after each session to understand your key findings, and if necessary, edit the discussion guide for future focus groups based on your learnings and observations so far.

8. Analyse and report on the findings

Now’s time to transcribe your recordings and analyse them for key themes and insights. The aim here is to interpret your findings in the context of your initial goal.

It’s best practice to present your key focus group results and findings in a report, alongside recommendations based on them.

How many people should be in a focus group?

The ideal size of a focus group is generally said to fall between 6 and 8 participants .Why is this the sweet spot? Because it’s small enough to ensure that everyone has a chance to speak and share their views, but large enough to provide a variety of perspectives.

That said, the goal of your research and the topic(s) you’re focusing on can change things. For instance, if the topic is particularly complex or sensitive, a smaller group may be better.

If you have a larger pool of potential focus group attendees, best practice would be to split them up and conduct multiple focus groups, instead of one focus group with too many people.

Focus groups vs in-depth interviews

Focus groups and in-depth interviews are two of the most popular forms of qualitative research . They do, however, differ in what they can bring to your research – which is why they’re often used in tandem to answer a single research question.

The benefits of focus groups over in-depth interviews

Focus groups are designed to encourage interaction between a collection of people, often revealing insights that may not surface in a one-on-one conversation. They give researchers an opportunity to observe group dynamics and how individuals influence each other and can be influenced themselves.

A big advantage of focus groups is their efficiency – in one session you can gather a broad range of insights from multiple individuals.

The benefits of in-depth interviews over focus groups

In-depth interviews are one-on-one discussions between a researcher and participant.

Whereas focus groups are by definition a group discussion, in-depth interviews provide a more personal and detailed exploration of an individual’s perspectives and experiences. Because of this, interviews are great for sensitive or personal topics, and the interviewee won’t be as influenced by others when giving their honest opinions – which is a risk with focus groups.

Another benefit of in-depth interviews is that the researcher/interviewer has greater control over the conversation, which gives you a greater chance of covering all topics thoroughly.

Advantages and disadvantages of focus groups

Like any research method, focus groups come with a variety of pros and cons that are typically associated with any type of qualitative research.

Advantages of focus groups

• They give you qualitative insights . Exploring the ‘why’ behind people’s behaviors, views and decisions
• They enable interactive discussions . Often leading to deeper insights as participants explore topics and ideas
• They give immediate findings . Observing real-time reactions means you can quickly implement them on a concept, product or campaign
• You can capture non-verbal data . Non-verbal cues and body language often give a further layer of insight into participants’ attitudes and feelings
• You have real-time flexibility . The moderator can steer the conversation to explore new points and topics if they arise

Disadvantages of focus groups

• Your sample size is small . And less likely to represent how the total population feels
• You’re at risk of conforming beliefs . Meaning that participants may change what they’re saying to match the majority opinion or the loudest voice
• They require a skilled moderator . Your findings could be a lot less valuable without one
• Data analysis can be time consuming . If you’re hosting multiple groups, transcribing and deciphering data can be labour-intensive and complex
• They can be expensive (especially if done in person) . You may need to pay for participant travel, accommodation and incentives, venue rent and even moderator fees

Related resources

Market intelligence 10 min read, marketing insights 11 min read.

Analysis & Reporting

Thematic Analysis 11 min read

Ethnographic research 11 min read, post event survey questions 10 min read, data saturation in qualitative research 8 min read, how to determine sample size 12 min read, request demo.

Ready to learn more about Qualtrics?

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer
• QuestionPro

• Solutions Industries Gaming Automotive Sports and events Education Government Travel & Hospitality Financial Services Healthcare Cannabis Technology Use Case NPS+ Communities Audience Contactless surveys Mobile LivePolls Member Experience GDPR Positive People Science 360 Feedback Surveys
• Resources Blog eBooks Survey Templates Case Studies Training Help center

Home Communities

Focus group: What It Is & How to Conduct It + Examples

In 1991, marketing and psychological expert Ernest Dichter coined the name “Focus Group.” The term described meetings held with a limited group of participants with the objective of discussion.

The group’s purpose is not to arrive at a consensus or agreement on the topic. Instead, it seeks to identify and understand customer perceptions of a brand, product, or service.

We’ll cover what a focus group is, how to conduct one, and example questions and best practices below.

What is a focus group?

A focus group is best defined as a small group of carefully selected participants who contribute to open discussions for research. The hosting organization carefully selects participants for the study to represent the larger population they’re attempting to target.

The group might look at new products, feature updates, or other topics of interest to generalize the entire population’s reaction. This research includes a moderator. Their job is to ensure legitimate results and reduce bias in the discussions.

• You use a focus group in qualitative research . A group of 6-10 people, usually 8, meet to explore and discuss a topic, such as a new product. The group shares their feedback, opinions, knowledge, and insights about the topic at hand.
• Participants openly share opinions and are free to convince other participants of their ideas.
• The mediator takes notes on the discussion and opinions of group members.
• The right group members affect the results of your research, so it’s vital to be picky when selecting members.

These groups possess a distinct advantage over other market research and market research methods. They capitalize on the moderator’s communication with participants and the flexibility to move the discussion. It allows you to extract meaningful insights and opinions.

Explore our latest article delving into real-world examples of qualitative data in education . Why not take a look and gather more insights from the valuable information we’ve shared?

LEARN ABOUT: Steps in Qualitative Research

Main pillars of a focus group

Participant, the role of a moderator, types of focus groups.

Your choice of focus group depends on the needs of your action research . Types include: 

• Dual moderator: There are two moderators for this event. One ensures smooth execution, and the other guarantees the discussion of each question.
• Two-way: A two-way group involves two separate groups having discussions on the topic at different times. As one group conducts its study, the other group observes the discussion. In the end, the group that observed the first session performed their conversation. The second group can use insights gained from watching the first discussion to dive deeper into the topic and offer more perspective.
• Mini: This type of small group restricts participants to 4-5 members instead of the usual 6-10.
• Client-involvement: Use this group when clients ask you to conduct a focus group and invite those who ask.
• Participant-moderated: One or more participants provisionally take up the role of moderator.
• Online: These groups employ online mediums to gather opinions and feedback. There are three categories of people in an online panel : observer, moderator, and respondent.

How to conduct a focus group

A focus group is a research method or technique that is used to collect opinions and ideas regarding a concept, service, or product. Follow the below steps to conduct it:

• Recruit the right participants

A researcher must be careful while recruiting participants. Members need adequate knowledge of the topic so that they can add to the conversation.

• Choose a moderator

Your moderator should understand the topic of discussion and possess the following qualities:

• Ensures participation from all members of the group.
• Regulates dominant group members so others may speak.
• Motivates inattentive members through supportive words and positive body language.
• Makes the executive decision to end or continue a discussion should it become too heated.

Verify your moderator doesn’t know any of the participants. Existing relationships between a member and moderator cause bias and can skew your data.

• Record the meeting for future purposes

While conducting a focus group, recording the sessions or meetings is essential. A researcher can record the discussion through audio or video. You must let participants know you’re planning to record the event and get their consent.

• Write clear discussion guidelines

Before the session starts, writing down clear session guidelines is crucial. Include key questions, expectations of focus group members, whether you’re recording the discussion, and methods of sharing results. Give out the instructions in advance and request participants to comply with them.

• Conduct the session and generate a report

Once participants understand their role, the moderator leads the survey. You can ask members to fill out a feedback form to collect quantitative data from the event. Use your data collection and generate reports on the overall findings of your study.

• Use the data to make a plan of action

Share your report with stakeholders and decision-makers in your organization. According to the focus group feedback, a good report helps you design actionable plans to improve products or services. Update the group members on the changes you make and the results of those changes.

Focus Group Examples

Focus groups are common in three situations:

• Initial stages of a research study
• While creating a plan of action during research
• After the completion of the study to establish the results

For example, a laptop company needs customer feedback about an upcoming product. Focus group provides direct information about the marketing research from actual consumers.

The company chooses eight individuals representing their target market for a constructive discussion. The moderator asks questions regarding customer preference for laptop size and features. Group members discuss why they do or do not like certain aspects of a laptop. The company uses the opinions of the participants to create a product that fits customer needs and wants

Best practices for focus group research

Follow these five steps to create a market research focus group:

Have a clear plan for focus group members

With a plan in place, begin writing your focus group survey questions, schedule the time, place, and duration of the discussion, you can host it in person or through an online community, create informational brochures or forum, focus group advantages and disadvantages.

Focus group is a well-liked research technique due to its simple setup and the insightful data it can yield. It has advantages and disadvantages much, like other research techniques.

• A great complement to other mediums like online surveys and online polls . Focus groups give you access to why a customer feels a certain way about a product, and surveys help you collect supporting feedback in large batches.
• Immediate access to customer opinions, making data collection and analysis quick and convenient.
• Highly flexible to adapt to the needs and opinions of the group members.
• Easy to conduct regular discussions to eliminate inaccurate results due to current market outlooks.
• Focus groups are perfect sources to understand the true feelings and perceptions of your selected target audience.

Disadvantages

• Creating a representative sample is tough. Small-size sample makes focus groups unreliable.
• Due to the limited sample size, you cannot guarantee respondent anonymity, which may affect their willingness to speak freely.
• Getting honest opinions on sensitive topics can make the depth of analysis difficult.
• Data analysis is vulnerable to inaccuracy and observer research bias .

Focus group question examples

When using a focus group in market research , you must ask the right questions for accurate results. Good group questions have the following characteristics:

• A friendly and conversational tone
• Language or phrases that resonate with focus group participants
• Straightforward and accurate
• Each item includes one aspect and doesn’t merge multiple topics
• Clarify complex questions for more precise answers

Avoid asking questions to specific individuals to ensure the inclusion of all participants. Restrict discussion time per question to 5-20 minutes to keep the conversation efficient.

There are four categories:

1. Pr imary question: This first open-ended question initiates the entire discussion.

• We are here to discuss ____. What are your thoughts about it?

2. Probe questions: These questions dig deeper into the discussion of the primary question.

For example:

• What do you know about ____?
• How familiar are you with this organizational program?
• What do you love about our organization?

3. Questions to follow up :  After establishing the overall knowledge and feelings of the group, the moderator identifies specific insights.

• What do you think are the pros and cons of this product?
• According to you, where can we improve to provide better customer service?
• Which factors prompted you to purchase our products/services?
• What is the likelihood of recommending our products to your friends and colleagues?

4. Questions for the conclusion: Review previous questions to avoid overlooking the main points. It is the time when a moderator can revisit specific topics to gather more data.

For example :

• Is there anything other than the already discussed questions you would like to talk about?
• Do you want to add to what is already spoken about?

Focus group questions to recruit participants

Here are some questions you may ask to recruit participants:

• Do you or any of your family members work in any of the following sectors?

• Select your age range:

• Kindly select your employment type:

• Please specify your level of education:

• Please state your family status:

Our focus group recruitment questionnaire template gives you a range of survey question types for maximum responses. These responses also help you make the best choice in recruiting the appropriate group members.

Best Online Focus Group Software: QuestionPro Communities

Online focus groups remove the need for a physical location. Like in-person groups, online groups involve 6-10 participants who share their opinions. Many researchers prefer online focus groups for convenience and cost-effectiveness.

QuestionPro Communities is an online focus group software . It’s a highly-effective market research tool that helps researchers find online focus groups for their research purposes, including market research.

QuestionPro Communities software includes:

• Discussions : Organizations invite participants to a moderated online discussion forum. Participants may answer questions at any time suitable to them.

• Idea Board : Idea Board allows respondents to share their ideas. Other group members can analyze, write feedback, and even vote on submissions.

• Topics :  Users can submit topics, cast their votes in existing posts, and leave comments or feedback instantly.

Organizations can ensure that they gather the most valuable insights from their focus groups by carefully planning, recruiting, and conducting the sessions. The examples provided highlight the versatility of focus groups, highlighting the wide range of applications for this research method.

Organizations can gain a deeper understanding of their customers and make more informed decisions that drive success by leveraging the power of focus groups.

QuestionPro Communities is the only online focus group software available on desktop and mobile. Go mobile and take Discussions, Idea Board, and Topics anywhere your respondents go.

Start conducting online focus group surveys with participants from across the globe with QuestionPro Communities today.

Collect community feedback through our insights community software!

More like this.

Data Information vs Insight: Essential differences

May 14, 2024

Pricing Analytics Software: Optimize Your Pricing Strategy

May 13, 2024

Relationship Marketing: What It Is, Examples & Top 7 Benefits

May 8, 2024

The Best Email Survey Tool to Boost Your Feedback Game

May 7, 2024

Other categories

• Academic Research
• Artificial Intelligence
• Assessments
• Brand Awareness
• Case Studies
• Communities
• Consumer Insights
• Customer effort score
• Customer Engagement
• Customer Experience
• Customer Loyalty
• Customer Research
• Customer Satisfaction
• Employee Benefits
• Employee Engagement
• Employee Retention
• Friday Five
• General Data Protection Regulation
• Insights Hub
• Life@QuestionPro
• Market Research
• Mobile diaries
• Mobile Surveys
• New Features
• Online Communities
• Question Types
• Questionnaire
• QuestionPro Products
• Release Notes
• Research Tools and Apps
• Revenue at Risk
• Survey Templates
• Training Tips
• Uncategorized
• Video Learning Series
• What’s Coming Up
• Workforce Intelligence

• Privacy Policy

Home » Focus Groups – Steps, Examples and Guide

Focus Groups – Steps, Examples and Guide

Table of Contents

Focus Group

Definition:

A focus group is a qualitative research method used to gather in-depth insights and opinions from a group of individuals about a particular product, service, concept, or idea.

The focus group typically consists of 6-10 participants who are selected based on shared characteristics such as demographics, interests, or experiences. The discussion is moderated by a trained facilitator who asks open-ended questions to encourage participants to share their thoughts, feelings, and attitudes towards the topic.

Focus groups are an effective way to gather detailed information about consumer behavior, attitudes, and perceptions, and can provide valuable insights to inform decision-making in a range of fields including marketing, product development, and public policy.

Types of Focus Group

The following are some types or methods of Focus Groups:

Traditional Focus Group

This is the most common type of focus group, where a small group of people is brought together to discuss a particular topic. The discussion is typically led by a skilled facilitator who asks open-ended questions to encourage participants to share their thoughts and opinions.

Mini Focus Group

A mini-focus group involves a smaller group of participants, typically 3 to 5 people. This type of focus group is useful when the topic being discussed is particularly sensitive or when the participants are difficult to recruit.

Dual Moderator Focus Group

In a dual-moderator focus group, two facilitators are used to manage the discussion. This can help to ensure that the discussion stays on track and that all participants have an opportunity to share their opinions.

Teleconference or Online Focus Group

Teleconferences or online focus groups are conducted using video conferencing technology or online discussion forums. This allows participants to join the discussion from anywhere in the world, making it easier to recruit participants and reducing the cost of conducting the focus group.

Client-led Focus Group

In a client-led focus group, the client who is commissioning the research takes an active role in the discussion. This type of focus group is useful when the client has specific questions they want to ask or when they want to gain a deeper understanding of their customers.

The following Table can explain Focus Group types more clearly

How To Conduct a Focus Group

To conduct a focus group, follow these general steps:

Define the Research Question

Identify the key research question or objective that you want to explore through the focus group. Develop a discussion guide that outlines the topics and questions you want to cover during the session.

Recruit Participants

Identify the target audience for the focus group and recruit participants who meet the eligibility criteria. You can use various recruitment methods such as social media, online panels, or referrals from existing customers.

Select a Venue

Choose a location that is convenient for the participants and has the necessary facilities such as audio-visual equipment, seating, and refreshments.

Conduct the Session

During the focus group session, introduce the topic, and review the objectives of the research. Encourage participants to share their thoughts and opinions by asking open-ended questions and probing deeper into their responses. Ensure that the discussion remains on topic and that all participants have an opportunity to contribute.

Record the Session

Use audio or video recording equipment to capture the discussion. Note-taking is also essential to ensure that you capture all key points and insights.

Analyze the data

Once the focus group is complete, transcribe and analyze the data. Look for common themes, patterns, and insights that emerge from the discussion. Use this information to generate insights and recommendations that can be applied to the research question.

When to use Focus Group Method

The focus group method is typically used in the following situations:

Exploratory Research

When a researcher wants to explore a new or complex topic in-depth, focus groups can be used to generate ideas, opinions, and insights.

Product Development

Focus groups are often used to gather feedback from consumers about new products or product features to help identify potential areas for improvement.

Marketing Research

Focus groups can be used to test marketing concepts, messaging, or advertising campaigns to determine their effectiveness and appeal to different target audiences.

Customer Feedback

Focus groups can be used to gather feedback from customers about their experiences with a particular product or service, helping companies improve customer satisfaction and loyalty.

Public Policy Research

Focus groups can be used to gather public opinions and attitudes on social or political issues, helping policymakers make more informed decisions.

Examples of Focus Group

Here are some real-time examples of focus groups:

• A tech company wants to improve the user experience of their mobile app. They conduct a focus group with a diverse group of users to gather feedback on the app’s design, functionality, and features. The focus group consists of 8 participants who are selected based on their age, gender, ethnicity, and level of experience with the app. During the session, a trained facilitator asks open-ended questions to encourage participants to share their thoughts and opinions on the app. The facilitator also observes the participants’ behavior and reactions to the app’s features. After the focus group, the data is analyzed to identify common themes and issues raised by the participants. The insights gathered from the focus group are used to inform improvements to the app’s design and functionality, with the goal of creating a more user-friendly and engaging experience for all users.
• A car manufacturer wants to develop a new electric vehicle that appeals to a younger demographic. They conduct a focus group with millennials to gather their opinions on the design, features, and pricing of the vehicle.
• A political campaign team wants to develop effective messaging for their candidate’s campaign. They conduct a focus group with voters to gather their opinions on key issues and identify the most persuasive arguments and messages.
• A restaurant chain wants to develop a new menu that appeals to health-conscious customers. They conduct a focus group with fitness enthusiasts to gather their opinions on the types of food and drinks that they would like to see on the menu.
• A healthcare organization wants to develop a new wellness program for their employees. They conduct a focus group with employees to gather their opinions on the types of programs, incentives, and support that would be most effective in promoting healthy behaviors.
• A clothing retailer wants to develop a new line of sustainable and eco-friendly clothing. They conduct a focus group with environmentally conscious consumers to gather their opinions on the design, materials, and pricing of the clothing.

Purpose of Focus Group

The key objectives of a focus group include:

Generating New Ideas and insights

Focus groups are used to explore new or complex topics in-depth, generating new ideas and insights that may not have been previously considered.

Understanding Consumer Behavior

Focus groups can be used to gather information on consumer behavior, attitudes, and perceptions to inform marketing and product development strategies.

Testing Concepts and Ideas

Focus groups can be used to test marketing concepts, messaging, or product prototypes to determine their effectiveness and appeal to different target audiences.

Gathering Customer Feedback

Informing decision-making.

Focus groups can provide valuable insights to inform decision-making in a range of fields including marketing, product development, and public policy.

Advantages of Focus Group

The advantages of using focus groups are:

• In-depth insights: Focus groups provide in-depth insights into the attitudes, opinions, and behaviors of a target audience on a specific topic, allowing researchers to gain a deeper understanding of the issues being explored.
• Group dynamics: The group dynamics of focus groups can provide additional insights, as participants may build on each other’s ideas, share experiences, and debate different perspectives.
• Efficient data collection: Focus groups are an efficient way to collect data from multiple individuals at the same time, making them a cost-effective method of research.
• Flexibility : Focus groups can be adapted to suit a range of research objectives, from exploratory research to concept testing and customer feedback.
• Real-time feedback: Focus groups provide real-time feedback on new products or concepts, allowing researchers to make immediate adjustments and improvements based on participant feedback.
• Participant engagement: Focus groups can be a more engaging and interactive research method than surveys or other quantitative methods, as participants have the opportunity to express their opinions and interact with other participants.

Limitations of Focus Groups

While focus groups can provide valuable insights, there are also some limitations to using them.

• Small sample size: Focus groups typically involve a small number of participants, which may not be representative of the broader population being studied.
• Group dynamics : While group dynamics can be an advantage of focus groups, they can also be a limitation, as dominant personalities may sway the discussion or participants may not feel comfortable expressing their true opinions.
• Limited generalizability : Because focus groups involve a small sample size, the results may not be generalizable to the broader population.
• Limited depth of responses: Because focus groups are time-limited, participants may not have the opportunity to fully explore or elaborate on their opinions or experiences.
• Potential for bias: The facilitator of a focus group may inadvertently influence the discussion or the selection of participants may not be representative, leading to potential bias in the results.
• Difficulty in analysis : The qualitative data collected in focus groups can be difficult to analyze, as it is often subjective and requires a skilled researcher to interpret and identify themes.

Characteristics of Focus Group

• Small group size: Focus groups typically involve a small number of participants, ranging from 6 to 12 people. This allows for a more in-depth and focused discussion.
• Targeted participants: Participants in focus groups are selected based on specific criteria, such as age, gender, or experience with a particular product or service.
• Facilitated discussion: A skilled facilitator leads the discussion, asking open-ended questions and encouraging participants to share their thoughts and experiences.
• I nteractive and conversational: Focus groups are interactive and conversational, with participants building on each other’s ideas and responding to one another’s opinions.
• Qualitative data: The data collected in focus groups is qualitative, providing detailed insights into participants’ attitudes, opinions, and behaviors.
• Non-threatening environment: Participants are encouraged to share their thoughts and experiences in a non-threatening and supportive environment.
• Limited time frame: Focus groups are typically time-limited, lasting between 1 and 2 hours, to ensure that the discussion stays focused and productive.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Questionnaire – Definition, Types, and Examples

Case Study – Methods, Examples and Guide

Observational Research – Methods and Guide

Quantitative Research – Methods, Types and...

Qualitative Research Methods

Explanatory Research – Types, Methods, Guide

What Is a Focus Group in 100 Words or Less [+ Pros and Cons]

Updated: March 22, 2022

Published: November 06, 2020

In an ideal world, you'd know just how your product or business idea would be perceived before it's released. This knowledge could help you make alterations to what you're offering for the best possible reception, and better inform your sales projections and marketing strategy.

Sadly, you'll never know exactly how what you're selling will be received by your target audience, which is why companies conduct market research .

But, while mass data collection through surveys provides you with necessary quantitative information, it doesn't offer as much qualitative insight into your target market's view or opinion of what you're selling.

This is where a focus group comes in.

So, what is a focus group, and how can it help you navigate your market research? Let's explore those two questions, next.

What is a focus group?

In the context of market research for businesses, a focus group is a cohort of individuals participating in a guided discussion about a business, brand, product, and/or service.

Typically, a focus group is facilitated by representatives from the business and is composed of individuals in the business's target market who share their thoughts and opinions on the topic or offering in question.

What is the purpose of a focus group?

Focus groups enable you to conduct qualitative market research on a product, service, or overall brand image. They enable you to collect constructive feelings, opinions, or perspectives that can help you ensure your product or service is helpful to its target market, and that your marketing materials are persuasive.

A focus group is usually moderated by a representative or representatives of the company, who ask 5-10 questions to the participants over the course of 30-60 minutes, with another facilitator keeping notes on the focus group questionnaire .

Follow Along With a Free Focus Group Questionnaire Template

HubSpot's Market Research Kit includes a questionnaire template to use in your focus groups, as well as four more templates to aid you in your market research efforts. You can download the kit here to help you plan your focus group and market research.

You can also read more about the process of conducting an effective focus group in our blog post, How to Run a Focus Group for Your Business .

Focus Group Size

A focus group can be anywhere from 3-15 participants, with many groups falling between five and eight participants. The size of your focus group depends on your company's resources and intentions. For instance, the size may vary depending on whether you'd prefer a few in-depth opinions, or a broader range of perspectives.

Next, let's explore the pros and cons of a focus group. 

The Pros of a Focus Group

1. you get the story behind the data..

In focus groups, qualitative data takes center stage. Survey data is unbelievably powerful, but it's hard to understand the rationale for the numbers without context. Focus groups are a way to understand how someone truly feels about your business and provide the why behind the data.

If someone answers a question in a way that interests you, you'll have the chance to dig deeper. Ask “Why?” See how the other participants feel about the specific answer. Gauge facial expressions and tone of voice to see how people react to what you're talking about. You'll end up with the emotional input from your target market that your surveys may not be able to provide.

2. Focus groups are interactive.

Those responding to a survey or a questionnaire can't pick up your products or use them, but they can in a focus group. If the subject of your focus group is tangible, observe and ask questions about how participants use the product and feel about the packaging and design.

Here, you'll see your product through the end-users' eyes, which can help you realize something you hadn't before.

3. They're more efficient than interviews.

Interviewing individuals can take much longer than running focus groups with the same amount of people. Say you want to interview 100 people, and each interview or focus group takes one hour. Getting the opinions of those 100 people would take 100 hours if interviewed, but only 20 hours if participants were broken up into groups of five.

This way, you can get qualitative feedback from multiple people in a shorter amount of time — an enormous time saver, especially if most of your participants think alike.

The Cons of a Focus Group

1. they're not entirely representative..

What you gain from depth of opinion from focus groups, you lose in sample size.

Because focus groups take longer than surveys, you'll hear from dozens or hundreds of people in more time than it could take you to hear from thousands of people through your own surveys or exploring secondary research, such as previously conducted studies or surveys.

This constricts the amount of people whose input you'll receive, which means your findings may not represent the opinions of your entire target market.

2. They could encourage groupthink.

Have you ever been in a meeting where one or two people voice an idea you disagree with, but everyone else agrees with the idea before you have the chance to say your piece?

As a result, maybe you decide to go along with the idea ... even though you're not its biggest fan?

That's called groupthink , and it happens when a group rallies behind a vocalized idea that not everyone believes is correct for the sake of moving on or attempting to avoid a conflict.

Focus groups can quickly turn into one or two participants providing the bulk of the answers while the other four or five silently nod in agreement. The problem is you're now only getting input from two participants – not the entire focus group, as intended.

You can avoid this by calling on specific group members to answer in-depth, but some may be reluctant due to shyness or disinterest.

3. Your focus group moderators may have confirmation bias.

Focus group moderators are often attached to the project in question, and can come into the session with an idea of where they think it will — or want it to — go.

For example, one moderator may want a product to be priced, packaged, or colored a certain way, and can lead the discussion towards that conclusion. This is known as observer dependency .

For instance, let's say one moderator wants a product to be colored blue, and poses the open question to the group: "What color should this be?"

After everyone responds — and no one says blue — she might ask, “What about blue, would that work?” Everyone silently nods, and she notes that the group agreed blue would be a good color, despite that being far from the perfect truth.

To overcome this, focus group moderators should be explicitly instructed to put their personal preferences aside and act as an objective group facilitator. You could also work with a market research firm, which typically has less interest in the product or subject than those from the business who are actually creating it.

Focus groups may not be the most efficient source of gathering data, but when used appropriately, they can put a face and an emotion behind the statistics and quantitative data you've gathered to better inform your business, marketing, and product development.

Remember, focus groups are most effective when moderators organize their thoughts ahead of time and take notes during the session on a focus group questionnaire — which you can access for free here in our Market Research Kit.

Don't forget to share this post!

Related articles.

25 Tools & Resources for Conducting Market Research

What is a Competitive Analysis — and How Do You Conduct One?

Market Research: A How-To Guide and Template

SWOT Analysis: How To Do One [With Template & Examples]

TAM SAM SOM: What Do They Mean & How Do You Calculate Them?

How to Run a Competitor Analysis [Free Guide]

5 Challenges Marketers Face in Understanding Audiences [New Data + Market Researcher Tips]

Causal Research: The Complete Guide

Total Addressable Market (TAM): What It Is & How You Can Calculate It

What Is Market Share & How Do You Calculate It?

Free Guide & Templates to Help Your Market Research

Marketing software that helps you drive revenue, save time and resources, and measure and optimize your investments — all on one easy-to-use platform

Filed under:

Focus groups shape what we buy. But how much do they really say about us?

Even in the age of big data, brands can’t quit the focus group.

Share this story

• Share this on Facebook
• Share this on Twitter
• Share this on Reddit
• Share All sharing options

Share All sharing options for: Focus groups shape what we buy. But how much do they really say about us?

Think about the items you put in your cart during your last trip to the grocery store. Recall the new fast-food value meal you saw in a commercial, or the app you use to check your bank account balance, or the packaging of the shampoo you purchase for your dog. It’s extremely likely that sometime before any of these products saw the light of day, a half-dozen or so strangers got together, sat down in a conference room with a one-way mirror, and debated their merits in exchange for a couple hundred dollars each.

We now live firmly in the age of big data. Every link we click is tracked and cataloged. We rate our Uber drivers and the things we buy on Amazon and the cleanliness of airport bathrooms. The movies and TV shows we’re prompted to stream on Netflix are based on algorithms that analyze everything we’ve ever watched before. But when designers and marketers need to come up with new ideas or vet products before trying to sell them, they still turn to the same lo-fi method that’s been in use for decades: putting a bunch of people in a room and having them hash it out as part of a focus group.

Focus groups might seem like a throwback — they came to prominence in the middle of the last century — and their demise has been predicted many times over in recent years. But for as many times as they’ve been declared dead, a victim of ever-improving digital analytics, they haven’t gone anywhere. In 2017, $2.2 billion worldwide was spent on conducting focus groups, according to the trade group ESOMAR, with $809 million of that coming in the US .

In the 1950s, focus groups famously led Mattel to make Barbie one of the first adult-looking toy dolls, and in 2014, they convinced the company to introduce a new, “curvier” Barbie to appeal to a more varied audience. Today, corporations use focus groups to study and sell everything from frozen foods to summer blockbusters. Political parties use them to hone campaign messaging, as do US government agencies concerned about public reaction to policy changes. Law firms even use them when trying to gauge how juries will respond to an argument or line of questioning.

Like most of us, I’ve spent my life consuming products shaped by focus groups. So a few months ago, I decided to become an active participant in them. After entering my name in recruiting databases and filling out countless surveys, I took part in seven different groups, offering my views on unique beverages, novel insurance concepts, and new snack flavors. I’ve been asked if I prefer the taste of formula A or formula B, but I’ve spent much more time answering questions that are far less straightforward: which stock images, for instance, most accurately reflect my relationship with a brand. I’ve heard participants contradict what they said a moment beforehand; I’ve met regulars on the focus group circuit who routinely sell their opinions as a side hustle.

All this has left me with a question I keep asking myself as I fill out survey after survey. Focus groups have a hand in designing so many of the things we own, and the cost of conducting them gets passed on to us in the prices we pay for these products. But are they a unique window into our tastes and innermost desires, or an elaborate waste of time and money?

I started my search with help from a friend, a focus group regular for the better part of 10 years, whom I’ll call Claude (he’s asked me not to use his name so as to preserve his future earnings). He showed me the websites where I could sign up to receive recruiting surveys and suggested what sorts of answers could land me in studies: It’s good to say you’re responsible for the majority of your household’s grocery shopping, and that you’re open to trying any brand of a given product.

After filling out a few surveys, I began to get calls from recruiters, who would painstakingly confirm all my survey answers before inviting me to sessions that typically went for an hour or two and paid $100 or so. Often, they added, if I showed up early, I’d be entered into a raffle to win a cash bonus.

I never did win one of these raffles — one of a few trends I saw over and over again as I became a focus group regular myself. The rooms look like you might imagine: flavorless conference rooms with wall-to-wall mirrors at one end that you can just barely see through if you look at the right angle. The facilitators generally begin by asking everyone to go around and say a fun fact about themselves; they seem trained to reply to every comment, no matter how uninspired, with praise. The atmosphere is usually somewhere between that of a holiday office party and jury duty. People generally do make an effort, but there’s also a clear sense that everyone is mainly looking forward to leaving as soon as the hour is up, their obligation fulfilled, so they can grab their check on the way out the door.

While we might be shown ad mockups for new products or offered flavors to taste, vague, open-ended exercises are the real bread and butter of these sessions. I was often asked to relate personal experiences I’ve had with a product, or describe scenarios that might prompt me to buy it. More than once, I was asked to close my eyes and visualize scenes I associate with a brand. In theory, these kinds of activities are meant to probe for emotions or product associations we might not even realize we hold.

This is a tactic that dates all the way back to the accidental invention of the focus group in 1941. As Liza Featherstone details in her fascinating history Divining Desire: Focus Groups and the Culture of Consultation , the idea came out of Columbia sociologist Robert Merton’s impromptu visit to a test airing of This Is War , a US Office of War Information radio program meant to counter Nazi propaganda. His Columbia colleague Paul Lazarsfeld had given the test listeners a device with buttons to record whenever they liked or disliked the broadcast — itself a major market research innovation — while another researcher followed up by asking the audience why they had pressed the buttons at various moments. “[Merton] began to observe the interview keenly, and to send Lazarsfeld notes,” Featherstone writes. “Lazarsfeld asked Merton, if he thought he could do so much better, why not try it himself?”

Merton did so, and over the course of World War II would go on to develop what he called “ The Focused Interview ”: a discussion emphasizing the “subjective experiences” that shape a person’s response to a particular item, whether a radio program or box of cereal. Rather than collecting raw numbers on how many people preferred one product or the other, Merton sought to dig into “the relevant personal context, the idiosyncratic associations, beliefs, and ideas” that quietly colored people’s preferences, often without their explicit knowledge. He felt it especially important to include open-ended questions so participants could move the conversation in directions meaningful to them, and to drill down to the underlying, sometimes subconscious why of their opinions — not just the what.

The interviews, borrowing heavily from psychology and anthropology research methods, contrasted sharply with the statistical methods used in market research at the time. Madison Avenue ad firms were soon hiring Merton and others to hold focused interviews — usually with a group of people at once — to gauge what consumers wanted to buy, and how to sell it to them.

This era spawned a flurry of Freud-flavored focus group success stories of varying plausibility that are nonetheless celebrated to this day. Ernest Dichter, the psychologist who’d coin the term “focus group,” used them to determine that people supposedly preferred borrowing money from loan sharks to banks because they felt judged by bankers’ stern authority — and recommended that banks offer checking accounts with overdraft, so people wouldn’t have to come in to ask for a loan.

Focus groups led another psychologist, Herta Herzog (the inspiration for Mad Men ’s Greta Guttman ), to proclaim that for men, cars represented the ultimate fulfillment of repressed sexual desires, pushing auto companies to put out increasingly sexualized advertisements throughout the ’50s.

Focus groups still seem to be preoccupied with emotion, but the way these findings are incorporated into market research has become a whole lot more rigorous over the years. “We always recommend to all of our clients that they do both qualitative and quantitative research,” says Andrew Tuck of ARC Research, which conducts polling and statistical analysis alongside focus groups. “You can’t talk to 10 people outside St. Paul and make a good decision based on that.”

Like many in the industry, he feels that focus groups can be useful for generating hypotheses at the outset of a project so they can later be tested quantitatively, rather than for ranking option A versus option B right before one has to go to market. As Kristen Miles of Branded Research puts it, “With new product development, companies often don’t even know where to start. We need people to tell us as researchers what we should focus on.”

If a client wants to run focus groups, ARC will carry them out with one of a few national panel companies : firms that host sessions, often in their own facilities, and recruit participants by emailing out surveys. “Recruiting participants is usually the most expensive part,” Tuck says, explaining that finding the right people — often based on whether they already buy the client’s products, or those of a competitor in the same category — can lead to a total cost of around $10,000 per session for the client. After finding the right people who promise to show up at the right time, the panel company will typically hold sessions in a few major US cities. The clients themselves will often gather behind the one-way mirror, bowls of snacks and popcorn at hand, to watch the proceedings.

“It’s like you’re looking at ants from above,” says David Reischer, who used focus groups in deciding on a domain name for his website LegalAdvice.com . He remembers being fascinated watching people pick apart various names his team had come up with, unaware that the creators of the list sat feet away behind a thin layer of glass and aluminum.

Steve Thomas, a former executive at Edible Arrangements , says he liked to see participants’ behavior from the moment they walked in the door. “Tasting the product always generates a lot of robust discussion,” he says. “But as a client, we are really watching for responses much earlier. How did they respond to the idea of the product? What was their visual response to it and its packaging?” For him, this sort of spontaneous behavior is more valuable than people’s answers to scripted questions — it’s a deeper look at the sorts of opinions they might not even think to share on, say, a structured survey.

This fits with what Tuck describes as the main purpose of the focus group: to get people talking. “If you’re doing a good focus group, it’s not a question-and-answer session,” he says. “You don’t really care about the answers. What you care about is observing natural conversation.” Listen to enough ordinary conversation, the theory goes, and companies will hear ideas they wouldn’t have conceived of on their own.

But this is a hotly contested point. “In my 40 years working in design and innovation, alongside some of the most brilliant minds in the business, I have never seen innovation come out of a focus group,” wrote designer Gianfranco Zaccai in an anti-focus group polemic a few years ago. “Let me put it more strongly: Focus groups kill innovation.”

When I spoke to Zaccai, he qualified his views, allowing that listening to a product’s users can be extraordinarily helpful in giving a product designer insight into how their designs are actually used. However, he said he’s seldom gotten truly novel ideas from users, and when he’s come up with a hit idea on his own, focus groups have tended to reject it even when it’s gone on to huge success in the actual market. When he debuted the legendary Reebok Pump to a high school basketball team in the 1980s, for example, the players laughed at the idea, turned off by the shoes’ weird appearance; the sneakers are now acknowledged to be among the most influential in Reebok’s history.

This sort of critique — that innovation is the province of the professional, rather than the laypeople who make up focus groups — has been around almost as long as focus groups themselves. It came to even greater prominence in the 2000s, propelled by people like Malcolm Gladwell (who railed against focus groups in a 2005 speech ) and Steve Jobs. “It’s really hard to design products by focus groups,” Jobs famously said . “A lot of times, people don’t know what they want until you show it to them.”

At least in my focus group experience, there’s some truth to this. I’ve been part of several groups that tear apart a proposed product, often for good reason. But afterward, when the facilitator asks for alternative ideas, we’re all silent.

One key benefit of focus groups, I was told several times while reporting this article, is that they expose designers and marketers to the relevant context of real people’s lives. But how good are we really at talking about ourselves honestly in front of groups of strangers? I’ve tried to make a sincere effort during my focus groups, but when asked exactly how often and why I buy things like frozen dinners or junk food, there’s always a strong temptation to lie. I don’t think that’s just me.

For many people, it can also be tough to air a dissenting opinion during a focus group. A particularly strong voice often sways everyone’s opinions, and psychologists consistently find that most people, despite what they might claim, prefer to blend in with the group rather than stand out on an island.

You don’t need to do many focus groups to see groupthink in action. During one focus group I did, the moderator passed out design mockups for a new product and asked each of us to rank them from most to least appealing. We each laid them out in our preferred rankings, but then something interesting happened. To my left, there was a hip-looking guy who happened to work in an industry adjacent to the product. He also considered himself something of an authority on matters of aesthetics and went on for some time about the designs. Then several people around the table reordered their choices and justified why they’d done so.

The moderator tried to emphasize that differences of opinion were expected, and even preferable, but it was striking to see more than one participant change their answer to mirror those of a perfect stranger — and then seemingly tell themselves it was what they’d thought all along.

Some view this as a feature of focus groups, not a bug. Tuck, the market research professional, told me it’s part of what his field refers to as “ group effects ”: the ways people’s behavior changes when they know they’re being observed and judged by everyone else. “Ultimately, people behave in groups. Consumers are groups of people. Voters are groups of people,” he said. “The lies people tell themselves about themselves, or tell their community — that’s the exact kind of stuff we want to hear.”

The idea is that we’re fake in focus groups the same way we’re fake in real life. Our social behavior is who we really are — at least insofar as it matters to retailers. In a world of abundance , what we ultimately choose to buy often hinges on how a product makes us feel, how it makes us view ourselves, and how we imagine it affects how others see us. This is why focus groups spend so much time digging into the emotional. They want to capture our most authentically fake selves: the selves we declare ourselves to be with the clothes we wear and the foods we eat and the vacation photos we post to Instagram.

Still, focus groups are rife with another type of deception, one that starts before participants even walk in the door. Ever since a 2004 New York magazine article that advised readers exactly how to lie to qualify for as many groups as possible, industry professionals say they’ve been fighting the scourge of what they call “professional” respondents, who’ve made focus groups into a lucrative side gig. By his own accounting, my friend Claude has done 95 focus groups for a total of $10,740 over the past decade. The trend has only become more common in the internet era, with focus group tips from sites like Stay a Stay at Home Mom ; more than once, Claude’s told me, he’s struck up conversation with a co-participant in the elevator after a focus group and found that they, too, are a regular.

There’s a whole lot of gray area to work within when filling out the surveys. You can, for example, rate your personality as “extremely outgoing” rather than the more accurate “somewhat outgoing,” and you can indicate that you plan to buy a car sometime in the next year, when in reality it might be more like two or three. Fill out enough surveys and you learn that these are the sorts of little lies that get you into groups.

One might blame respondents for exploiting the system, but I frequently got the sense that the panel companies are in on it too. Claude told me about a screening call he got a few months ago from a recruiter at Schlesinger Group , a market research firm. “They asked if I had been to a financial seminar before and I said yes,” he told me. “She said, ‘Did you mean to say no?’” He changed his answer, was invited to join a group, and made $200.

When I reached out to representatives of the company for comment, they seemed concerned, and described the protocols they have in place to these sorts of events. “For this specific part of the process, we perform an initial screener, re-screener, and, for an in-person project, a facility onsite screener,” said Terri-Lyn Hawley, a VP at Schlesinger. “These are all managed by different teams, as well as randomly monitoring phone calls, to mitigate the risk of something like this happening.”

But I saw this pattern with other panel companies I interacted with, and it’s one Liza Featherstone experienced when participating in focus groups as part of the research for her book Divining Desire . The reason is simple, she explained to me: The longer it takes to fill a group, the higher the cost. As a result, panel companies pressure their recruiters to find participants as quickly as possible — and force them to blur the line between finding members of the right demographic and coaching people into saying the right answers. There are other signs that panel companies are well aware of regulars. Another friend of mine, who started doing focus groups over the past year, was recently given a W-9 form from Schlesinger because she earned more than $600 in annual income from them.

For Featherstone, though, the extent to which all this really matters is debatable. “Focus groups are not a scientific and quantitative method of gathering knowledge anyway,” she says. “So the fact that some people are participating frequently really doesn’t matter.” A focus group, in other words, is a case study, not a scientific survey. It’s a limited interview that nevertheless may illustrate something about a bigger whole. It’s not an ideal way to gather accurate data on, say, what percentage of people prefer a new flavor of latte to the original, but it might be a good way to unearth useful truths about how people decide to try a new flavor of latte, and what role that flavor might play in their lives.

In exchange for these details about our private lives over and over, we focus group regulars get something quite valuable too, apart from the money. During the very last group I did for this project, carried out by a cable company, I had a realization. For more than an hour, I was granted the privilege to complain about one of our most reviled consumer services. Normally, we have to navigate complex automated phone systems just to talk to anyone at a cable company; here, professionals spent time politely listening to us rant about deceptive fees and frustrating customer service so they could write reports to executives about it.

As I sat there airing my trivial grievances to a captive audience, I discovered something that surprised me but probably shouldn’t have. Perhaps the most authentic fact about consumers that focus groups elicit is this: It feels good to talk. It feels good to be heard.

Will you support Vox today?

We believe that everyone deserves to understand the world that they live in. That kind of knowledge helps create better citizens, neighbors, friends, parents, and stewards of this planet. Producing deeply researched, explanatory journalism takes resources. You can support this mission by making a financial gift to Vox today. Will you join us?

We accept credit card, Apple Pay, and Google Pay. You can also contribute via

Why can’t prices just stay the same?

Meme stocks like gamestop are soaring like it’s 2021, the gamestop stock frenzy, explained, sign up for the newsletter today, explained, thanks for signing up.

Check your inbox for a welcome email.

Oops. Something went wrong. Please enter a valid email and try again.

The Ultimate Guide to Qualitative Research - Part 1: The Basics

• Introduction and overview
• What is qualitative research?
• What is qualitative data?
• Examples of qualitative data
• Qualitative vs. quantitative research
• Mixed methods
• Qualitative research preparation
• Theoretical perspective
• Theoretical framework
• Literature reviews
• Research question
• Conceptual framework
• Conceptual vs. theoretical framework
• Data collection
• Qualitative research methods

What is a focus group in research?

Why are focus groups effective in research, what are some research examples of focus groups, planning and conducting focus groups, challenges and limitations of focus groups.

• Observational research
• Case studies
• Ethnographical research
• Ethical considerations

Confidentiality and privacy

• Power dynamics
• Reflexivity

Focus groups

Focus groups are a widely used qualitative research method in which a small group of participants engage in guided discussions on a specific topic. You might think of a focus group as a group interview because it can gather information on people's experiences, opinions, and feelings in a natural and interactive setting. However, the group dynamic of a focus group discussion can also be especially useful for observing how people construct meaning together, practice body language, and interact with each other.

In this section, we'll discuss the focus group method, compare it to interview research, and explore what researchers can do with focus group data.

Focus groups are characterized by their collaborative, interactive nature, with discussions guided by a facilitator or moderator. These qualities raise some similarities with and differences from qualities found in interview research .

What is the purpose of a focus group?

Like interviews, focus groups are often used to elicit opinions and perspectives about a topic, product, or service. Market research often employs focus group discussions to test out something new before it is introduced to the larger public. However, a focus group can also illuminate social behavior by allowing researchers to observe how people interact with each other in a way that wouldn't be possible with interviews or observations .

How many people form a focus group?

One key characteristic is the number of focus group participants involved. In this type of research, a moderator will typically work with a small group of 6 to 10 focus group members. This range is considered optimal because it is small enough to allow everyone a chance to share their thoughts and large enough to ensure a diversity of perspectives. Too few participants can limit the richness of the discussion, while too many can make the discussion difficult to manage and may prevent some participants from expressing their views.

What does a focus group do?

In general, a focus group consists of posing questions to a group of people and inviting then to discuss the question or topic. Focus group discussions are typically guided by a set of open-ended questions prepared in advance by the researcher. Ideally, focus group questions serve as prompts to stimulate discussion and to ensure that all relevant topics are covered.

The nature of these questions varies depending on the research objectives. Still, they are generally broad and non-directive, allowing participants the freedom to express their views and experiences in their own words. The role of the moderator is to use these questions to guide the discussion, to probe deeper when necessary, and to ensure that all participants have the opportunity to contribute.

The interaction among group members is the defining characteristic that sets focus groups apart from other qualitative research methods like individual interviews. They allow researchers to observe how opinions are formed and influenced within a social context. Through these interactions, researchers can gain insights into not only individual attitudes and beliefs but also the group dynamics that shape these attitudes and beliefs.

The interaction among participants can stimulate new thoughts and ideas, reveal points of agreement or disagreement, and highlight the process of consensus-building or negotiation that occurs in a group setting. The moderator plays a crucial role in facilitating these interactions, encouraging participation, managing conflicts, and maintaining a constructive and respectful discussion environment.

Focus groups are used in a variety of research settings, from market research to social science studies, due to their versatility in collecting qualitative data . They provide a rich source of information as they capture not only what people think but also how they think and why they think the way they do. Let's look at some of the potential applications of focus groups in research.

Exploratory research

Focus groups are particularly valuable in exploratory research, which is often the first step in investigating a new or complex issue. Exploratory research aims to gain a general understanding of a problem, and focus groups are well-suited for this task due to their interactive and dynamic nature. They can help researchers identify key themes , generate propositions, and develop a deeper understanding of the research context. By encouraging open-ended discussion, these group interactions can reveal a breadth of perspectives and experiences and uncover issues and insights that researchers may not have anticipated.

Idea generation

The group dynamics of focus groups can stimulate creative thinking and the generation of new ideas. This can be particularly beneficial in fields such as product development, policy making, and program design. In these settings, focus groups can help researchers or practitioners gather a range of ideas about a new product, policy, or program, which can then be further refined and evaluated.

Language and terminology

Focus groups can also provide valuable insights into the language and terms that participants use to discuss a certain topic. This is particularly important in qualitative research, where the goal is often to understand the meanings and interpretations that people attach to their experiences. The language used in focus group discussions can reveal these meanings and interpretations and help researchers develop a more nuanced understanding of the topic under study. This understanding can also be particularly useful when developing survey instruments or interpreting other qualitative data.

Assessing concepts and prototypes

Focus groups can also be used to assess concepts and prototypes. For example, in marketing research, a focus group might be used to gather feedback on a new product design or to understand how potential users interact with a prototype. In social science research, focus groups might be used to refine and verify concepts or theories that are relevant to group behavior. This kind of feedback can help researchers and practitioners hone their ideas based on the social interactions of the focus group.

Observing social interaction online

The advent of digital technologies has expanded the possibilities for observing social interaction through the use of online focus groups. Online focus groups, conducted via video conferencing platforms, chat rooms, or discussion forums, offer similar benefits to their in-person counterparts but with added flexibility. They allow participants from diverse geographical locations to engage in discussion, and they can be more convenient and less intimidating for some participants.

Moreover, online focus groups can provide a written or recorded transcript of the discussion, which can be useful for analysis. However, they also present unique challenges, such as managing group dynamics in a virtual environment and ensuring access and comfort with the necessary technology among participants.

Unlock key insights from your data with ATLAS.ti

Download a free trial of ATLAS.ti to see what it can do for your qualitative research project.

Many different fields use focus groups both as a means to collect honest opinions about key research topics or to observe human behavior and interaction. Let's look at some of the many fields that employ a focus group format in research.

Consumer behavior: In market research, focus groups are often used to understand consumer preferences and attitudes toward products or services. For instance, a company might use a focus group to gauge consumer reactions to a new product concept or to understand the reasons behind purchasing decisions.

Healthcare: In healthcare research, focus groups have been used to explore patients' experiences and perceptions of healthcare services or to understand the attitudes and beliefs of healthcare providers. For example, a study might conduct focus groups with patients to gain insights into the barriers and facilitators to medication adherence.

Education: In educational research, focus groups can be used to understand student experiences, attitudes, and beliefs. For instance, a university might use focus groups to explore students' perceptions of campus safety, or a school district might conduct focus group discussions with teachers to understand the challenges they face in implementing a new curriculum.

Public policy: Focus groups can provide valuable insights into the formulation and evaluation of public policies. They can be used to understand public perceptions and attitudes toward policy proposals or to gather feedback on existing policies. For example, a local government might use focus groups to explore residents' views on a proposed transportation policy.

As with interviews, conducting a focus group isn't simply a matter of having people in the same place and talking to them. Focus group research methods call for intentional planning and organization. Here are some considerations to keep in mind when thinking about focus groups.

Selecting participants

The selection of participants is a crucial step in planning a focus group. Participants should be chosen based on their relevance to the research question. They might share a common characteristic (e.g., they are users of a particular service, or they belong to a specific age group), or they may represent a diversity of perspectives on the topic under discussion.

The group should be small enough to manage (typically 6-10 participants) but large enough to ensure a variety of views. In some cases, researchers might choose to conduct multiple focus groups to compare and contrast different groups’ views.

Developing a discussion guide

A discussion guide outlines the topics to be discussed during the focus group. It typically includes a list of open-ended questions and prompts that are designed to stimulate discussion on the research topic.

The questions should be thoughtfully constructed and sequenced, starting with broader questions to warm up the group and progressively focusing on more specific areas of interest. While the discussion guide serves as a roadmap for the session, the moderator should be flexible and responsive to the flow of the discussion, probing for deeper insights and following up on interesting or unexpected comments.

Role of the moderator

The role of the moderator is central to the success of a focus group. A skilled moderator facilitates the discussion, encourages participation, manages group dynamics, and ensures that all topics in the discussion guide are covered. The moderator needs to ensure each participant gets a chance to express their views, and it is also helpful to keep participants from speaking over one another so that everyone can be heard, both during the discussion and for subsequent transcription.

The moderator needs to create an environment where participants feel comfortable sharing their views while also ensuring that the discussion remains focused and productive. This requires a balance of active listening, gentle steering, and tactful intervention when necessary.

Managing group dynamics

Managing group dynamics is a key challenge in focus groups. The interaction among participants can stimulate rich and insightful discussions, but it can also lead to issues such as dominance by a few participants, groupthink, or conflicts. As a result, the moderator plays a crucial role in managing these dynamics, encouraging quieter participants to speak, respectfully managing more dominant participants, and facilitating a constructive and respectful discussion environment.

However, the extent to which the moderator controls the discussion may depend on the research inquiry driving the focus group, particularly if the study is concerned with observing a particular behavior or group dynamic. A fruitful focus group discussion often consists of participants speaking with each other, as opposed to each participant simply answering the moderator one by one.

Focus group question examples

Designing focus group questions is an art in itself, with a focus on sparking discussion and interaction among participants. Here are some example questions that are particularly suited for focus groups:

• "How do others here feel about what [participant's name] just said?" This question can encourage participants to respond to each other's views, fostering a more interactive discussion.
• "Can anyone provide a different perspective on this issue?" This prompt invites diversity of opinion and encourages quieter participants to contribute.
• "Why do you think people might have different opinions about this topic?" This question can stimulate discussion about the reasons behind varying perspectives.
• "Can you help me understand why this is important to you?" By asking for elaboration, this question can lead to deeper, more nuanced discussions.
• "Has anyone had a different experience?" This question can bring out a range of experiences and perspectives within the group.
• "How do you think others outside of this group might view this issue?" This question encourages participants to consider perspectives beyond their own, fostering empathy and understanding.

By crafting questions that prompt group interaction and discussion, researchers can harness the full potential of the focus group method.

At first glance, a focus group is a great way to quickly capture the perspectives of multiple participants. That said, meeting this goal has its challenges. Let's discuss some of them briefly.

Recruitment and participation

One of the key challenges in conducting focus groups is recruiting and retaining an appropriate group of participants. Given the group-based nature of this method, a single participant dropping out can significantly impact the dynamics and the effectiveness of the session. Ensuring a diversity of views while also creating a comfortable environment for open discussion can be a delicate balance to strike. Additionally, scheduling a time that is convenient for all participants can be logistically challenging, particularly when dealing with busy or hard-to-reach populations.

Interpreting group dynamics

While the interaction in focus groups can generate rich insights, it can also complicate the interpretation of the data. The dynamics of the group discussion can influence individual responses, with dominant personalities potentially skewing the discussion or quieter participants holding back their views. It can be challenging for researchers to discern whether the views expressed represent the individual's true beliefs, the influence of the group dynamic, or a combination of both.

Depth of individual perspectives

Unlike other research methods , focus groups can provide a broad overview of group opinions and norms. However, they may not allow for the depth of understanding of individual experiences and perspectives that can be achieved through other qualitative methods, like one-on-one interviews. Time constraints and the need to ensure all participants have a chance to speak can limit the depth of exploration into individual views and experiences.

Transcription and data analysis

Other methods, such as surveys and interviews , generate data that is relatively easier to organize. Survey data is often divided into records, each representing a particular individual, while each and every interview has its own separate raw audio and corresponding transcript. A focus group has multiple participants who may contribute spontaneously to a discussion and even talk over each other. Transcribing these interactions for the purposes of coding and data analysis can be time-consuming as the researcher needs to discern between different voices and adequately represent these voices for empirical analysis.

Ethical considerations for focus groups

As with all other qualitative research methods, ethical issues such as informed consent and vulnerable populations are relevant to focus group discussions. However, there are also ethical considerations that are unique to focus groups that are worth thinking about.

Potential for unintended disclosure

In a focus group, there's a distinct possibility that participants may disclose more personal or sensitive information than they intended due to the dynamics of the group conversation. This presents an ethical challenge for researchers, as they have a responsibility to protect participants from potential harm, including emotional distress that might result from such disclosures. Researchers should be prepared to manage these situations by providing immediate support if necessary, reminding participants about the voluntary nature of their participation and their right to pass on any question, and following up with participants after the session if appropriate.

Protecting the confidentiality and privacy of participants is another key ethical consideration. In focus groups, this can be more challenging than in one-on-one interviews because there are multiple participants. Researchers should ensure that participants understand the importance of confidentiality, which includes not disclosing any information revealed during the discussion with people outside the focus group. The researcher should also take steps to protect participants' privacy in the research report, such as by using pseudonyms or other de-identifying methods. Online focus groups present additional privacy considerations, such as data security and the potential for participants to be identified through their online profiles.

Managing sensitive topics

Focus group discussions can sometimes involve sensitive topics that may cause discomfort or distress for participants. Researchers need to be prepared to manage these situations with ethical awareness and sensitivity. This includes being aware of potential triggers, providing support or referrals to support services if necessary, and ensuring that the discussion remains respectful and safe for all participants.

Respect for diversity

Given the group nature of focus groups, respect for diversity is an important ethical consideration. This includes being sensitive to and respectful of differences in culture, age, gender, socioeconomic status, and other factors among participants. Researchers should foster an inclusive and respectful discussion environment and should be mindful of potential power dynamics or biases that could influence the discussion.

Organize and analyze your data with ATLAS.ti

Intuitive and powerful tools to analyze interviews and focus groups at your fingertips, starting witha free trial.

Introducing OpenAI ChatGPT Survey Question Creator

• How Reviewfy.io works
• Frequently Asked Questions

• Get in touch

Focus Group in Market Research: Key Strategies & Benefits

As a popular qualitative research technique, focus group discussions have become increasingly utilized to gain insights into consumer preferences and behaviors. This powerful qualitative research technique allows researchers to delve deep into the minds of their target audience, uncovering valuable information that can help shape marketing strategies and product development.

As you read through this blog post on “Focus Group in Market Research,” you will learn about various types of focus groups, such as mini-focus groups and remote/online focus groups. You’ll also discover best practices for planning and conducting successful sessions, including tips on creating an optimal environment for participant comfort and establishing ground rules to ensure productive discussion.

The role of the moderator is crucial in facilitating fruitful conversations within these settings. We will explore how skilled moderators use open-ended questions to guide participants’ responses while encouraging active involvement from all attendees. We’ll also discuss which industries benefit most from employing Focus Group in Market Research methods – from marketing & sales departments to customer service teams, research agencies, and entrepreneurial ventures.

Finally, our analysis would be incomplete without weighing the advantages and disadvantages of using focus groups in market research endeavors. While they offer rich qualitative data collection opportunities, potential biases, and logistical challenges must be considered when deciding if this approach suits your organization’s specific needs.

Table of Contents

Types of Focus Groups

Different types of focus groups are available to meet specific research objectives and appeal to particular target audiences, such as mini-focus groups or remote/online ones. Two popular formats include mini-focus groups and remote or online focus groups.

Mini Focus Group: Small Group Size for More Intimate Discussions

A mini-focus group typically consists of 4-5 participants, allowing for more in-depth conversations and a better understanding of individual perspectives. This small group setting enables market researchers to delve deeper into consumer opinions, preferences, and experiences while maintaining a manageable level of interaction among the participants.

Remote/Online Focus Group: Connecting Participants from Diverse Locations

In today’s digital age, an online focus group offers a practical alternative to traditional face-to-face methods by overcoming key challenges such as geographical limitations and scheduling conflicts. Researchers can gather qualitative data from target markets across different regions without needing a physical presence by connecting potential customers through video conferencing platforms or specialized software applications. Additionally, this format allows greater flexibility in terms of participant recruitment and reduced logistical costs compared to in-person sessions.

Types of Focus Groups provide an effective way to gain insights into customer behaviour, preferences, and opinions. With careful planning and execution, a successful focus group can yield valuable market research data.

Planning and Conducting a Successful Focus Group

Running an effective focus group requires careful planning and attention to detail. Every aspect ensures productive discussions among participants, from creating the right environment to establishing ground rules.

Preparing the Environment for Optimal Participant Comfort

Creating a comfortable atmosphere for your focus group participants is essential to encourage open communication. This includes setting the temperature at a pleasant level, providing water bottles for everyone, arranging seating that encourages interaction, and minimizing distractions such as noise or glare from windows. A well-prepared environment can significantly impact how engaged and forthcoming attendees are during the discussion.

Establishing Ground Rules to Ensure Productive Discussion

• Maintain confidentiality: Remind participants that their opinions will be anonymous and ask them not to share personal information about others outside the session.
• Avoid interruptions: Encourage attendees to allow others to finish speaking before sharing their thoughts. This helps maintain order within the group setting while giving everyone an opportunity to express themselves fully.
• Promote active listening: Request that all members pay close attention when someone else is talking to better understand different perspectives on the discussed topic.
• Foster respect: Emphasize that each person’s opinion is valuable regardless of whether they agree with other points raised during conversations. Promoting mutual respect among group members will help facilitate more insightful exchanges throughout your research sessions.

In addition to these guidelines, having an experienced moderator who can effectively manage interactions between attendees is key to conducting successful focus groups. A skilled moderator can ensure that all voices are heard and guide the conversation toward achieving your research objectives.

Market researchers use focus groups as a qualitative research technique to gain insights into the opinions and attitudes of potential customers. Focus group discussions are conducted in a group setting with a small group of participants with similar characteristics, such as age, gender, or interests. The group interaction allows researchers to measure customer satisfaction and collect qualitative data on important questions related to the subject matter.

Focus groups are just one of many market research methods available to businesses. Online surveys offer a way to collect quantitative data from a larger group of people, while group interviews can provide more in-depth information from existing customers. Defining research objectives and target audience is important before recruiting participants, regardless of the research methodology used.

Overall, focus groups are an effective way to gather qualitative data and gain insights into the opinions and attitudes of potential customers. By following the guidelines outlined above, you can ensure that your focus group research is productive and informative.

The Role of the Moderator in Focus Groups

A moderator is essential in facilitating successful interactions within a focus group. Their responsibilities include guiding conversations using open-ended questions while encouraging all attendees’ involvement through exploration, follow-up clarification questions, and inviting participation. Normally, a Discussion Guide is prepared well in advance, and the moderator is given orientation on this discussion guide.

Guiding Conversations Using Open-Ended Questions

To gather valuable insights from participants, moderators must ask open-ended questions, which allow for more detailed responses than closed or yes/no queries. By doing so, they can effectively steer discussions toward the research objectives without imposing their own opinions on the conversation.

Encouraging Active Participation from All Attendees

Moderators should facilitate a balanced dialogue by engaging all participants, especially more reticent ones, through direct questioning and soliciting their perspectives. They should actively engage with quieter members by asking them direct questions or seeking their input on specific topics. This helps create a balanced discussion where everyone’s voice is heard and valued.

To maintain a productive atmosphere throughout the session, moderators must also manage any potential conflicts between participants or address dominating personalities that may stifle others’ contributions. Employing effective group facilitation techniques, such as summarizing key points and refocusing discussions when necessary, can help ensure smooth communication among group members.

The moderator is critical in ensuring that focus groups are productive and successful. By utilizing open-ended questions, the moderator can guide conversations to uncover valuable insights for the organization. Moving on, let us explore how different industries benefit from using focus groups in their market research strategy.

Industries Benefiting from the Use of Focus Groups

Various industries can benefit significantly from utilizing focus groups as a market research methodology. These sectors can make informed decisions to improve their products and services by gathering insights into specific market segments and target audiences. Let’s explore some key industries that stand to gain valuable information through focus group discussions.

Marketing & Sales Industry

In the marketing and sales sector, focus groups effectively collect qualitative insights or data about consumer preferences, brand perception, and advertising effectiveness. These insights help businesses develop targeted campaigns that resonate with their audience.

Customer Service Departments

Customer service departments use focus groups better to understand customer pain points, needs, and preferences. This qualitative research method enables companies to identify areas for improvement in their support processes while measuring customer satisfaction levels effectively.

Research Agencies

Research agencies frequently employ focus group discussions in their broader market research efforts. By engaging directly with participants representing diverse demographics or interests within a target market segment, they gather invaluable feedback on various topics ranging from product design to user experience.

Entrepreneurial Ventures

New entrepreneurs launching ventures can also gain valuable insights before investing heavily in resources, time, and money on ideas or concepts that may not resonate well with potential customers. Focus groups allow them to test their hypotheses and refine their offerings based on real-world feedback from potential users or clients.

The use of focus groups in market research provides a variety of industries with invaluable insights and data. Yet, before settling on focus groups as a research tool, it is essential to evaluate any potential biases or logistical issues that could come up.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Focus Groups in Market Research

Focus groups are a popular market research method that offers valuable insights into consumer opinions and preferences. However, like any research technique, they have their advantages and disadvantages.

Advantages: Rich Qualitative Data Collection

• Rapid feedback: Focus groups provide immediate responses from participants, allowing researchers to quickly gain insights into customer satisfaction levels or potential improvements for products/services.
• Diverse perspectives: By bringing together individuals with different backgrounds and experiences, focus group discussions can reveal a wide range of viewpoints on the subject matter at hand.
• In-depth understanding: The interactive nature of focus groups enables researchers to explore complex topics more thoroughly than through other methods, such as online surveys or questionnaires.

Disadvantages: Potential Biases and Logistical Challenges

• Dominant personalities: Some participants may be more vocal than others during discussions, potentially skewing results toward their opinions. Moderators must work diligently to ensure all voices are heard equally within the group setting.
• Social pressure: Participants might feel pressured to conform to the majority opinion rather than express their true thoughts freely. This could lead to inaccurate data that does not truly represent the target audience’s views.

When conducting focus group research, it is important to consider the research objectives and target audience. Market researchers should recruit participants who are representative of the target market and have a sample size that is large enough to gain insights but small enough to allow for group interaction. A discussion guide should be prepared in advance with important questions to guide the conversation, but there should also be room for open-ended questions to encourage lively debate.

Online focus groups have become increasingly popular due to their convenience but also limitations. While they can reach a larger group of participants, they may not provide the same level of group interaction as in-person focus groups. Additionally, measuring customer satisfaction through online surveys may be more difficult.

Overall, focus groups can be a valuable research technique for gaining qualitative data and insights into consumer preferences. However, it is important to carefully consider the research methodology and potential biases to ensure accurate results that truly represent the target audience.

FAQs in Relation to Focus Group in Market Research

What is a focus group in market research.

A focus group in market research is a qualitative data collection method where a small, diverse group of participants discuss and share their opinions on products, services, or concepts. The aim is to gain insights into consumer preferences, perceptions, and motivations that can help guide business decision-making.

What is an example of a focus group in market research?

An example of a focus group in market research could be gathering 8-10 smartphone users to explore their experiences with various features and apps. Participants would discuss the usability, design aspects, and satisfaction levels while providing feedback on improvements they’d like to see implemented by manufacturers.

How do focus groups help marketing?

Focus groups help marketing efforts by providing valuable insights into customer preferences and behaviors. These insights enable marketers to develop targeted campaigns that resonate with consumers’ needs and desires. Additionally, they assist in identifying potential areas for product improvement or innovation based on real-world user experiences.

Why use focus group market research?

Focus groups allow researchers to gather rich qualitative data from direct interactions with target audiences. This approach enables businesses to better understand customers’ thoughts about products or services before making critical decisions about branding strategies or new product development initiatives.

Focus groups are an essential tool for market research, providing rich qualitative data that can help businesses make informed decisions. Mini focus groups and remote/online focus groups offer flexibility in group size and location, while planning and conducting a successful focus group requires careful preparation and moderation to ensure productive discussion.

Industries such as marketing and sales, customer service departments, research agencies, and entrepreneurial ventures all benefit from using focus groups. Yet, potential prejudices and difficulties in terms of logistics may arise when making use of this method.

We at reviewfy.io believe that a robust customer feedback ecosystem immensely adds value to both the brands and users. After extensive research, we found that the feedback survey creation and administration should be simplified and made into an enjoyable experience for both the creator and the respondent of the surveys. Our innovative ChatGPT-generated survey questions , visual cues, and drag-and-drop survey form creator make the process of survey creation less tedious and a real-time saver. Try it now and increase the response rate manifold.

Quick survey creation and quicker response

Get started ! Reviewfy.io is made just for you

You might also like to read.

How to Measure Customer Loyalty? 10 Survey Questions You Need to Ask.

As a business owner, your customers are the lifeblood of your company. You want to...

10 Survey Retention Questions to Keep Your Audience Engaged

As marketers, we all know the importance of surveys in gathering valuable insights and feedback...

10 Best Types of Survey Methods – 2023

Market research is an essential component of any business or organization that aims to make...

We use cookies to track visitors, measure ads, ad campaign effectiveness and analyze site traffic. We may also share information about your use of our site with 3rd parties. For more info, see, our Cookie Policy and our Privacy Policy .

By clicking on “Cookie Preference Manager” you can choose to enable only certain cookie categories. By clicking “ACCEPT ALL” you agree to the storing of all cookies on your device. In case you don’t choose one of these options and use our website we will treat it as if you have accepted all cookies.

• Open supplemental data
• Reference Manager
• Simple TEXT file

People also looked at

Original research article, linking farmers’ perceptions and management decision toward sustainable agroecological transition: evidence from rural tunisia.

• 1 International Center for Agricultural Research in The Dry Areas (ICARDA), Tunisia, Tunisia
• 2 Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique de Tunisie (INRAT), Ariana, Tunisia

Global food systems face sustainability challenges like undernourishment, inequity, resource degradation, and pollution. Food production and consumption drive environmental change with greenhouse gas emissions, biodiversity loss, and land-system shifts. The climate change crisis has intensified concerns about the ecological impact of these systems. Sustainable food networks, such as community-supported agriculture, are promoting sustainable production and consumption through short supply chains. International bodies like the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) are also spearheading initiatives for more equitable and sustainable food systems. In Tunisia, where dryland areas predominate, the ongoing implementation of the Agroecology Initiative provides the context for this study, which explores the drivers and barriers of agroecological transformation in this challenging environment. The research focuses on stakeholder engagement, with a gender perspective to explore farmer perceptions. The study, conducted in the northwest of Tunisia in 2022–2023, involved focus groups, workshops, surveys, and questionnaires with various stakeholders. Findings highlight farmer organizations’ potential in promoting sustainable farming, with clear goals, diversified systems, and collaborations. However, challenges such as input scarcity, water shortage, low income, and marketing must be addressed. Results also indicate that over 90% of farmers who received assistance with agroecological practices reported a change in their ideas and practices. Fifty seven percent of the workshops participants identified the olive oil value chain as having the greatest potential for agroecological transformation, but it faces constraints such as climate, lack of policy incentives, training, funding, and difficulty in adopting technical innovations. Women’s inclusion in agriculture, environmental, social, and economic challenges were also highlighted. Despite these obstacles, key drivers for agroecological transition were identified. These include the compatibility of many agroecological practices with existing farmer capabilities, their cultural and economic benefits, and the positive outcomes for environmental sustainability and health. The study advocates for a socio-technical systems analysis to address the root causes hindering Tunisia’s agroecological transformation. A participatory approach is crucial to understanding priorities and developing a sustainable and resilient food system. Furthermore, the research underscores the importance of considering diverse farmer perspectives and tailoring strategies to support this critical transition effectively.

1 Introduction

Global food systems are struggling to achieve sustainable development goals, contributing to undernourishment, inequity, natural resource degradation, and environmental pollution. Current food systems are vulnerable to multiple shocks, such as climate change, economic crises, and pandemics, which can have cascading effects on smallholder food security. The rising prices of fertilizers and food imports resulting from these shocks have rekindled interest in the call for a policy shift toward agroecology ( 1 ). Food production and consumption are major contributors to global environmental change, including greenhouse gas emissions, biodiversity loss, and land-system change ( 2 ).

Alternative food networks, such as food cooperatives and community-supported agriculture, aim to promote sustainable production and consumption through short supply chains and connections between consumers and producers. These networks also foster social interactions and collective mindfulness for a sustainable food system. Producers face both pressure and opportunities to incorporate sustainability into their business practices to meet consumers’ expectations. The agroecological transition is a promising approach to create more equitable and ecologically sustainable food systems ( 3 ). Agroecology is the application of ecological principles to agricultural systems, offering solutions to farming and food security challenges such as drought, hunger, poverty, and inequality ( 4 ). It supports small-scale farmers in diversity and ensures a long-term balance between food production and the sustainability of natural and environmental resources. It also transforms food systems and ensures resilience by balancing between socio-economic and environmental facets.

According to Dagunga et al. ( 5 ), promoting agroecology in smallholder farming communities faces both challenges and opportunities. Some of the opportunities for promoting agroecology, include the potential for increased productivity, improved soil health, and enhanced biodiversity. However, there are many challenges to this transition, such as institutional, social, technical, economic, and environmental factors. These challenges include limited access to resources, such as land, water, and capital, as well as inadequate policy support and institutional frameworks. Additionally, there may be cultural and social barriers to the adoption of agroecological practices ( 6 ). Previous research also highlights the importance of participatory approaches and knowledge sharing in promoting agroecology among smallholder farmers ( 5 ).

International bodies like the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the Consultative Group for International agricultural Research (CGIAR) are introducing initiatives to promote more equitable and ecologically sustainable food systems. The agroecological transformation initiative, 1 which promotes good governance of natural resources, input reduction and biodiversity, as well as social and cultural inclusion, equity, and knowledge sharing, is seen as an opportunity for a shift toward more sustainable, inclusive, and resilient food systems ( 7 ).

This study is part of the “Agroecological Transformation in Food, Land and Water Systems” initiative launched by the CGIAR and implemented in Tunisia by the International Centre for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA). This research contributes to addressing the climate change crisis and to enhancing the resilience of food systems. This research aims to investigate the barriers of agroecological transformation in the dryland context based on the involvement of the different stakeholders with a special emphasis on farmers’ beliefs, experiences, and characteristics. Farmers, perception is analyzed, considering the gender perspective. Focusing on dryland areas is crucial due to their unique challenges and characteristics such as water scarcity, erratic rainfall, and fragile ecosystems. Contrasting with more temperate or humid regions, the dryland context requires tailored solutions that consider the specific needs and constraints of farmers operating in these environments.

2 Conceptual framework

Conventional expert-led change assessment methods based on top-down approaches generate quantifiable indicators that allow regional or national comparisons. However, they have certain shortcomings, such as alienating local communities and failing to capture the views of diverse stakeholders ( 8 ). Involving the community in evaluation procedures means that indicators are more relevant and specific to the context and evolve over time with the community. Participation leads to the empowerment and capacity building of communities to address emerging challenges in their local environment ( 8 ). The agroecological transition is a process that involves the adoption of innovative practices that aim to balance productivity with environmental protection. These practices require a significant change in the way farmers manage their crops and natural resources. Therefore, the adoption of agroecological innovations is subject to various uncertainties and risks, which can influence farmers’ perceptions of the innovation ( 9 ). Perceptions, which refer to individuals’ interpretations and understanding of received information, play a crucial role in the agroecological transition. In this context, farmers’ perceptions of innovation can greatly shape their willingness to adopt it. These perceptions can be influenced by various factors, such as the perceived advantages and drawbacks of the innovation, the compatibility with existing practices, the level of information and experience, and the social and cultural context ( 10 ).

To understand the role of perceptions in the agroecological transition, researchers use various experimental methods, such as surveys, interviews, or focus groups. These methods help identify the factors that influence farmers’ perceptions of innovation and how these perceptions impact their decision-making process ( 11 , 12 ). According to Roussy et al. ( 12 ), the factors that influence the adoption of agricultural innovations by farmers are observable and unobservable. Three main categories are identified as observable: external factors, internal factors, and innovation-specific factors. External factors include market conditions, policy environment, and social networks. Internal factors include farmer characteristics, farm characteristics, and risk attitudes. Innovation-specific factors include characteristics of the innovation, information sources, and adoption process ( Figure 1 ).

Figure 1 . Factors influencing farmers’ adoption of agroecological innovations, adapted from Roussy et al. ( 12 ).

Considering farmers’ perceptions of these factors in the agroecological transition can help researchers and policymakers design and promote innovations that are more likely to be accepted and adopted by farmers ( 13 ). By understanding farmers’ perceptions and addressing the factors that influence them, it is possible to accelerate the transition toward more sustainable and environmentally friendly agricultural practices. Understanding farmers’ perceptions and strategies highlights the need to involve multiple actors in co-constructing policies and plans to address challenges in food systems. Additionally, farmers’ perception-centered approach emphasizes the significance of integrating and sharing knowledge from different sources to enhance agricultural productivity and improve the delivery of agricultural extension services to small-scale farmers ( 14 ). The literature underscores the importance of stakeholder engagement, innovation management, and entrepreneurship development. It emphasizes the need for a systematic and integrative approach to understand the relationship between these concepts and foster sustainable innovation while considering the interests and concerns of various stakeholders in decision-making processes ( 15 – 17 ).

Another classification of the factors influencing the agroecological transition is revealed according to many studies ( Figure 2 ). These factors are categorized into personal, technical, economic, and social factors. Personal factors pertain to the specific characteristics and beliefs of individual farmers, while technical factors include the knowledge, skills, and resources required for agroecological practices. Economic factors encompass the availability of funds and economic incentives to support the transition. Social factors, on the other hand, are influenced by external factors such as access to grants, markets, and community attitudes ( 3 , 9 , 18 ). These factors are interconnected and can collectively shape the success or barriers to the agroecological transition. Understanding and weighing these factors is crucial when developing strategies to promote sustainable and resilient food systems.

Figure 2 . Categories of the factors influencing the agroecological transition.

3 Methodology

The research methodology is based on a participatory approach supplemented by quantitative and qualitative analysis. The case study is conducted in the northwest region of Tunisia characterized by a mixed tree-crop-livestock farming system.

3.1 Study site

Located in northwest semi-arid zone of Tunisia, the Kef-Siliana transect ( Figure 3 ) has been designated a priority zone by the Agroecology Initiative ( 19 ) due to its vulnerability to both soil erosion and climate change ( 20 ). While Siliana and Kef governorates both experience a continental climate, their rainfall and temperature ranges differ slightly. Siliana receives between 350 and 550 mm of rain annually with temperatures ranging from 3.2 to 35.7°C, whereas Kef experiences an average annual rainfall of 350 mm to 450 mm and temperatures varying from 7.3 to 26.5°C. These predominantly rural regions face socioeconomic challenges such as high poverty rates, unemployment, and limited access to basic services, leading to significant outmigration, particularly among young people. Despite these challenges, the transect boasts a diversified agricultural system, including cereal crops, livestock farming, and olive tree cultivation. This agricultural diversity reflects the complex interdependence of various sectors and the complexity of the regions’ resource utilization patterns ( 21 , 22 ).

Figure 3 . The Tunisian Transect Kef-Siliana localization in the northwest of Tunisia (Source: ( 19 )).

3.2 Data collection

The research involved semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions, workshops, a survey, and a closed-ended questionnaire. The participants were identified based on their expertise, involvement in the initiative, and their roles in the agroecological transition landscape. The selection process has involved reaching out to academic and research institutions, governmental bodies, extension services and other relevant stakeholders to ensure a diverse representation of expertise and perspectives in the study. Table 1 summarizes the different sources of the collected data, the details of the respondents, the research questions, and the methods of analysis. The data were collected in ( 7 ) through semi-structured interviews with four professional farming organizations, workshops with farmers, technicians, researchers, public and private stakeholders from various value chains, and an open-ended survey carried out among 69 farmers belonging to farmers’ organizations. Additionally, a questionnaire about the perception of the agroecology transformation barriers and drivers was conducted with 35 farmers engaged in the initiative.

Table 1 . Overview of data Sources, participants, research questions, and methodology.

3.3 Data sources

The semi-structured interviews and the focus group discussions were conducted with four farmers organizations included in the Tunisian agroecological living landscape in the transect Kef-Siliana. The agroecology initiative is built around the concept and approach of living landscape to integrate the socioeconomic-system and ecosystems in one site to implement and test the agroecological transition ( 19 ). The Tunisian living landscape is characterized by the urgent need to enhance natural resource management, foster agricultural innovation, and address climate change impacts effectively. The main objectives of the interviews were to describe the key characteristics of each farmers’ organization and their main activities. To explore the diversity of the key partners and to discuss the main issues/challenges and their propositions to see how the agroecology approach could satisfy their needs.

The workshops were instrumental in identifying the opportunities and challenges to the agroecological transformation and selecting the main value chains with the greatest potential for boosting this transformation. The selection was based on a global evaluation matrix prioritizing the value chains according to a set of predefined criteria based on agroecological principles and their economic, social, and environmental dimensions or criteria ( 20 ). These selection criteria are summarized in Table 2 . The research by Di Vita et al. ( 24 ) and Spina et al. ( 25 ) underscores the importance of employing value chain methodologies. Through a holistic approach that involves establishing a focus group with thematic nodes and topics, involving national-level actors and experts, collecting data via interviews, and rigorously processing the gathered information, a comprehensive framework is developed to enhance understanding and decision-making in the field.

Table 2 . Dimensions for the selection of the value chains.

The survey explores the influences of farmers’ organization on innovative farming practices. It includes questions on the impact of agricultural demonstrations on farmers’ understanding and practices, on trade between farmers, on collective investment, on the perception of the organization of farmers in the community, and on the inclusiveness, exchange of information, commitment, and participation of women within the farmer organization, as well as on contracts and services between the farmer organization and farmers.

The questionnaire on perception is designed based on the factors that were identified in the theoretical framework as influencing the agroecological transformation. It is structured into several sections. The first section focuses on the socio-economic characteristics of the farmers, including age, gender, location, education level, land ownership, main farming activities, and years of experience. The second part of the questionnaire explores the farmers’ perceptions of the agroecological transformation in Tunisia. This section is further divided into four subsections. The first subsection addresses the effects of agroecological practices, the second subsection focuses on the farmers’ capabilities, and the third subsection delves into the difficulties and challenges associated with transformation. The fourth subsection of the questionnaire deals specifically with technical barriers. It is important to note that the active participation in the agroecological transformation was a selection criterion for all the respondents.

3.4 Respondents’ characteristics

An overview of the characteristics of the farmers included in the survey and in the questionnaire is included in Table 3 . The survey was conducted on a total of 69 farmers, with 38 female and 31 male farmers, while the questionnaire on perception was conducted on 35 farmers, with 6 female and 29 male farmers. The farmers are in Transect Kef-Seliana and Kairouan, with a primary focus on livestock, cereal crops, and olive trees as their main crops.

Table 3 . Characteristics of the farmers.

The land holdings of the farmers range from 1 to 50 hectares in the survey and 0–100 hectares in the questionnaire, with an average of 9 and 17 hectares, respectively. The age range of the farmers is between 22 and 73 years, with an average age of 48 years for the survey and 51 years for the questionnaire.

3.5 Analytical methods

Descriptive statistical analysis was conducted using various basic statistical measures, including mean, standard deviation, maximum, minimum, frequencies, and percentages. In addition, several analytical techniques were employed, such as SWOT analysis, Chi 2 , correlation, Kendall W and Kruskal-Wallis tests, Bayesian Belief Network (BBN) visualization, and factorial analysis. These methods were performed to accomplish several objectives: determining the level of engagement of local communities, prioritizing value chains with high agroecological potential, evaluating the progress toward an agroecological system through project interventions and farmers’ organizations, and assessing and categorizing the different drivers and barriers in the agroecological transformation of the Tunisian food system. The software tools SPSS and Stata were utilized for these analyses.

3.5.1 The SWOT analysis

The SWOT analysis is a strategic tool that helps identify the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats associated with projects and businesses ( 26 , 27 ). Its primary purpose is to evaluate both external and internal factors that either support or hinder the progress and successful implementation of projects or programs, aiding in making informed operational decisions ( 28 ). This analysis provides a framework for the strategic development of programs or projects, and it has been widely used to explore the internal and external environments, enabling the formulation of strategies and decision-making approaches for projects and programs ( 29 ). However, in the context of agroecology research, the SWOT analysis does encounter certain limitations. These limitations encompass subjectivity, the absence of quantifiable metrics hindering precise numerical assessments and comparisons, the dynamic nature of factors necessitating ongoing updates, and the limited focus on interactions, which may not fully consider how different factors in agroecosystems interact and influence each other. This can overlook important connections and complexities within agricultural systems, which are crucial for sustainability and resilience ( 30 , 31 ). It is crucial to consider these limitations to ensure a comprehensive and balanced evaluation of agroecosystems. Despite the SWOT analysis limitations, it remains relevant in the literature due to its usefulness in exploring possibilities during the decision-making process and its flexibility in combination with other approaches ( 32 – 34 ).

3.5.2 Bayesian belief network

A Bayesian Belief Network (BBN) is a graphical model that represents the probabilistic relationships between different variables. It is a powerful tool for understanding the complex interdependencies among variables and their influence on each other. BBNs are particularly useful for analyzing and visualizing data in fields such as decision analysis, risk assessment, and machine learning ( 35 ). In the context of this study, the BBN was used to visualize the relationships between different variables related to perceived changes. It helped to identify and understand how changes in one variable were connected to changes in other variables, providing insights into the overall impact of project interventions.

3.5.3 Factorial analysis

A principal component analysis with a varimax (orthogonal) rotation method is applied to perform exploratory factor analysis. The aim of this analysis was to obtain a factor structure of Agroecological transition perceived drivers and barriers, with both empirical and conceptual support ( 36 ). To determine the applicability of factor analysis, Bartlett’s test of sphericity ( p  < 0.05) was used. The number of factors to retain was decided by applying the criteria of eigenvalues greater than 1 ( 37 ). Finally, the extracted factors were labeled to give each factor a meaningful definition and meaning for interpretation.

4 Results and discussion

4.1 level of engagement of local communities.

The general characterization of the four farmers ‘organizations is summarized in Table 4 . The farmer organizations have diverse social and technical histories, allowing for the study of agroecological transition dynamics under various social and policy configurations. Farmer Organization 1, established in 2015, focuses on livestock and diverse agricultural production on smaller land holdings, with an exclusively female membership. In contrast, Farmer Organization 4, founded in 2017, specializes in cereal cultivation and livestock farming on larger land areas, boasting a more gender-balanced composition (50% women). Farmer Organization 3, established in 2020, centers its activities around olive trees, fruit trees, and beekeeping on moderate-sized land holdings. Farmer Organization 2, founded in 2022, is primarily involved in livestock farming and cereal crop cultivation on medium-sized land areas, with the lowest number of members and only 11% female representation. These organizations often develop common projects and actions, and their area and number of beneficiaries reflect their radius of action and capacity for scaling out.

Table 4 . General characterization of the farmers’ organizations.

The SWOT Analysis is performed to assess the agroecological transition potential of the farmer organizations in the transect Kef-Seliana. The findings show that the farmer organizations promote diversified and sustainable farming systems that align with agroecological principles and facilitate a variety of agroecological practices. The key points identified from the SWOT analysis are included in Table 5 .

Table 5 . SWOT analysis assessing the agroecological transition potential of the farmer organizations.

The interviewed farmer organizations have successful projects and collaborations with various key partners, such as The German International Cooperation (GIZ), The International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA), and the Regional Agricultural Development Commissariat (CRDA), to access resources, expertise, and funding opportunities. They have implemented various activities, such as local food artisanal production, conservation agriculture practices, crop rotation, forage mixtures (cereal-legumes), mechanization, forage seeds distribution, access to finance, and capacity building, which contribute to environmental and farming sustainability and connectivity. The diversified membership, with a focus on women and young farmers, aligns with the agroecological principle of social equity and justice. While Farmer Organization 1 had 100% female adherents and Farmer Organization 3 had 70% women adherents, Farmer Organization 2 only had 11% women members. Similarly, the percentage of members less than 35 years old varied across the organizations, with Farmer Organization 1 having 20%, Farmer Organization 2 having 11%, Farmer Organization 3 and 4 having 40%. This diversity in gender and age representation highlights that not all farmer organizations in Tunisia exhibit the same level of inclusion of women and young farmers. However, all the studied organizations encourage economic diversity and have a clear purpose in contributing to good governance. According to many studies, farmers’ collectives have different approaches for supporting agroecological transitions, including funding, advice, capacity building, experimentation with new practices, and information exchange ( 38 , 39 ). Diversified Farming Systems include functional biodiversity in farming practices to maintain ecosystem services like soil fertility, pest and disease control, water use efficiency, and pollination ( 40 ). Besides, crop rotation and legumes were identified as the most adequate diversification strategies for intensive rainfed cereal-based cropping systems ( 41 ).

4.2 High-potential value chains for agroecological transition

During the workshops conducted with the different stakeholders, many potential value chains were identified including the olive oil, honey, and sheep value chains. Among 33 and 30 participants, respectively in Kef and Siliana, 18 participants in both locations have selected the olive oil value chain as the value chain with the highest potential to integrate agroecology principles, as indicated in Figure 4 .

Figure 4 . Stakeholder preference for value chains integrated with agroecology principles in Kef and Siliana.

The prioritization of value chains for the agroecological transition in Tunisia highlights the olive oil sector as the most promising for development, considering economic, social, and environmental factors. Table 6 presents the participants motivations regarding the selection of the olive oil value chain.

Table 6 . Olive oil value chain selection dimensions and arguments.

4.3 Agroecological assessment of the olive oil value chain

The stakeholders present in the workshops were asked if the olive oil value chain can integrate the agroecological principles. The 13 principles of agroecology ( 42 ) applied to the selected value chain are presented in Table 7 .

Table 7 . The agroecological principles applied to the olive oil value chain.

Several research studies have backed the views of different stakeholders and considered the multi-stakeholder perspective to identify the obstacles and prospects in the food products’ value chains ( 24 ). The goal is to identify potential innovations that align with the needs and perceptions of the stakeholders ( 16 , 43 , 44 ). According to Torquati et al. ( 45 ), short extra virgin olive oil supply chains enhance agricultural products’ sustainability, with no real trade-offs when considering value chain results and environmental impact. In the context of the Tunisian olive oil supply chain, an optimal configuration incorporating organic farming, biodynamic growing techniques, and a two-phase extraction system using wet pomace for compost preparation is recommended ( 46 ). Circular economy principles can be implemented in the olive oil supply chain, but overcoming technological barriers and knowledge gaps is crucial for advancing circularity in the Mediterranean region’s agroecological systems ( 47 ).

4.4 Farmers’ perceptions of change

The aim of the survey was to understand how farmers perceive the change toward an agroecological farming system based on project interventions, and what is the influence of the organizational factor in this transformation in the Tunisian context. The descriptive analysis reveals that over 91.3% of farmers who received training and assistance with agroecological practices as part of ICARDA projects reported a change in their ideas and practices, while around 8.7% reported no change at all. These results confirm the findings of Oppong et al. ( 48 ), indicating that farmers in Ghana’s semi-deciduous region face challenges in adopting climate-smart agricultural practices due to lack of training, government support and extension officers. According to Šūmane et al. ( 49 ) redesigning the farming systems, necessitates farmer engagement in practices and local knowledge production. Integrating researcher and support-oriented strategies to bridge theory and practice is crucial for sustainable agroecological farming systems development ( 50 ).

Table 8 illustrates the number and percentage of farmers adopting and not adopting new agroecological practices by age and gender. The project suggests incorporating agroecological practices such as intercropping, direct seeding, minimal tillage, and crop rotation. The total percentage of female respondents is higher than male respondents, with 55 and 45%, respectively. The highest percentage of adopting farmers is in the 41–60 age group, with 36.5% of female respondents and 20.6% of male respondents.

Table 8 . Farmer’s adoption of agroecological practices by age and gender.

The Pearson chi-squared (chi 2 ) test showed no significant association between location and the adoption of new practices (with a Pearson chi 2 statistic of 0.3570 and a p -value of 0.550) or between gender and the adoption of new practices (Pearson chi 2  = 0.3570, Pr = 0.550). These results could be explained by the high level of adopting farmers among the respondents. The correlation coefficient between the adoption of new practices and farmer’s age is −0.051, indicating a very weak negative correlation. However, the p -value (0.677) suggests that this correlation is not statistically significant. However, many studies reveal that age of farmers have a negative effect on the adoption of sustainable agriculture practices ( 51 – 54 ).

Farmers’ perceptions of the change after research and development projects reveal varying levels of endorsement. In terms of motivation and engagement, change in farming comprehension and practices, and improved information exchange between farmers, these aspects are perceived very positively (Mean = 0.95, 0.92, and 0.91, respectively), indicating strong support for agroecological initiatives ( Supplementary Appendix 1 ). Factors related to inclusiveness of small farmers (Mean = 0.87), participation of women (Mean = 0.78), and commercial exchange between farmers (Mean = 0.70) are viewed more moderately. On the other hand, perception of investment in collective activities (Mean = 0.56) and better services and contracts between the farmers’ organization and agricultural producers (Mean = 0.49) are comparatively lower, suggesting a more nuanced view or potential challenges. Understanding these nuanced perspectives is crucial in tailoring interventions and promoting sustainable agricultural practices.

Through the chi-squared test, statistically significant linkages between various aspects of the perceived change are identified ( Supplementary Appendix 2 ). The visualization via the Bayesian Belief Network (BBN) allows for understanding the complex interdependencies between the different variables ( Figure 5 ). The farmer’s perception of changes in motivation and engagement is linked to the perception of changes in women’s participation and to the enhancement of services and contracts with farmers’ organizations. Likewise, the perception of a better understanding of farming practices is connected to the change of farming practices and to a better information exchange between farmers. Information exchange between farmers is related to the perception of a better commercial exchange that also associated to the enhancement of services and contracts with farm organizations. Only the perception of inclusiveness and collective investments are not connected to other aspects of change. The identification of these interlinks helps prioritizing the intervention areas where interventions had the most significant impact. A higher perceived motivation and engagement suggests the effectiveness of interventions in that domain and may impact women participation and the enhancement of services and contracts with farmers’ organizations. The project’s interventions were also effective leading to a high perceived understanding of farming practices that improves the information exchange between farmers and farming practices change. This insight can guide the design of future interventions based on the identified associations, leading to more targeted and impactful interventions.

Figure 5 . Bayesian Belief Network illustrating the interconnected perceptions of change among farmers.

The findings suggest a significant association between gender and the perceptions of motivation and engagement in agricultural projects ( Supplementary Appendix 3 ). A strong association is identified between gender and the women’s participation perception and the perception of better services and contracts between farmers and farmer organizations. The study shows that the perception of change on motivation and engagement increases from 95 to 100% if all respondents are women, while the women’s participation perception increases from 78 to 98% ( Figure 6 ). These results are consistent with several studies that have explored the role of gender in agricultural projects. Cloete et al. ( 55 ) found that rural Nicaraguan women’s motivations change from initial to sustained forms, enabling them to sustain community-led projects and build social capital, self-efficacy, and agency. Amran and Fatah ( 56 ) studied women’s empowerment in agriculture in Malaysia and found that access to extension services and effective decision-making are key factors, but limited leadership, motivation and engagement challenges, and restricted community group participation hinder women’s empowerment. Meinzen-Dick et al. ( 57 ) emphasized the importance of integrating gender into agricultural research, development, and extension to enhance food security and promote innovation in developing countries. Gender perceptions can significantly influence smallholder farmers’ adoption of resilient or sustainable farming practices. Studies have shown that women, who are often the most vulnerable smallholder farmers, are bound to benefit from this agricultural technology, mostly because of its attributes (i.e., climate smart practices) ( 58 ). Additionally, women have less access to productive resources, financial capital, and advisory services compared to men which may explain women’s high positive perception of motivation, engagement, and participation in projects’ activities ( 59 ).

Figure 6 . Gender influence in the motivation and engagement perception and in women participation perception of farmers.

4.5 Farmers’ organizations influence in the adoption of innovative farming practices and decision-making change

Table 9 presents the results of farmers’ perceptions of the effects of farmers’ organizations on changing practices and decisions on the farm. The items in the survey included the effect of farmers’ organizations on “changing input purchasing behavior,” “changing practices and techniques for crop management and/or breeding,” “changing sales and marketing behavior,” “changing relationships with other farmers,” and “changing vision for the farm in 10 years.” The results of the reliability analysis using Cronbach’s alpha for a scale composed of the five items show that the average interitem covariance is 1.58, indicating that the items in the scale are positively correlated. The scale reliability coefficient is 0.93, which is considered high and suggests that the scale has good internal consistency. This means that the items in the scale are measuring the same construct and are reliable for measuring that construct.

Table 9 . Responses on farmer’s perceptions of farmers’ organization effects on changing practices and decisions on the farm ( n  = 69).

The weighted average decision score is the sum of the mean values for the five items, divided by the total number of the items. It was 3.70, indicating an overall positive perception of the effects of farmers’ organizations on changing practices and decisions on the farm. The results show that the highest levels of agreement were observed for changing relationships with other farmers and changing the vision of the farm in 10 years. The Kendall W test shows that the five variables presenting the effects of farmers’ organization have similar mean ranks, ranging from 2.69 to 3.27 ( Supplementary Appendix 4 ). This suggests a general agreement that all effects hold some importance. However standard deviations are relatively high, indicating variation in perceived importance among respondents. Kendall’s Coefficient of Concordance (W) was estimated at 0.064 and statistically significant at 10%, indicating a weak level of agreement in the ranking of effects across respondents. The weak concordance suggests individual differences in how they prioritize these effects. There is not a strong consensus on which effect is most or least important.

The findings are consistent with previous studies that highlighted the significance of behavioral, social, and cognitive factors in influencing farmers’ decisions. Spina et al. ( 60 ) found that farmers’ attitudes strongly influence their intention to adopt, followed by social norms and perceived control. According to Addai et al. ( 61 ), the membership in farmer organizations affects the decision to adopt farm technologies by rice farmers in Ghana. The household head’s decision to adopt new farming practices such as machinery use and row planting increases upon joining a farmer organization. A scoping review of the literature on farmers’ organizations impacts on small-scale producers in sub-Saharan Africa and India found that farmers’ organizations, such as associations, cooperatives, and women’s groups, provide services that contribute to income and productivity for small-scale producers ( 62 ). Most reviewed studies reported positive impacts on farmer income, but much fewer reported positive impacts on crop yield and production quality. Environmental benefits, such as resilience-building and improved water quality and quantity, were documented in 24% of the studies. The review suggests that farmers’ organizations could be integrated into policy by having access to markets through information, infrastructure, and logistical support at the center of farmers’ organizations design ( 62 ).

To understand if there are any gender disparities in how farmers’ organizations shape farm management, a Kruskal-Wallis’s test was performed. The Kruskal Wallis test is a non-parametric test that compares the medians of two or more groups, and it is used when the data do not meet the assumptions of normality and equal variances required by parametric tests. Results showed that there were significant differences between the two groups in all five variables ( p  < 0.05) ( Supplementary Appendix 5 ). Specifically, women had higher mean ranks than men in the perception of the farmer organization effect on changing input purchasing behavior, on changing practices, on changing sales and marketing behavior, and on changing their vision for the farm in 10 years. The higher mean ranks for the female group suggest they generally perceived these effects as more important than the male farmers. Men had a higher mean rank only in the perception of the farmer organization effect on changing relationship with other farmers. The overall assessment suggests that, on average, females tend to provide higher ratings for the farmer organization effects on changing practices and decisions on the farm compared to males. However, the variability in responses is higher among males, indicating that there might be more diverse opinions among males. Women could be more aware of the farmer organization roles and influences because of the important gap in productivity, income, and resources that women are experiencing. According to Bello et al. ( 63 ), a disparity between men and women with a gender performance gap of about 11% in favor of men, is partially explained by factors such as the men access to improved varieties, membership of farmer-based organizations, extension services, and quantity of seeds sown.

Farmers’ organizations play a significant role in influencing the adoption of farming innovative practices and decision-making change. The positive perceptions of the effects of farmers’ organizations on changing practices and decisions on the farm, particularly in relation to changing relationships with other farmers and the long-term vision for the farm, underscore the importance of collaborative and supportive networks in promoting sustainable farming practices. However, the lower levels of agreement regarding changing sales and marketing behavior, as well as input purchasing behavior and crop management practices, suggest that there may be specific areas where farmers’ organizations could focus on enhancing their support and influence.

4.6 Farmers perception of agroecological transformation

The findings derived from the perception analysis provide valuable information regarding the farmers’ perception of agroecological transformation drivers and barriers. The descriptive analysis of the sample reveals that most of the participants in the study are male farmers, comprising 83% of the sample. In terms of education level, a significant proportion of the participants have completed secondary education (37%), followed by those with a university level of education (20%). The primary activities of the participants are dominated by olive tree cultivation (43%), with field crop cultivation (28%) and livestock farming (14%) also being prevalent. The participants’ age ranges from 21 to 72 years, with a mean of 52 years. Land ownership among participants varies widely, ranging from no land to 100 hectares, with a mean of 17 hectares. There is only one young farmer (27 years old) who does not own any land. On average, the participants have 28 years of experience as farmers, and their primary activity contributes about 63% of their income, with some variation across individuals ( Supplementary Appendix 6 ).

Respondents’ perceptions about challenges and barriers of adopting agroecological practices are varying from strong agreement to total disagreement. The percentages of respondents for each category, means, standard deviations, decisions, and the ranking of the perceived barriers and motivating factors to the adoption of agroecological practices by farmers are summarized in Supplementary Appendix 7 . The highest perceived barriers are the lack of financing and credit opportunities, the lack of encouragement from the government, water shortages, soil erosion, and other environmental problems, the absence of encouraging legislation and laws, the lack of infrastructure and supporting systems, the lack of training on ecological farming, and the lack of production inputs. Improved water conservation and enhanced soil quality are indeed key benefits of the agroecological transition. However, water shortages and soil erosion can still be perceived as barriers due to the initial challenges and adjustments required during the transition process. Despite the eventual benefits, the transition to agroecology may initially pose challenges in adapting to new practices and overcoming existing environmental issues.

Indeed, the most motivating factors perceived by farmers are that agroecological practices contribute to preserving the environment and natural resources, reduce the cost of production, contribute to improved food quality, are compatible with culture and values, contribute to improved production and income, and are compatible with farmers’ knowledge and experience. The most motivating items of the agroecological transformation can be the entry points for the transition. However, the respondents agree less with the facts that agroecological practices and activities are compatible with the financial, economic, technical, and logistical capabilities of farmers. These results are confirmed by Kendall’s W test. The test has been used to assess the level of agreement among respondents’ rankings of various statements related to agroecological practices and their associated motivations, challenges, and barriers. The value of Kendall’s W is 0.20 and the p -value is 0.000 ( Supplementary Appendix 7 ). This indicates that there is a statistically significant weak level of agreement among the respondents’ rankings of the various statements related to agroecological practices and their associated challenges and barriers. The mean ranks for each statement provide insight into the relative importance or perception of each item. For example, “Agroecological practices contribute to preserve the environment and natural resources” has the highest mean rank of 21.87, indicating that, on average, respondents ranked this statement as more important or more in agreement compared to other statements. Conversely, “Constraints and complexity of agroecological transition consist of the lack of consumer demand for ecological products” has a lower mean rank of 9.31, indicating that, on average, respondents ranked this statement as less important compared to other statements. The Cronbach’s alpha value is 0.763, indicating an acceptable level of reliability and suggesting a satisfactory level of internal consistency among the items.

4.7 Key driver and barrier factors of the agroecological transformation in Tunisia

Factorial analysis is conducted to understand the structure of the main drivers and barriers of the agroecological transformation considering the current perceptions of the Tunisian farmers. The factorial analysis conducted on 30 factors (items) related to agroecological practices reveals a nuanced understanding of the complexities and challenges surrounding their adoption. The analysis delineates 9 key components (explaining 78% of the total variance), each capturing distinct aspects of the agroecological transition process ( Supplementary Appendix 8 ).

• Component 1: captures financial, and economic considerations, alongside logistical and technical feasibility, that emerge as crucial determinants of this first factor labeled as “Compatibility with farmers’ capabilities and knowledge and capacity building needs.” This component also focusses on technical difficulties facing ecological transformation, such as the lack of training, technical knowledge, and experience.

• Component 2: highlights key constraints such as the absence of encouraging legislation and laws, and the lack of government support, the delayed results to enhance incomes and the lack of exchange of experiences and of cooperation between farmers. The second factor more related to the perception of barriers is labeled as “Political, institutional, and communication barriers and risk perception.”

• Component 3: includes constraints such as the high cost of transition, difficulties in changing production habits and lack of cooperation between the different stakeholders. This factor is labeled as “Stakeholder cooperation and implementation challenges.”

• Component 4: emphasizes the alignment of agroecological practices with cultural and economic expectations, including initial productivity changes, cost reduction, and long-term production and income improvement. This component can be interpreted as “Cultural and economic benefits.”

• Component 5: highlights logistical difficulties such as input unavailability, the lack of infrastructure and supporting systems and challenges in scaling up agroecological practices. This factor is summarized as a barrier and labeled as “Logistical difficulties and scaling-up challenges.”

• Component 6: focuses on environmental aspects, including the contribution of agroecological practices to preserve the environment and natural resources, and constraints related to water shortages, soil erosion, and other environmental problems. This factor can be interpreted as “Environmental sustainability and mitigation in agroecological practices,” highlighting the role of environmental challenges and mitigation factors as drivers of the agroecological transformation.

• Component 7: encompasses factors related to access to both economic and non-economic aspects such as access to information, credit, and financial support. This component considered as a barrier and is identified as “Access to information and financial services.”

• Component 8: highlights constraints such as the lack of consumer demand for ecological products, marketing difficulties, and market access challenges. The component is identified as “Market-related factors.”

• Component 9: suggests that agroecological practices contribute to improved food quality and hygiene and can be interpreted as “Health Determinants” factor.

Figure 7 presents drivers and barriers in agroecological transitions in Tunisia according to the local farmers involved. The total explained variance by the extracted components reached 78%. The drivers include compatibility with farmers’ capabilities (17.71%), cultural and economic benefits (8.75%), environmental sustainability (6.07%), and health determinants (3.55%). Political, institutional, and communication barriers (15.54%), stakeholder cooperation challenges (9.76%), logistical difficulties (8.15%), access to information and financial services (5.58%), and market-related factors (3.83%) are identified as barriers. Consistent with these results, the literature highlights the complexity of the factors involved as barriers of agroecological transitions ( 64 ). Furthermore, the sustainability of transitions to agroecology is linked to factors such as capacity building, social capital, and farmer knowledge, emphasizing the multifaceted nature of these transitions ( 65 ).

Figure 7 . Key drivers and barriers of agroecological transition.

5 Conclusion and implications

In examining the potential for agroecological transitions in Tunisia, specifically the Kef-Siliana transect, this study has revealed valuable insights. The SWOT analysis demonstrates that farmer organizations have clear goals, diversified farming systems, and partnerships in collaboration with various organizations and institutions. The study emphasizes the significant potential of these farmers’ organizations in advancing sustainable farming practices. However, it also underscores the need for targeted efforts to address specific challenges in farming practices and decision-making. Outlined obstacles include the unavailability of seeds and fertilizers, water shortage, limited income, diseases, and marketing issues. To prioritize value chains for agroecological transition in Tunisia, the study identifies the olive oil sector as the most promising for development, considering economic, social, and environmental factors. Implementing recycling and input minimization principles in the olive oil supply chain and bridging the gap between theoretical agroecological concepts and farming practice implementation are recommended to cultivate sustainable agroecological farming systems. The survey’s results indicate that farmers who received training and assistance with agroecological practices reported positive changes in their ideas and practices. Therefore, the study emphasizes the importance of farmer engagement, knowledge production, and multi-stakeholder collaboration in promoting agroecological transitions in Tunisia. The Bayesian Belief Network (BBN) visualization highlights complex interdependencies between different factors, emphasizing the significance of women’s participation, improved services and contracts with farmers’ organizations, and a better understanding of farming practices to facilitate agroecological transitions. The study identifies various challenges and barriers, including political, institutional, and communication barriers, logistical difficulties, and market-related factors. To address these challenges and facilitate agroecological transitions, the study emphasizes the need for farmer engagement, knowledge production, and multi-stakeholder collaboration. Furthermore, it suggests targeted efforts to address specific aspects of farming practices and decision-making. The study’s findings also underscore the influence of gender perceptions on the adoption of resilient and sustainable farming practices among smallholder farmers, emphasizing the importance of integrating gender into agricultural research, development, and extension to enhance food security and foster innovation in Tunisia. At the political and institutional level, the study recommends the increase of public incentives and supportive legislation to support agroecological practices. Additionally, the study suggests offering innovative financing and credit opportunities to farmers to overcome the lack of production inputs and limited access to microfinancing. Recognizing the lack of training on ecological farming as a significant barrier, the study proposes the development of capacity building programs to equip farmers with the necessary knowledge and skills to embrace agroecological practices.

Data availability statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Ethics statement

Ethical approval was not required for the studies involving humans because the farmers participated voluntarily and provided their consent to answer the survey questions. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.

Author contributions

AS: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Data curation, Investigation, Software. BD: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Supervision, Validation, Writing – review & editing, Project administration. AO: Validation, Writing – review & editing. RM: Data curation, Investigation, Writing – original draft. AF: Funding acquisition, Project administration, Resources, Writing – review & editing. MZ: Investigation, Writing – review & editing. MD: Investigation, Writing – review & editing.

The author(s) declare financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This work is part of the Agroecology Initiative “Transformational Agroecology across Food, Land and Water Systems” under a grant agreement (#200302) with the International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA - https://www.icarda.og/ ). We would like to thank all funders who supported this research through their contributions to the CGIAR Trust Fund: https://www.cgiar.org/funders .

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Author disclaimer

The opinions expressed here belong to the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of ICARDA or CGIAR.

Supplementary material

The Supplementary material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnut.2024.1389007/full#supplementary-material

1. ^ More about this initiative can be read here: https://www.cgiar.org/initiative/agroecology/ .

1. Anderson, CR, Bruil, J, Chappell, MJ, Kiss, C, and Pimbert, MP. Agroecology now! Transformations towards more just and sustainable food systems . Cham: Springer Nature (2021) Available at: https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/46819 .

Google Scholar

2. Kretschmer, S, and Kahl, J. Sustainable development goal drivers in food systems. Front Sustain Food Syst . (2021) 5:536620. doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2021.536620

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

3. Padel, S, Levidow, L, and Pearce, B. UK farmers’ transition pathways towards agroecological farm redesign: evaluating explanatory models. Agroecol Sustain Food Syst . (2019) 44:139–63. doi: 10.1080/21683565.2019.1631936

4. Conde, YQ, Locatelli, B, Vallet, A, and Sevillano, RB. Agroecology for food security and against climate change in Peru. Econo Agr Recur Nat . (2022) 22:5–29. doi: 10.7201/earn.2022.01.01

5. Dagunga, G, Ayamga, M, Laube, W, Ansah, IGK, Kornher, L, and Kotu, BH. Agroecology and resilience of smallholder food security: a systematic review. Front Sustain Food Syst . (2023) 7:1267630. doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2023.1267630

6. Altieri, MA, and Nicholls, CI. Agroecology: challenges and opportunities for farming in the anthropocene. Int J Agric Nat Resour . (2020) 47:204–15. doi: 10.7764/ijanr.v47i3.2281

7. CGIAR Initiative on Agroecology (2023). The agroecology transition: different pathways to a single destination - eight country experiences . Available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10568/138124

8. Fraser, EDG, Dougill, AJ, Mabee, WE, Reed, M, and McAlpine, P. Bottom up and top down: analysis of participatory processes for sustainability indicator identification as a pathway to community empowerment and sustainable environmental management. J Environ Manag . (2006) 78:114–27. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.04.009

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

9. Soini Coe, E, and Coe, R. Agroecological transitions in the mind. Elementa . (2023) 11:26. doi: 10.1525/elementa.2022.00026

10. Rizzo, G, Migliore, G, Schifani, G, and Vecchio, R. Key factors influencing farmers’ adoption of sustainable innovations: a systematic literature review and research agenda. Org Agr . (2023) 14:57–84. doi: 10.1007/s13165-023-00440-7

11. Gaba, S, and Lamine, C. Social–ecological experiments to foster agroecological transition. People Nat . (2020) 2:317–27. doi: 10.1002/pan3.10078

12. Roussy, C, Ridier, A, and Chaib, K. Farmers’ innovation adoption behaviour: role of perceptions and preferences. Int J Agric Resour Gov Ecol . (2017) 13:138–61. doi: 10.1504/IJARGE.2017.086439

13. Chikezie, NP, Omolehin, RA, and Fadiji, TO. Socio-economic and institutional factors influencing adoption of community-based agriculture and rural development (CBARD) crop production interventions project in Kaduna and Bauchi states, Nigeria. Open Access J Agric Res . (2019) 4:215. doi: 10.23880/oajar-16000215

14. Martin, G. A conceptual framework to support adaptation of farming systems – development and application with forage rummy. Agric Syst . (2015) 132:52–61. doi: 10.1016/j.agsy.2014.08.013

15. Ayuso, S, Rodríguez, M, García-Castro, R, and Ariño, M. Does stakeholder engagement promote sustainable innovation orientation? Ind Manag Data Syst . (2011) 111:1399–417. doi: 10.1108/02635571111182764

16. Leonidou, E, Christofi, M, Vrontis, D, and Thrassou, A. An integrative framework of stakeholder engagement for innovation management and entrepreneurship development. J Bus Res . (2018) 119:245–58. doi: 10.1016/J.JBUSRES.2018.11.054

17. Thabrew, L, Wiek, A, and Ries, R. Environmental decision making in multi-stakeholder contexts: applicability of life cycle thinking in development planning and implementation. J Clean Prod . (2009) 17:67–76. doi: 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2008.03.008

18. Dupré, M, Michels, T, and Le Gal, PY. (2017). Diverse dynamics in agroecological transitions on fruit tree farms. Eur J Agron . 90:23–33.

19. Alary, V, Frija, A, Ouerghemmi, H, Idoudi, Z, Rudiger, U, Rekik, M, et al. Context assessment for agroecology transformation in the Tunisian living landscape . Beirut, Lebanon: International Center for Agricultural Research (2022) in the Dry Areas (ICARDA). Working Paper, 71.

20. Attiaoui, I, and Boufateh, T. (2019). Impacts of climate change on cereal farming in Tunisia: a panel ARDL–PMG approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research . 26:13334–45.

21. CRDA Kef (2020). Commissariat Régional de Développment Agricole . Technical Report in Kef.

22. ODNO. (2020). Gouvernorat de Siliana en chiffre . Ministère de l’Economie et de la Planification. Office de Développement du Nord-Ouest. Available at: https://odno.nat.tn/

23. Jochem, S. (2015). Les lignes directrices pour sélectionner des chaînes de valeur. Intégration des critères économiques, environnementaux, sociaux et institutionnels. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH sur mandat du Ministère fédéral de la Coopération économique et du Développement (BMZ) et Organisation internationale du Travail(OIT). 66 Available at: https://webapps.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_emp/---emp_ent/documents/instructionalmaterial/wcms_463147.pdf

24. Di Vita, G, Spina, D, De Cianni, R, D’Amico, M, and Zanchini, R. Enhancing the extended value chain of the aromatic plant sector in Italy: a multiple correspondence analysis based on stakeholders’ opinions. Agric Econ . (2023) 11:15. doi: 10.1186/s40100-023-00257-8

25. Spina, D, Barbieri, C, Carbone, R, Hamam, M, D’Amico, M, and Di Vita, G. Market trends of medicinal and aromatic plants in Italy: future scenarios based on the Delphi method. Agronomy . (2023) 13:1703. doi: 10.3390/agronomy13071703

26. Agyekum, EB, Ansah, MNS, and Afornu, KB. Nuclear energy for sustainable development: SWOT analysis on Ghana’s nuclear agenda. Energy Rep . (2020) 2020:107–15.

27. Rauch, P. SWOT analyses and SWOT strategy formulation for forest owner co-operations in Austrias. Eur J For Res . (2007) 2007:413–20.

28. Kangas, J, Tikkanen, J, Leskinen, P, Kurttila, M, and Kajanus, M. Developing hybrid SWOT methodologies for choosing joint bioeconomy co-operation priorities by three Finnish universities. Biofuels . (2017) 8:459–71. doi: 10.1080/17597269.2016.1271625

29. Ghazinoory, S, Abdi, M, and Azadegan-Mehr, M. Swot methodology: a state-of-the-art review for the past, a framework for the future/SSGG Metodologija: Praeities ir Ateities Analizė. J Bus Econ Manag . (2011) 12:24–48. doi: 10.3846/16111699.2011.555358

30. Oladele, OI, Lepetu, J, Subair, SK, and Obuh, J. SWOT analysis of extension systems in southern African countries. J Agri Enviro Int Dev . (2009) 103:309–20.

31. Tryphone, G, and Thomas, SP. Evaluating limitations of Agroecological practices and stakeholders’ response: a case of Uluguru Mountains landscape in Morogoro municipality, Tanzania. East Afr J Sci Technol Innov . (2023) 4. doi: 10.37425/eajsti.v4i3.676

32. Dyson, RG. Strategic development, and SWOT analysis at the University of Warwick. Eur J Oper Res . (2004) 152:631–40. doi: 10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00062-6

33. Helms, MM, and Nixon, JC. Exploring SWOT analysis—where are we now? J Strat Manag . (2010) 3:215–51. doi: 10.1108/17554251011064837

34. Oladele, OI, and Sakagami, JI. SWOT analysis of extension systems in Asian and west African countries. Food Agric Environ . (2004) 2:232–6.

35. Heckerman, D, Geiger, D, and Chickering, DM. Learning Bayesian networks: the combination of knowledge and statistical data. Mach Learn . (1995) 20:197–243. doi: 10.1007/BF00994016

36. Costello, AB, and Osborne, J. Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Pract Assess Res Eval . (2019) 10:1–9. doi: 10.7275/jyj1-4868

37. Riitters, KH, O’Neill, RV, Hunsaker, CT, Wickham, JD, Yankee, DH, Timmins, SP, et al. A factor analysis of landscape pattern and structure metrics. Landsc Ecol . (1995) 1995:23–39.

38. Ryschawy, J., Sarthou, J., Chabert, A., and Thérond, O. (2019). The key role of actors in the agroecological transition of farmers: a case-study in the Tarn-Aveyron Basin: agroecological transitions: from theory to practice in local participatory design . Springer. 149–173.

39. Slimi, C, Prost, M, Cerf, M, and Prost, L. Exchanges among farmers’ collectives in support of sustainable agriculture: from review to reconceptualization. J Rural Stud . (2021) 83:268–78. doi: 10.1016/J.JRURSTUD.2021.01.019

40. Kremen, C, Iles, A, and Bacon, C. Guest editorial, part of a special feature on A social-ecological analysis of diversified farming systems: benefits, costs, obstacles, and enabling policy frameworks diversified farming systems: an Agroecological, systems-based alternative to modern industrial. Agriculture . (2012) 17:19–44. doi: 10.5751/ES-05103-170444

41. Bene, C, Gómez-López, M, Francaviglia, R, Farina, R, Blasi, E, Martínez-Granados, D, et al. Barriers and opportunities for sustainable farming practices and crop diversification strategies in Mediterranean cereal-based systems. Front Environ Sci . (2022) 10:16. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2022.861225

42. HLPE. Agroecological and other innovative approaches for sustainable agriculture and food systems that enhance food security and nutrition . Rome: A report by the High-Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition of the Committee on World Food Security (2019) Available at: https://www.fao.org/3/ca5602en/ca5602en.pdf .

43. Pisanelli, A, Consalvo, C, Russo, G, Ciolfi, M, Martini, E, Lauteri, M, et al. Agroforestry systems and innovation in extra-virgin olive oil chain (EVOO) in Central Italy: a multi-stakeholder perspective. Innov Appr Appl Sustaina Rural Dev . (2017) 85–99. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-02312-6_5

44. Tyl, B, Vallet, F, Bocken, N, and Real, M. The integration of a stakeholder perspective into the front end of eco-innovation: a practical approach. J Clean Prod . (2015) 108:543–57. doi: 10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2015.07.145

45. Torquati, B, Cecchini, L, Paffarini, C, and Chiorri, M. The economic and environmental sustainability of extra virgin olive oil supply chains: an analysis based on food miles and value chains. Econ Agro Alimen Food Econ Open Access . (2021) 23:1–28. doi: 10.3280/ECAG1-2021OA11391

46. Jellali, A, Hachicha, W, and Aljuaid, A. Sustainable configuration of the Tunisian olive oil supply chain using a fuzzy TOPSIS-based approach. Sustain For . (2021) 13:722. doi: 10.3390/SU13020722

47. Stempfle, S, Carlucci, D, Gennaro, B, Roselli, L, and Giannoccaro, G. Available pathways for operationalizing circular economy into the olive oil supply chain: mapping evidence from a scoping literature review. Sustain For . (2021) 13:9789. doi: 10.3390/su13179789

48. Oppong, E, Opoku, A, Tuffour, H, Snr, A, and Kyere, C. Climate change and climate-smart agricultural practices: opportunities and challenges in the semi-deciduous region of Ghana. Int J Environ Clim Change . (2021) 11:100–10. doi: 10.9734/ijecc/2021/v11i630426

49. Šūmane, S, Kunda, I, Knickel, K, Strauss, A, Tisenkopfs, T, Ríos, I, et al. Local and farmers' knowledge matters! How integrating informal and formal knowledge enhances sustainable and resilient agriculture. J Rural Stud . (2017) 59:232–41. doi: 10.1016/J.JRURSTUD.2017.01.020

50. Lacombe, C, Couix, N, and Hazard, L. Designing agroecological farming systems with farmers: a review. Agric Syst . (2018) 165:208–20. doi: 10.1016/J.AGSY.2018.06.014

51. Awan, S, Ashfaq, M, Naqvi, S, Hassan, S, Kamran, M, Imran, A, et al. Profitability analysis of sustainable cotton production: a case study of cotton wheat farming system in Bahawalpur district of Punjab. Bulgarian J Agr Sci . (2015) 21:251–6.

52. Hina, T, and Naseer, M. Impact of better management practices on sustainable cotton production: evidence from South Punjab. J Econ Impact . (2019) 1:92–7. doi: 10.52223/jei0103194

53. Lastiri-Hernández, M, Álvarez-Bernal, D, Moncayo-Estrada, R, Cruz-Cárdenas, G, and Garcia, J. Adoption of phytodesalination as a sustainable agricultural practice for improving the productivity of saline soils. Environ Dev Sustain . (2020) 23:8798–814. doi: 10.1007/s10668-020-00995-5

54. Olawuyi, S. Farmers' preference for soil and water conservation practices in Nigeria: analytic hierarchic process approach. J Econ Behav Stud . (2018) 10:68–80. doi: 10.22610/jebs.v10i4(j).2408

55. Cloete, E, House, A, Velásquez, L, Calderon, M, López, J, Rivera, R, et al. I left my shyness behind: sustainable community-led development and processes of motivation among rural Nicaraguan women. J Community Psychol . (2022) 51:860–79. doi: 10.1002/jcop.22926

56. Amran, F, and Fatah, F. Insights of women’s empowerment and decision-making in rice production in Malaysia. Food Res . (2020) 4:53–61. doi: 10.26656/fr.2017.4(s5).013

57. Meinzen-Dick, R, Quisumbing, A, and Behrman, J. A system that delivers: integrating gender into agricultural research, development, and extension In: A Quisumbing, R Meinzen-Dick, T Raney, A Croppenstedt, J Behrman, and A Peterman, editors. Gender in agriculture . Dordrecht: Springer (2014). 373–91.

58. Murage, AW, Pittchar, JO, Midega, CAO, Onyango, CO, and Khan, ZR. Gender specific perceptions and adoption of the climate-smart push–pull technology in eastern Africa. Crop Prot . (2015) 76:83–91. doi: 10.1016/j.cropro.2015.06.014

59. Jost, C, Kyazze, F, Naab, J, Neelormi, S, Kinyangi, J, Zougmore, R, et al. Understanding gender dimensions of agriculture and climate change in smallholder farming communities. Clim Dev . (2015) 8:133–44. doi: 10.1080/17565529.2015.1050978

60. Spina, D, Caracciolo, F, Chinnici, G, Di Vita, G, Selvaggi, R, Pappalardo, G, et al. How do farmers plan to safeguard the environment? Empirical evidence on farmers’ intentions to adopt organic pest management practices. J Environ Plan Manag . (2023):1–21. doi: 10.1080/09640568.2023.2218021

61. Addai, K, Temoso, O, and Ng’ombe, J. Review for "participation in farmer organizations and adoption of farming technologies among rice farmers in Ghana". Int J Soc Econ . (2021) 529–45. doi: 10.1108/ijse-06-2021-0337/v3/review1

62. Bizikova, L, Nkonya, E, Minah, M, Hanisch, M, Turaga, RMR, Speranza, CI, et al. A scoping review of the contributions of farmers’ organizations to smallholder agriculture. Nat Food . (2020) 1:620–30. doi: 10.1038/s43016-020-00164-x

63. Bello, L, Baiyegunhi, L, Danso-Abbeam, G, and Ogundeji, A. Gender decomposition in smallholder agricultural performance in rural Nigeria. Sci Afr . (2021) 13:e00875. doi: 10.1016/j.sciaf.2021.e00875

64. Ying, TW, and Wenying, L. Agroecological transitions: A mathematical perspective on a transdisciplinary problem. Front Sustain Food Syst . (2020) 4:2020. doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2020.00091

65. Schwarz, G, Vanni, F, Miller, D, Helin, J, Pražan, J, Albanito, F, et al. Exploring sustainability implications of transitions to agroecology: a transdisciplinary perspective. EuroChoices . (2022) 21:37–47. doi: 10.1111/1746-692X.12377

Keywords: participatory approach, agroecological transformation, perceptions, resilience, value chain, North Africa

Citation: Souissi A, Dhehibi B, Oumer AM, Mejri R, Frija A, Zlaoui M and Dhraief MZ (2024) Linking farmers’ perceptions and management decision toward sustainable agroecological transition: evidence from rural Tunisia. Front. Nutr . 11:1389007. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2024.1389007

Received: 20 February 2024; Accepted: 25 April 2024; Published: 13 May 2024.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2024 Souissi, Dhehibi, Oumer, Mejri, Frija, Zlaoui and Dhraief. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Asma Souissi, [email protected]

This article is part of the Research Topic

Sustainable and Resilient Food Systems in Times of Crises

Cultural Relativity and Acceptance of Embryonic Stem Cell Research

Article sidebar.

Main Article Content

There is a debate about the ethical implications of using human embryos in stem cell research, which can be influenced by cultural, moral, and social values. This paper argues for an adaptable framework to accommodate diverse cultural and religious perspectives. By using an adaptive ethics model, research protections can reflect various populations and foster growth in stem cell research possibilities.

INTRODUCTION

Stem cell research combines biology, medicine, and technology, promising to alter health care and the understanding of human development. Yet, ethical contention exists because of individuals’ perceptions of using human embryos based on their various cultural, moral, and social values. While these disagreements concerning policy, use, and general acceptance have prompted the development of an international ethics policy, such a uniform approach can overlook the nuanced ethical landscapes between cultures. With diverse viewpoints in public health, a single global policy, especially one reflecting Western ethics or the ethics prevalent in high-income countries, is impractical. This paper argues for a culturally sensitive, adaptable framework for the use of embryonic stem cells. Stem cell policy should accommodate varying ethical viewpoints and promote an effective global dialogue. With an extension of an ethics model that can adapt to various cultures, we recommend localized guidelines that reflect the moral views of the people those guidelines serve.

Stem cells, characterized by their unique ability to differentiate into various cell types, enable the repair or replacement of damaged tissues. Two primary types of stem cells are somatic stem cells (adult stem cells) and embryonic stem cells. Adult stem cells exist in developed tissues and maintain the body’s repair processes. [1] Embryonic stem cells (ESC) are remarkably pluripotent or versatile, making them valuable in research. [2] However, the use of ESCs has sparked ethics debates. Considering the potential of embryonic stem cells, research guidelines are essential. The International Society for Stem Cell Research (ISSCR) provides international stem cell research guidelines. They call for “public conversations touching on the scientific significance as well as the societal and ethical issues raised by ESC research.” [3] The ISSCR also publishes updates about culturing human embryos 14 days post fertilization, suggesting local policies and regulations should continue to evolve as ESC research develops. [4]  Like the ISSCR, which calls for local law and policy to adapt to developing stem cell research given cultural acceptance, this paper highlights the importance of local social factors such as religion and culture.

I.     Global Cultural Perspective of Embryonic Stem Cells

Views on ESCs vary throughout the world. Some countries readily embrace stem cell research and therapies, while others have stricter regulations due to ethical concerns surrounding embryonic stem cells and when an embryo becomes entitled to moral consideration. The philosophical issue of when the “someone” begins to be a human after fertilization, in the morally relevant sense, [5] impacts when an embryo becomes not just worthy of protection but morally entitled to it. The process of creating embryonic stem cell lines involves the destruction of the embryos for research. [6] Consequently, global engagement in ESC research depends on social-cultural acceptability.

a.     US and Rights-Based Cultures

In the United States, attitudes toward stem cell therapies are diverse. The ethics and social approaches, which value individualism, [7] trigger debates regarding the destruction of human embryos, creating a complex regulatory environment. For example, the 1996 Dickey-Wicker Amendment prohibited federal funding for the creation of embryos for research and the destruction of embryos for “more than allowed for research on fetuses in utero.” [8] Following suit, in 2001, the Bush Administration heavily restricted stem cell lines for research. However, the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005 was proposed to help develop ESC research but was ultimately vetoed. [9] Under the Obama administration, in 2009, an executive order lifted restrictions allowing for more development in this field. [10] The flux of research capacity and funding parallels the different cultural perceptions of human dignity of the embryo and how it is socially presented within the country’s research culture. [11]

b.     Ubuntu and Collective Cultures

African bioethics differs from Western individualism because of the different traditions and values. African traditions, as described by individuals from South Africa and supported by some studies in other African countries, including Ghana and Kenya, follow the African moral philosophies of Ubuntu or Botho and Ukama , which “advocates for a form of wholeness that comes through one’s relationship and connectedness with other people in the society,” [12] making autonomy a socially collective concept. In this context, for the community to act autonomously, individuals would come together to decide what is best for the collective. Thus, stem cell research would require examining the value of the research to society as a whole and the use of the embryos as a collective societal resource. If society views the source as part of the collective whole, and opposes using stem cells, compromising the cultural values to pursue research may cause social detachment and stunt research growth. [13] Based on local culture and moral philosophy, the permissibility of stem cell research depends on how embryo, stem cell, and cell line therapies relate to the community as a whole. Ubuntu is the expression of humanness, with the person’s identity drawn from the “’I am because we are’” value. [14] The decision in a collectivistic culture becomes one born of cultural context, and individual decisions give deference to others in the society.

Consent differs in cultures where thought and moral philosophy are based on a collective paradigm. So, applying Western bioethical concepts is unrealistic. For one, Africa is a diverse continent with many countries with different belief systems, access to health care, and reliance on traditional or Western medicines. Where traditional medicine is the primary treatment, the “’restrictive focus on biomedically-related bioethics’” [is] problematic in African contexts because it neglects bioethical issues raised by traditional systems.” [15] No single approach applies in all areas or contexts. Rather than evaluating the permissibility of ESC research according to Western concepts such as the four principles approach, different ethics approaches should prevail.

Another consideration is the socio-economic standing of countries. In parts of South Africa, researchers have not focused heavily on contributing to the stem cell discourse, either because it is not considered health care or a health science priority or because resources are unavailable. [16] Each country’s priorities differ given different social, political, and economic factors. In South Africa, for instance, areas such as maternal mortality, non-communicable diseases, telemedicine, and the strength of health systems need improvement and require more focus [17] Stem cell research could benefit the population, but it also could divert resources from basic medical care. Researchers in South Africa adhere to the National Health Act and Medicines Control Act in South Africa and international guidelines; however, the Act is not strictly enforced, and there is no clear legislation for research conduct or ethical guidelines. [18]

Some parts of Africa condemn stem cell research. For example, 98.2 percent of the Tunisian population is Muslim. [19] Tunisia does not permit stem cell research because of moral conflict with a Fatwa. Religion heavily saturates the regulation and direction of research. [20] Stem cell use became permissible for reproductive purposes only recently, with tight restrictions preventing cells from being used in any research other than procedures concerning ART/IVF.  Their use is conditioned on consent, and available only to married couples. [21] The community's receptiveness to stem cell research depends on including communitarian African ethics.

c.     Asia

Some Asian countries also have a collective model of ethics and decision making. [22] In China, the ethics model promotes a sincere respect for life or human dignity, [23] based on protective medicine. This model, influenced by Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), [24] recognizes Qi as the vital energy delivered via the meridians of the body; it connects illness to body systems, the body’s entire constitution, and the universe for a holistic bond of nature, health, and quality of life. [25] Following a protective ethics model, and traditional customs of wholeness, investment in stem cell research is heavily desired for its applications in regenerative therapies, disease modeling, and protective medicines. In a survey of medical students and healthcare practitioners, 30.8 percent considered stem cell research morally unacceptable while 63.5 percent accepted medical research using human embryonic stem cells. Of these individuals, 89.9 percent supported increased funding for stem cell research. [26] The scientific community might not reflect the overall population. From 1997 to 2019, China spent a total of $576 million (USD) on stem cell research at 8,050 stem cell programs, increased published presence from 0.6 percent to 14.01 percent of total global stem cell publications as of 2014, and made significant strides in cell-based therapies for various medical conditions. [27] However, while China has made substantial investments in stem cell research and achieved notable progress in clinical applications, concerns linger regarding ethical oversight and transparency. [28] For example, the China Biosecurity Law, promoted by the National Health Commission and China Hospital Association, attempted to mitigate risks by introducing an institutional review board (IRB) in the regulatory bodies. 5800 IRBs registered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry since 2021. [29] However, issues still need to be addressed in implementing effective IRB review and approval procedures.

The substantial government funding and focus on scientific advancement have sometimes overshadowed considerations of regional cultures, ethnic minorities, and individual perspectives, particularly evident during the one-child policy era. As government policy adapts to promote public stability, such as the change from the one-child to the two-child policy, [30] research ethics should also adapt to ensure respect for the values of its represented peoples.

Japan is also relatively supportive of stem cell research and therapies. Japan has a more transparent regulatory framework, allowing for faster approval of regenerative medicine products, which has led to several advanced clinical trials and therapies. [31] South Korea is also actively engaged in stem cell research and has a history of breakthroughs in cloning and embryonic stem cells. [32] However, the field is controversial, and there are issues of scientific integrity. For example, the Korean FDA fast-tracked products for approval, [33] and in another instance, the oocyte source was unclear and possibly violated ethical standards. [34] Trust is important in research, as it builds collaborative foundations between colleagues, trial participant comfort, open-mindedness for complicated and sensitive discussions, and supports regulatory procedures for stakeholders. There is a need to respect the culture’s interest, engagement, and for research and clinical trials to be transparent and have ethical oversight to promote global research discourse and trust.

d.     Middle East

Countries in the Middle East have varying degrees of acceptance of or restrictions to policies related to using embryonic stem cells due to cultural and religious influences. Saudi Arabia has made significant contributions to stem cell research, and conducts research based on international guidelines for ethical conduct and under strict adherence to guidelines in accordance with Islamic principles. Specifically, the Saudi government and people require ESC research to adhere to Sharia law. In addition to umbilical and placental stem cells, [35] Saudi Arabia permits the use of embryonic stem cells as long as they come from miscarriages, therapeutic abortions permissible by Sharia law, or are left over from in vitro fertilization and donated to research. [36] Laws and ethical guidelines for stem cell research allow the development of research institutions such as the King Abdullah International Medical Research Center, which has a cord blood bank and a stem cell registry with nearly 10,000 donors. [37] Such volume and acceptance are due to the ethical ‘permissibility’ of the donor sources, which do not conflict with religious pillars. However, some researchers err on the side of caution, choosing not to use embryos or fetal tissue as they feel it is unethical to do so. [38]

Jordan has a positive research ethics culture. [39] However, there is a significant issue of lack of trust in researchers, with 45.23 percent (38.66 percent agreeing and 6.57 percent strongly agreeing) of Jordanians holding a low level of trust in researchers, compared to 81.34 percent of Jordanians agreeing that they feel safe to participate in a research trial. [40] Safety testifies to the feeling of confidence that adequate measures are in place to protect participants from harm, whereas trust in researchers could represent the confidence in researchers to act in the participants’ best interests, adhere to ethical guidelines, provide accurate information, and respect participants’ rights and dignity. One method to improve trust would be to address communication issues relevant to ESC. Legislation surrounding stem cell research has adopted specific language, especially concerning clarification “between ‘stem cells’ and ‘embryonic stem cells’” in translation. [41] Furthermore, legislation “mandates the creation of a national committee… laying out specific regulations for stem-cell banking in accordance with international standards.” [42] This broad regulation opens the door for future global engagement and maintains transparency. However, these regulations may also constrain the influence of research direction, pace, and accessibility of research outcomes.

e.     Europe

In the European Union (EU), ethics is also principle-based, but the principles of autonomy, dignity, integrity, and vulnerability are interconnected. [43] As such, the opportunity for cohesion and concessions between individuals’ thoughts and ideals allows for a more adaptable ethics model due to the flexible principles that relate to the human experience The EU has put forth a framework in its Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being allowing member states to take different approaches. Each European state applies these principles to its specific conventions, leading to or reflecting different acceptance levels of stem cell research. [44]

For example, in Germany, Lebenzusammenhang , or the coherence of life, references integrity in the unity of human culture. Namely, the personal sphere “should not be subject to external intervention.” [45]  Stem cell interventions could affect this concept of bodily completeness, leading to heavy restrictions. Under the Grundgesetz, human dignity and the right to life with physical integrity are paramount. [46] The Embryo Protection Act of 1991 made producing cell lines illegal. Cell lines can be imported if approved by the Central Ethics Commission for Stem Cell Research only if they were derived before May 2007. [47] Stem cell research respects the integrity of life for the embryo with heavy specifications and intense oversight. This is vastly different in Finland, where the regulatory bodies find research more permissible in IVF excess, but only up to 14 days after fertilization. [48] Spain’s approach differs still, with a comprehensive regulatory framework. [49] Thus, research regulation can be culture-specific due to variations in applied principles. Diverse cultures call for various approaches to ethical permissibility. [50] Only an adaptive-deliberative model can address the cultural constructions of self and achieve positive, culturally sensitive stem cell research practices. [51]

II.     Religious Perspectives on ESC

Embryonic stem cell sources are the main consideration within religious contexts. While individuals may not regard their own religious texts as authoritative or factual, religion can shape their foundations or perspectives.

The Qur'an states:

“And indeed We created man from a quintessence of clay. Then We placed within him a small quantity of nutfa (sperm to fertilize) in a safe place. Then We have fashioned the nutfa into an ‘alaqa (clinging clot or cell cluster), then We developed the ‘alaqa into mudgha (a lump of flesh), and We made mudgha into bones, and clothed the bones with flesh, then We brought it into being as a new creation. So Blessed is Allah, the Best of Creators.” [52]

Many scholars of Islam estimate the time of soul installment, marked by the angel breathing in the soul to bring the individual into creation, as 120 days from conception. [53] Personhood begins at this point, and the value of life would prohibit research or experimentation that could harm the individual. If the fetus is more than 120 days old, the time ensoulment is interpreted to occur according to Islamic law, abortion is no longer permissible. [54] There are a few opposing opinions about early embryos in Islamic traditions. According to some Islamic theologians, there is no ensoulment of the early embryo, which is the source of stem cells for ESC research. [55]

In Buddhism, the stance on stem cell research is not settled. The main tenets, the prohibition against harming or destroying others (ahimsa) and the pursuit of knowledge (prajña) and compassion (karuna), leave Buddhist scholars and communities divided. [56] Some scholars argue stem cell research is in accordance with the Buddhist tenet of seeking knowledge and ending human suffering. Others feel it violates the principle of not harming others. Finding the balance between these two points relies on the karmic burden of Buddhist morality. In trying to prevent ahimsa towards the embryo, Buddhist scholars suggest that to comply with Buddhist tenets, research cannot be done as the embryo has personhood at the moment of conception and would reincarnate immediately, harming the individual's ability to build their karmic burden. [57] On the other hand, the Bodhisattvas, those considered to be on the path to enlightenment or Nirvana, have given organs and flesh to others to help alleviate grieving and to benefit all. [58] Acceptance varies on applied beliefs and interpretations.

Catholicism does not support embryonic stem cell research, as it entails creation or destruction of human embryos. This destruction conflicts with the belief in the sanctity of life. For example, in the Old Testament, Genesis describes humanity as being created in God’s image and multiplying on the Earth, referencing the sacred rights to human conception and the purpose of development and life. In the Ten Commandments, the tenet that one should not kill has numerous interpretations where killing could mean murder or shedding of the sanctity of life, demonstrating the high value of human personhood. In other books, the theological conception of when life begins is interpreted as in utero, [59] highlighting the inviolability of life and its formation in vivo to make a religious point for accepting such research as relatively limited, if at all. [60] The Vatican has released ethical directives to help apply a theological basis to modern-day conflicts. The Magisterium of the Church states that “unless there is a moral certainty of not causing harm,” experimentation on fetuses, fertilized cells, stem cells, or embryos constitutes a crime. [61] Such procedures would not respect the human person who exists at these stages, according to Catholicism. Damages to the embryo are considered gravely immoral and illicit. [62] Although the Catholic Church officially opposes abortion, surveys demonstrate that many Catholic people hold pro-choice views, whether due to the context of conception, stage of pregnancy, threat to the mother’s life, or for other reasons, demonstrating that practicing members can also accept some but not all tenets. [63]

Some major Jewish denominations, such as the Reform, Conservative, and Reconstructionist movements, are open to supporting ESC use or research as long as it is for saving a life. [64] Within Judaism, the Talmud, or study, gives personhood to the child at birth and emphasizes that life does not begin at conception: [65]

“If she is found pregnant, until the fortieth day it is mere fluid,” [66]

Whereas most religions prioritize the status of human embryos, the Halakah (Jewish religious law) states that to save one life, most other religious laws can be ignored because it is in pursuit of preservation. [67] Stem cell research is accepted due to application of these religious laws.

We recognize that all religions contain subsets and sects. The variety of environmental and cultural differences within religious groups requires further analysis to respect the flexibility of religious thoughts and practices. We make no presumptions that all cultures require notions of autonomy or morality as under the common morality theory , which asserts a set of universal moral norms that all individuals share provides moral reasoning and guides ethical decisions. [68] We only wish to show that the interaction with morality varies between cultures and countries.

III.     A Flexible Ethical Approach

The plurality of different moral approaches described above demonstrates that there can be no universally acceptable uniform law for ESC on a global scale. Instead of developing one standard, flexible ethical applications must be continued. We recommend local guidelines that incorporate important cultural and ethical priorities.

While the Declaration of Helsinki is more relevant to people in clinical trials receiving ESC products, in keeping with the tradition of protections for research subjects, consent of the donor is an ethical requirement for ESC donation in many jurisdictions including the US, Canada, and Europe. [69] The Declaration of Helsinki provides a reference point for regulatory standards and could potentially be used as a universal baseline for obtaining consent prior to gamete or embryo donation.

For instance, in Columbia University’s egg donor program for stem cell research, donors followed standard screening protocols and “underwent counseling sessions that included information as to the purpose of oocyte donation for research, what the oocytes would be used for, the risks and benefits of donation, and process of oocyte stimulation” to ensure transparency for consent. [70] The program helped advance stem cell research and provided clear and safe research methods with paid participants. Though paid participation or covering costs of incidental expenses may not be socially acceptable in every culture or context, [71] and creating embryos for ESC research is illegal in many jurisdictions, Columbia’s program was effective because of the clear and honest communications with donors, IRBs, and related stakeholders.  This example demonstrates that cultural acceptance of scientific research and of the idea that an egg or embryo does not have personhood is likely behind societal acceptance of donating eggs for ESC research. As noted, many countries do not permit the creation of embryos for research.

Proper communication and education regarding the process and purpose of stem cell research may bolster comprehension and garner more acceptance. “Given the sensitive subject material, a complete consent process can support voluntary participation through trust, understanding, and ethical norms from the cultures and morals participants value. This can be hard for researchers entering countries of different socioeconomic stability, with different languages and different societal values. [72]

An adequate moral foundation in medical ethics is derived from the cultural and religious basis that informs knowledge and actions. [73] Understanding local cultural and religious values and their impact on research could help researchers develop humility and promote inclusion.

IV.     Concerns

Some may argue that if researchers all adhere to one ethics standard, protection will be satisfied across all borders, and the global public will trust researchers. However, defining what needs to be protected and how to define such research standards is very specific to the people to which standards are applied. We suggest that applying one uniform guide cannot accurately protect each individual because we all possess our own perceptions and interpretations of social values. [74] Therefore, the issue of not adjusting to the moral pluralism between peoples in applying one standard of ethics can be resolved by building out ethics models that can be adapted to different cultures and religions.

Other concerns include medical tourism, which may promote health inequities. [75] Some countries may develop and approve products derived from ESC research before others, compromising research ethics or drug approval processes. There are also concerns about the sale of unauthorized stem cell treatments, for example, those without FDA approval in the United States. Countries with robust research infrastructures may be tempted to attract medical tourists, and some customers will have false hopes based on aggressive publicity of unproven treatments. [76]

For example, in China, stem cell clinics can market to foreign clients who are not protected under the regulatory regimes. Companies employ a marketing strategy of “ethically friendly” therapies. Specifically, in the case of Beike, China’s leading stem cell tourism company and sprouting network, ethical oversight of administrators or health bureaus at one site has “the unintended consequence of shifting questionable activities to another node in Beike's diffuse network.” [77] In contrast, Jordan is aware of stem cell research’s potential abuse and its own status as a “health-care hub.” Jordan’s expanded regulations include preserving the interests of individuals in clinical trials and banning private companies from ESC research to preserve transparency and the integrity of research practices. [78]

The social priorities of the community are also a concern. The ISSCR explicitly states that guidelines “should be periodically revised to accommodate scientific advances, new challenges, and evolving social priorities.” [79] The adaptable ethics model extends this consideration further by addressing whether research is warranted given the varying degrees of socioeconomic conditions, political stability, and healthcare accessibilities and limitations. An ethical approach would require discussion about resource allocation and appropriate distribution of funds. [80]

While some religions emphasize the sanctity of life from conception, which may lead to public opposition to ESC research, others encourage ESC research due to its potential for healing and alleviating human pain. Many countries have special regulations that balance local views on embryonic personhood, the benefits of research as individual or societal goods, and the protection of human research subjects. To foster understanding and constructive dialogue, global policy frameworks should prioritize the protection of universal human rights, transparency, and informed consent. In addition to these foundational global policies, we recommend tailoring local guidelines to reflect the diverse cultural and religious perspectives of the populations they govern. Ethics models should be adapted to local populations to effectively establish research protections, growth, and possibilities of stem cell research.

For example, in countries with strong beliefs in the moral sanctity of embryos or heavy religious restrictions, an adaptive model can allow for discussion instead of immediate rejection. In countries with limited individual rights and voice in science policy, an adaptive model ensures cultural, moral, and religious views are taken into consideration, thereby building social inclusion. While this ethical consideration by the government may not give a complete voice to every individual, it will help balance policies and maintain the diverse perspectives of those it affects. Embracing an adaptive ethics model of ESC research promotes open-minded dialogue and respect for the importance of human belief and tradition. By actively engaging with cultural and religious values, researchers can better handle disagreements and promote ethical research practices that benefit each society.

This brief exploration of the religious and cultural differences that impact ESC research reveals the nuances of relative ethics and highlights a need for local policymakers to apply a more intense adaptive model.

[1] Poliwoda, S., Noor, N., Downs, E., Schaaf, A., Cantwell, A., Ganti, L., Kaye, A. D., Mosel, L. I., Carroll, C. B., Viswanath, O., & Urits, I. (2022). Stem cells: a comprehensive review of origins and emerging clinical roles in medical practice.  Orthopedic reviews ,  14 (3), 37498. https://doi.org/10.52965/001c.37498

[2] Poliwoda, S., Noor, N., Downs, E., Schaaf, A., Cantwell, A., Ganti, L., Kaye, A. D., Mosel, L. I., Carroll, C. B., Viswanath, O., & Urits, I. (2022). Stem cells: a comprehensive review of origins and emerging clinical roles in medical practice.  Orthopedic reviews ,  14 (3), 37498. https://doi.org/10.52965/001c.37498

[3] International Society for Stem Cell Research. (2023). Laboratory-based human embryonic stem cell research, embryo research, and related research activities . International Society for Stem Cell Research. https://www.isscr.org/guidelines/blog-post-title-one-ed2td-6fcdk ; Kimmelman, J., Hyun, I., Benvenisty, N.  et al.  Policy: Global standards for stem-cell research.  Nature   533 , 311–313 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/533311a

[4] International Society for Stem Cell Research. (2023). Laboratory-based human embryonic stem cell research, embryo research, and related research activities . International Society for Stem Cell Research. https://www.isscr.org/guidelines/blog-post-title-one-ed2td-6fcdk

[5] Concerning the moral philosophies of stem cell research, our paper does not posit a personal moral stance nor delve into the “when” of human life begins. To read further about the philosophical debate, consider the following sources:

Sandel M. J. (2004). Embryo ethics--the moral logic of stem-cell research.  The New England journal of medicine ,  351 (3), 207–209. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp048145 ; George, R. P., & Lee, P. (2020, September 26). Acorns and Embryos . The New Atlantis. https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/acorns-and-embryos ; Sagan, A., & Singer, P. (2007). The moral status of stem cells. Metaphilosophy , 38 (2/3), 264–284. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24439776 ; McHugh P. R. (2004). Zygote and "clonote"--the ethical use of embryonic stem cells.  The New England journal of medicine ,  351 (3), 209–211. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp048147 ; Kurjak, A., & Tripalo, A. (2004). The facts and doubts about beginning of the human life and personality.  Bosnian journal of basic medical sciences ,  4 (1), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.17305/bjbms.2004.3453

[6] Vazin, T., & Freed, W. J. (2010). Human embryonic stem cells: derivation, culture, and differentiation: a review.  Restorative neurology and neuroscience ,  28 (4), 589–603. https://doi.org/10.3233/RNN-2010-0543

[7] Socially, at its core, the Western approach to ethics is widely principle-based, autonomy being one of the key factors to ensure a fundamental respect for persons within research. For information regarding autonomy in research, see: Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, & National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research (1978). The Belmont Report. Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research.; For a more in-depth review of autonomy within the US, see: Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (1994). Principles of Biomedical Ethics . Oxford University Press.

[8] Sherley v. Sebelius , 644 F.3d 388 (D.C. Cir. 2011), citing 45 C.F.R. 46.204(b) and [42 U.S.C. § 289g(b)]. https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/6c690438a9b43dd685257a64004ebf99/$file/11-5241-1391178.pdf

[9] Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005, H. R. 810, 109 th Cong. (2001). https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/109/hr810/text ; Bush, G. W. (2006, July 19). Message to the House of Representatives . National Archives and Records Administration. https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2006/07/20060719-5.html

[10] National Archives and Records Administration. (2009, March 9). Executive order 13505 -- removing barriers to responsible scientific research involving human stem cells . National Archives and Records Administration. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/removing-barriers-responsible-scientific-research-involving-human-stem-cells

[11] Hurlbut, W. B. (2006). Science, Religion, and the Politics of Stem Cells.  Social Research ,  73 (3), 819–834. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40971854

[12] Akpa-Inyang, Francis & Chima, Sylvester. (2021). South African traditional values and beliefs regarding informed consent and limitations of the principle of respect for autonomy in African communities: a cross-cultural qualitative study. BMC Medical Ethics . 22. 10.1186/s12910-021-00678-4.

[13] Source for further reading: Tangwa G. B. (2007). Moral status of embryonic stem cells: perspective of an African villager. Bioethics , 21(8), 449–457. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8519.2007.00582.x , see also Mnisi, F. M. (2020). An African analysis based on ethics of Ubuntu - are human embryonic stem cell patents morally justifiable? African Insight , 49 (4).

[14] Jecker, N. S., & Atuire, C. (2021). Bioethics in Africa: A contextually enlightened analysis of three cases. Developing World Bioethics , 22 (2), 112–122. https://doi.org/10.1111/dewb.12324

[15] Jecker, N. S., & Atuire, C. (2021). Bioethics in Africa: A contextually enlightened analysis of three cases. Developing World Bioethics, 22(2), 112–122. https://doi.org/10.1111/dewb.12324

[16] Jackson, C.S., Pepper, M.S. Opportunities and barriers to establishing a cell therapy programme in South Africa.  Stem Cell Res Ther   4 , 54 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1186/scrt204 ; Pew Research Center. (2014, May 1). Public health a major priority in African nations . Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project. https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2014/05/01/public-health-a-major-priority-in-african-nations/

[17] Department of Health Republic of South Africa. (2021). Health Research Priorities (revised) for South Africa 2021-2024 . National Health Research Strategy. https://www.health.gov.za/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/National-Health-Research-Priorities-2021-2024.pdf

[18] Oosthuizen, H. (2013). Legal and Ethical Issues in Stem Cell Research in South Africa. In: Beran, R. (eds) Legal and Forensic Medicine. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32338-6_80 , see also: Gaobotse G (2018) Stem Cell Research in Africa: Legislation and Challenges. J Regen Med 7:1. doi: 10.4172/2325-9620.1000142

[19] United States Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services. (1998). Tunisia: Information on the status of Christian conversions in Tunisia . UNHCR Web Archive. https://webarchive.archive.unhcr.org/20230522142618/https://www.refworld.org/docid/3df0be9a2.html

[20] Gaobotse, G. (2018) Stem Cell Research in Africa: Legislation and Challenges. J Regen Med 7:1. doi: 10.4172/2325-9620.1000142

[21] Kooli, C. Review of assisted reproduction techniques, laws, and regulations in Muslim countries.  Middle East Fertil Soc J   24 , 8 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s43043-019-0011-0 ; Gaobotse, G. (2018) Stem Cell Research in Africa: Legislation and Challenges. J Regen Med 7:1. doi: 10.4172/2325-9620.1000142

[22] Pang M. C. (1999). Protective truthfulness: the Chinese way of safeguarding patients in informed treatment decisions. Journal of medical ethics , 25(3), 247–253. https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.25.3.247

[23] Wang, L., Wang, F., & Zhang, W. (2021). Bioethics in China’s biosecurity law: Forms, effects, and unsettled issues. Journal of law and the biosciences , 8(1).  https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsab019 https://academic.oup.com/jlb/article/8/1/lsab019/6299199

[24] Wang, Y., Xue, Y., & Guo, H. D. (2022). Intervention effects of traditional Chinese medicine on stem cell therapy of myocardial infarction.  Frontiers in pharmacology ,  13 , 1013740. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2022.1013740

[25] Li, X.-T., & Zhao, J. (2012). Chapter 4: An Approach to the Nature of Qi in TCM- Qi and Bioenergy. In Recent Advances in Theories and Practice of Chinese Medicine (p. 79). InTech.

[26] Luo, D., Xu, Z., Wang, Z., & Ran, W. (2021). China's Stem Cell Research and Knowledge Levels of Medical Practitioners and Students.  Stem cells international ,  2021 , 6667743. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6667743

[27] Luo, D., Xu, Z., Wang, Z., & Ran, W. (2021). China's Stem Cell Research and Knowledge Levels of Medical Practitioners and Students.  Stem cells international ,  2021 , 6667743. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6667743

[28] Zhang, J. Y. (2017). Lost in translation? accountability and governance of Clinical Stem Cell Research in China. Regenerative Medicine , 12 (6), 647–656. https://doi.org/10.2217/rme-2017-0035

[29] Wang, L., Wang, F., & Zhang, W. (2021). Bioethics in China’s biosecurity law: Forms, effects, and unsettled issues. Journal of law and the biosciences , 8(1).  https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsab019 https://academic.oup.com/jlb/article/8/1/lsab019/6299199

[30] Chen, H., Wei, T., Wang, H.  et al.  Association of China’s two-child policy with changes in number of births and birth defects rate, 2008–2017.  BMC Public Health   22 , 434 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-12839-0

[31] Azuma, K. Regulatory Landscape of Regenerative Medicine in Japan.  Curr Stem Cell Rep   1 , 118–128 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40778-015-0012-6

[32] Harris, R. (2005, May 19). Researchers Report Advance in Stem Cell Production . NPR. https://www.npr.org/2005/05/19/4658967/researchers-report-advance-in-stem-cell-production

[33] Park, S. (2012). South Korea steps up stem-cell work.  Nature . https://doi.org/10.1038/nature.2012.10565

[34] Resnik, D. B., Shamoo, A. E., & Krimsky, S. (2006). Fraudulent human embryonic stem cell research in South Korea: lessons learned.  Accountability in research ,  13 (1), 101–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989620600634193 .

[35] Alahmad, G., Aljohani, S., & Najjar, M. F. (2020). Ethical challenges regarding the use of stem cells: interviews with researchers from Saudi Arabia. BMC medical ethics, 21(1), 35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-020-00482-6

[36] Association for the Advancement of Blood and Biotherapies.  https://www.aabb.org/regulatory-and-advocacy/regulatory-affairs/regulatory-for-cellular-therapies/international-competent-authorities/saudi-arabia

[37] Alahmad, G., Aljohani, S., & Najjar, M. F. (2020). Ethical challenges regarding the use of stem cells: Interviews with researchers from Saudi Arabia.  BMC medical ethics ,  21 (1), 35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-020-00482-6

[38] Alahmad, G., Aljohani, S., & Najjar, M. F. (2020). Ethical challenges regarding the use of stem cells: Interviews with researchers from Saudi Arabia. BMC medical ethics , 21(1), 35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-020-00482-6

Culturally, autonomy practices follow a relational autonomy approach based on a paternalistic deontological health care model. The adherence to strict international research policies and religious pillars within the regulatory environment is a great foundation for research ethics. However, there is a need to develop locally targeted ethics approaches for research (as called for in Alahmad, G., Aljohani, S., & Najjar, M. F. (2020). Ethical challenges regarding the use of stem cells: interviews with researchers from Saudi Arabia. BMC medical ethics, 21(1), 35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-020-00482-6), this decision-making approach may help advise a research decision model. For more on the clinical cultural autonomy approaches, see: Alabdullah, Y. Y., Alzaid, E., Alsaad, S., Alamri, T., Alolayan, S. W., Bah, S., & Aljoudi, A. S. (2022). Autonomy and paternalism in Shared decision‐making in a Saudi Arabian tertiary hospital: A cross‐sectional study. Developing World Bioethics , 23 (3), 260–268. https://doi.org/10.1111/dewb.12355 ; Bukhari, A. A. (2017). Universal Principles of Bioethics and Patient Rights in Saudi Arabia (Doctoral dissertation, Duquesne University). https://dsc.duq.edu/etd/124; Ladha, S., Nakshawani, S. A., Alzaidy, A., & Tarab, B. (2023, October 26). Islam and Bioethics: What We All Need to Know . Columbia University School of Professional Studies. https://sps.columbia.edu/events/islam-and-bioethics-what-we-all-need-know

[39] Ababneh, M. A., Al-Azzam, S. I., Alzoubi, K., Rababa’h, A., & Al Demour, S. (2021). Understanding and attitudes of the Jordanian public about clinical research ethics.  Research Ethics ,  17 (2), 228-241.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016120966779

[40] Ababneh, M. A., Al-Azzam, S. I., Alzoubi, K., Rababa’h, A., & Al Demour, S. (2021). Understanding and attitudes of the Jordanian public about clinical research ethics.  Research Ethics ,  17 (2), 228-241.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016120966779

[41] Dajani, R. (2014). Jordan’s stem-cell law can guide the Middle East.  Nature  510, 189. https://doi.org/10.1038/510189a

[42] Dajani, R. (2014). Jordan’s stem-cell law can guide the Middle East.  Nature  510, 189. https://doi.org/10.1038/510189a

[43] The EU’s definition of autonomy relates to the capacity for creating ideas, moral insight, decisions, and actions without constraint, personal responsibility, and informed consent. However, the EU views autonomy as not completely able to protect individuals and depends on other principles, such as dignity, which “expresses the intrinsic worth and fundamental equality of all human beings.” Rendtorff, J.D., Kemp, P. (2019). Four Ethical Principles in European Bioethics and Biolaw: Autonomy, Dignity, Integrity and Vulnerability. In: Valdés, E., Lecaros, J. (eds) Biolaw and Policy in the Twenty-First Century. International Library of Ethics, Law, and the New Medicine, vol 78. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05903-3_3

[44] Council of Europe. Convention for the protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine (ETS No. 164) https://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list?module=treaty-detail&treatynum=164 (forbidding the creation of embryos for research purposes only, and suggests embryos in vitro have protections.); Also see Drabiak-Syed B. K. (2013). New President, New Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research Policy: Comparative International Perspectives and Embryonic Stem Cell Research Laws in France.  Biotechnology Law Report ,  32 (6), 349–356. https://doi.org/10.1089/blr.2013.9865

[45] Rendtorff, J.D., Kemp, P. (2019). Four Ethical Principles in European Bioethics and Biolaw: Autonomy, Dignity, Integrity and Vulnerability. In: Valdés, E., Lecaros, J. (eds) Biolaw and Policy in the Twenty-First Century. International Library of Ethics, Law, and the New Medicine, vol 78. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05903-3_3

[46] Tomuschat, C., Currie, D. P., Kommers, D. P., & Kerr, R. (Trans.). (1949, May 23). Basic law for the Federal Republic of Germany. https://www.btg-bestellservice.de/pdf/80201000.pdf

[47] Regulation of Stem Cell Research in Germany . Eurostemcell. (2017, April 26). https://www.eurostemcell.org/regulation-stem-cell-research-germany

[48] Regulation of Stem Cell Research in Finland . Eurostemcell. (2017, April 26). https://www.eurostemcell.org/regulation-stem-cell-research-finland

[49] Regulation of Stem Cell Research in Spain . Eurostemcell. (2017, April 26). https://www.eurostemcell.org/regulation-stem-cell-research-spain

[50] Some sources to consider regarding ethics models or regulatory oversights of other cultures not covered:

Kara MA. Applicability of the principle of respect for autonomy: the perspective of Turkey. J Med Ethics. 2007 Nov;33(11):627-30. doi: 10.1136/jme.2006.017400. PMID: 17971462; PMCID: PMC2598110.

Ugarte, O. N., & Acioly, M. A. (2014). The principle of autonomy in Brazil: one needs to discuss it ...  Revista do Colegio Brasileiro de Cirurgioes ,  41 (5), 374–377. https://doi.org/10.1590/0100-69912014005013

Bharadwaj, A., & Glasner, P. E. (2012). Local cells, global science: The rise of embryonic stem cell research in India . Routledge.

For further research on specific European countries regarding ethical and regulatory framework, we recommend this database: Regulation of Stem Cell Research in Europe . Eurostemcell. (2017, April 26). https://www.eurostemcell.org/regulation-stem-cell-research-europe   

[51] Klitzman, R. (2006). Complications of culture in obtaining informed consent. The American Journal of Bioethics, 6(1), 20–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265160500394671 see also: Ekmekci, P. E., & Arda, B. (2017). Interculturalism and Informed Consent: Respecting Cultural Differences without Breaching Human Rights.  Cultura (Iasi, Romania) ,  14 (2), 159–172.; For why trust is important in research, see also: Gray, B., Hilder, J., Macdonald, L., Tester, R., Dowell, A., & Stubbe, M. (2017). Are research ethics guidelines culturally competent?  Research Ethics ,  13 (1), 23-41.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016116650235

[52] The Qur'an  (M. Khattab, Trans.). (1965). Al-Mu’minun, 23: 12-14. https://quran.com/23

[53] Lenfest, Y. (2017, December 8). Islam and the beginning of human life . Bill of Health. https://blog.petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/2017/12/08/islam-and-the-beginning-of-human-life/

[54] Aksoy, S. (2005). Making regulations and drawing up legislation in Islamic countries under conditions of uncertainty, with special reference to embryonic stem cell research. Journal of Medical Ethics , 31: 399-403.; see also: Mahmoud, Azza. "Islamic Bioethics: National Regulations and Guidelines of Human Stem Cell Research in the Muslim World." Master's thesis, Chapman University, 2022. https://doi.org/10.36837/ chapman.000386

[55] Rashid, R. (2022). When does Ensoulment occur in the Human Foetus. Journal of the British Islamic Medical Association , 12 (4). ISSN 2634 8071. https://www.jbima.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/2-Ethics-3_-Ensoulment_Rafaqat.pdf.

[56] Sivaraman, M. & Noor, S. (2017). Ethics of embryonic stem cell research according to Buddhist, Hindu, Catholic, and Islamic religions: perspective from Malaysia. Asian Biomedicine,8(1) 43-52.  https://doi.org/10.5372/1905-7415.0801.260

[57] Jafari, M., Elahi, F., Ozyurt, S. & Wrigley, T. (2007). 4. Religious Perspectives on Embryonic Stem Cell Research. In K. Monroe, R. Miller & J. Tobis (Ed.),  Fundamentals of the Stem Cell Debate: The Scientific, Religious, Ethical, and Political Issues  (pp. 79-94). Berkeley: University of California Press.  https://escholarship.org/content/qt9rj0k7s3/qt9rj0k7s3_noSplash_f9aca2e02c3777c7fb76ea768ba458f0.pdf https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520940994-005

[58] Lecso, P. A. (1991). The Bodhisattva Ideal and Organ Transplantation.  Journal of Religion and Health ,  30 (1), 35–41. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27510629 ; Bodhisattva, S. (n.d.). The Key of Becoming a Bodhisattva . A Guide to the Bodhisattva Way of Life. http://www.buddhism.org/Sutras/2/BodhisattvaWay.htm

[59] There is no explicit religious reference to when life begins or how to conduct research that interacts with the concept of life. However, these are relevant verses pertaining to how the fetus is viewed. (( King James Bible . (1999). Oxford University Press. (original work published 1769))

Jerimiah 1: 5 “Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee…”

In prophet Jerimiah’s insight, God set him apart as a person known before childbirth, a theme carried within the Psalm of David.

Psalm 139: 13-14 “…Thou hast covered me in my mother's womb. I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made…”

These verses demonstrate David’s respect for God as an entity that would know of all man’s thoughts and doings even before birth.

[60] It should be noted that abortion is not supported as well.

[61] The Vatican. (1987, February 22). Instruction on Respect for Human Life in Its Origin and on the Dignity of Procreation Replies to Certain Questions of the Day . Congregation For the Doctrine of the Faith. https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19870222_respect-for-human-life_en.html

[62] The Vatican. (2000, August 25). Declaration On the Production and the Scientific and Therapeutic Use of Human Embryonic Stem Cells . Pontifical Academy for Life. https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_academies/acdlife/documents/rc_pa_acdlife_doc_20000824_cellule-staminali_en.html ; Ohara, N. (2003). Ethical Consideration of Experimentation Using Living Human Embryos: The Catholic Church’s Position on Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research and Human Cloning. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology . Retrieved from https://article.imrpress.com/journal/CEOG/30/2-3/pii/2003018/77-81.pdf.

[63] Smith, G. A. (2022, May 23). Like Americans overall, Catholics vary in their abortion views, with regular mass attenders most opposed . Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/05/23/like-americans-overall-catholics-vary-in-their-abortion-views-with-regular-mass-attenders-most-opposed/

[64] Rosner, F., & Reichman, E. (2002). Embryonic stem cell research in Jewish law. Journal of halacha and contemporary society , (43), 49–68.; Jafari, M., Elahi, F., Ozyurt, S. & Wrigley, T. (2007). 4. Religious Perspectives on Embryonic Stem Cell Research. In K. Monroe, R. Miller & J. Tobis (Ed.),  Fundamentals of the Stem Cell Debate: The Scientific, Religious, Ethical, and Political Issues  (pp. 79-94). Berkeley: University of California Press.  https://escholarship.org/content/qt9rj0k7s3/qt9rj0k7s3_noSplash_f9aca2e02c3777c7fb76ea768ba458f0.pdf https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520940994-005

[65] Schenker J. G. (2008). The beginning of human life: status of embryo. Perspectives in Halakha (Jewish Religious Law).  Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics ,  25 (6), 271–276. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-008-9221-6

[66] Ruttenberg, D. (2020, May 5). The Torah of Abortion Justice (annotated source sheet) . Sefaria. https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/234926.7?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en

[67] Jafari, M., Elahi, F., Ozyurt, S. & Wrigley, T. (2007). 4. Religious Perspectives on Embryonic Stem Cell Research. In K. Monroe, R. Miller & J. Tobis (Ed.),  Fundamentals of the Stem Cell Debate: The Scientific, Religious, Ethical, and Political Issues  (pp. 79-94). Berkeley: University of California Press.  https://escholarship.org/content/qt9rj0k7s3/qt9rj0k7s3_noSplash_f9aca2e02c3777c7fb76ea768ba458f0.pdf https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520940994-005

[68] Gert, B. (2007). Common morality: Deciding what to do . Oxford Univ. Press.

[69] World Medical Association (2013). World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA , 310(20), 2191–2194. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.281053 Declaration of Helsinki – WMA – The World Medical Association .; see also: National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. (1979).  The Belmont report: Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research . U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.  https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/belmont-report/read-the-belmont-report/index.html

[70] Zakarin Safier, L., Gumer, A., Kline, M., Egli, D., & Sauer, M. V. (2018). Compensating human subjects providing oocytes for stem cell research: 9-year experience and outcomes.  Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics ,  35 (7), 1219–1225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-018-1171-z https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6063839/ see also: Riordan, N. H., & Paz Rodríguez, J. (2021). Addressing concerns regarding associated costs, transparency, and integrity of research in recent stem cell trial. Stem Cells Translational Medicine , 10 (12), 1715–1716. https://doi.org/10.1002/sctm.21-0234

[71] Klitzman, R., & Sauer, M. V. (2009). Payment of egg donors in stem cell research in the USA.  Reproductive biomedicine online ,  18 (5), 603–608. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1472-6483(10)60002-8

[72] Krosin, M. T., Klitzman, R., Levin, B., Cheng, J., & Ranney, M. L. (2006). Problems in comprehension of informed consent in rural and peri-urban Mali, West Africa.  Clinical trials (London, England) ,  3 (3), 306–313. https://doi.org/10.1191/1740774506cn150oa

[73] Veatch, Robert M.  Hippocratic, Religious, and Secular Medical Ethics: The Points of Conflict . Georgetown University Press, 2012.

[74] Msoroka, M. S., & Amundsen, D. (2018). One size fits not quite all: Universal research ethics with diversity.  Research Ethics ,  14 (3), 1-17.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016117739939

[75] Pirzada, N. (2022). The Expansion of Turkey’s Medical Tourism Industry.  Voices in Bioethics ,  8 . https://doi.org/10.52214/vib.v8i.9894

[76] Stem Cell Tourism: False Hope for Real Money . Harvard Stem Cell Institute (HSCI). (2023). https://hsci.harvard.edu/stem-cell-tourism , See also: Bissassar, M. (2017). Transnational Stem Cell Tourism: An ethical analysis.  Voices in Bioethics ,  3 . https://doi.org/10.7916/vib.v3i.6027

[77] Song, P. (2011) The proliferation of stem cell therapies in post-Mao China: problematizing ethical regulation,  New Genetics and Society , 30:2, 141-153, DOI:  10.1080/14636778.2011.574375

[78] Dajani, R. (2014). Jordan’s stem-cell law can guide the Middle East.  Nature  510, 189. https://doi.org/10.1038/510189a

[79] International Society for Stem Cell Research. (2024). Standards in stem cell research . International Society for Stem Cell Research. https://www.isscr.org/guidelines/5-standards-in-stem-cell-research

[80] Benjamin, R. (2013). People’s science bodies and rights on the Stem Cell Frontier . Stanford University Press.

Olivia Bowers

MS Bioethics Columbia University (Disclosure: affiliated with Voices in Bioethics)

Mifrah Hayath

SM Candidate Harvard Medical School, MS Biotechnology Johns Hopkins University

Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License .

Current time by city

For example, New York

Current time by country

For example, Japan

Time difference

For example, London

For example, Dubai

Coordinates

For example, Hong Kong

For example, Delhi

For example, Sydney

Geographic coordinates of Elektrostal, Moscow Oblast, Russia

City coordinates

Coordinates of Elektrostal in decimal degrees

Coordinates of elektrostal in degrees and decimal minutes, utm coordinates of elektrostal, geographic coordinate systems.

WGS 84 coordinate reference system is the latest revision of the World Geodetic System, which is used in mapping and navigation, including GPS satellite navigation system (the Global Positioning System).

Geographic coordinates (latitude and longitude) define a position on the Earth’s surface. Coordinates are angular units. The canonical form of latitude and longitude representation uses degrees (°), minutes (′), and seconds (″). GPS systems widely use coordinates in degrees and decimal minutes, or in decimal degrees.

Latitude varies from −90° to 90°. The latitude of the Equator is 0°; the latitude of the South Pole is −90°; the latitude of the North Pole is 90°. Positive latitude values correspond to the geographic locations north of the Equator (abbrev. N). Negative latitude values correspond to the geographic locations south of the Equator (abbrev. S).

Longitude is counted from the prime meridian ( IERS Reference Meridian for WGS 84) and varies from −180° to 180°. Positive longitude values correspond to the geographic locations east of the prime meridian (abbrev. E). Negative longitude values correspond to the geographic locations west of the prime meridian (abbrev. W).

UTM or Universal Transverse Mercator coordinate system divides the Earth’s surface into 60 longitudinal zones. The coordinates of a location within each zone are defined as a planar coordinate pair related to the intersection of the equator and the zone’s central meridian, and measured in meters.

Elevation above sea level is a measure of a geographic location’s height. We are using the global digital elevation model GTOPO30 .

Elektrostal , Moscow Oblast, Russia