A Literature Review of Studies that Have Compared the Use of Face-To-Face and Online Focus Groups

Abstract

Online communication in our work and private lives has increased significantly since the COVID-19 pandemic. Qualitative research has evolved with this trend with many studies adopting online methods. It is therefore timely to assess the use and utility of online focus groups compared to face-to-face focus groups. Traditional Pearl Growing Methodology was used to identify eligible papers. Data were extracted on data collection methods, recruitment and sampling strategies, analytical approaches to comparing data sets, the depth of data produced, participant interactions and the required resources. A total of 26 papers were included in the review. Along with face-to-face focus groups ( n = 26) 16 studies conducted synchronous, eight asynchronous and two both online focus group methods. Most studies ( n = 22) used the same recruitment method for both face-to-face and online focus groups. A variety of approaches to compare data sets were used in studies. Of the studies reporting on depth of data ( n = 19), nine found that face-to-face groups produced the most in-depth data, four online groups and six equivalent data. Participant interaction was reported to be greater during face-to-face groups in 10 studies; three reported online groups produced greater interaction and six equivalent interaction. Detailed resource use comparisons were not presented in any of the studies. This review demonstrates that to date there is not a clear consensus as to whether face-to-face or online focus groups hold specific advantages in terms of the data produced and the resources required. Given these findings it may be appropriate for researchers to consider using online focus groups where time and resources are constrained, or where these are more practicable.