The use of focus group discussion methodology: Insights from two decades of application in conservation
The use of focus group discussion methodology: Insights from two decades of application in conservation
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/2041-210x.12860
复制
发表时间：
2018-01-01
影响因子：
6.6
通讯作者：
Mukherjee, Nibedita
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Nyumba, Tobias O.;Wilson, Kerrie;Mukherjee, Nibedita
焦点小组讨论经常被用作深入了解社会问题的定性方法。该方法旨在从有目的地选择的一组个人中获取数据，而不是从更广泛的人口中具有统计代表性的样本中获取数据。尽管这种方法在保护研究中的应用已经广泛，但没有对该技术的应用进行批判性评估。此外，保护研究人员也没有现成的指导方针。本文回顾了1996年至2017年4月焦点小组讨论在生物多样性与保护研究中的应用。我们首先为第一次使用该技术的用户简要解释一下。然后，我们在结构化文献综述（使用Scopus）的基础上详细讨论了该技术在保护中的经验应用。筛选过程产生了170篇文章，其中大多数（67%,n=114）发表于2011年至2017年之间。这种方法很少作为一种独立的技术使用。每个焦点小组的参与者人数从3到21人不等，中位数为10人。每项研究有七次（中位数）焦点小组会议。焦点小组讨论持续了90分钟（中位数）。审查中出现了四个主要主题：了解人们对保护的看法（32%），其次是评估保护和生计做法（21%），审查资源管理干预措施的挑战和影响（19%）以及记录土著知识系统的价值（16%）。大多数研究在非洲（n=76），其次是亚洲（n=44）和欧洲（n=30）。我们注意到在审查的文件中报告方法细节方面存在严重的差距。超过一半的研究（n=101）没有报告样本量和小组规模（n=93），而54项研究在报告结果时没有提到焦点小组讨论的次数。很少有研究提供任何信息的理由选择的技术。我们提供了指导方针，以提高报告标准和未来应用的技术保护。
Focus group discussion is frequently used as a qualitative approach to gain an in-depth understanding of social issues. The method aims to obtain data from a purposely selected group of individuals rather than from a statistically representative sample of a broader population. Even though the application of this method in conservation research has been extensive, there are no critical assessment of the application of the technique. In addition, there are no readily available guidelines for conservation researchers. Here, we reviewed the applications of focus group discussion within biodiversity and conservation research between 1996 and April 2017. We begin with a brief explanation of the technique for first-time users. We then discuss in detail the empirical applications of this technique in conservation based on a structured literature review (using Scopus). The screening process resulted in 170 articles, the majority of which (67%, n=114,) were published between 2011 and 2017. Rarely was the method used as a stand-alone technique. The number of participants per focus group (where reported) ranged from 3 to 21 participants with a median of 10 participants. There were seven (median) focus group meetings per study. Focus group discussion sessions lasted for 90 (median) minutes. Four main themes emerged from the review: understanding of people's perspectives regarding conservation (32%), followed by the assessment of conservation and livelihoods practices (21%), examination of challenges and impacts of resource management interventions (19%) and documenting the value of indigenous knowledge systems (16%). Most of the studies were in Africa (n=76), followed by Asia (n=44), and Europe (n=30). We noted serious gaps in the reporting of the methodological details in the reviewed papers. More than half of the studies (n=101) did not report the sample size and group size (n=93), whereas 54 studies did not mention the number of focus group discussion sessions while reporting results. Rarely have the studies provided any information on the rationale for choosing the technique. We have provided guidelines to improve the standard of reporting and future application of the technique for conservation.