Method Effects in Survey and Focus Group Findings: Understanding Smoking Cessation in Low-SES African American Women

Abstract

The same pool of African American women participated in a survey and in focus groups on motivation to quit smoking. Findings from the two studies were compared to explore potential method effects. Consistent with each method's basic purposes, the survey identified variation in study variables based on accepted theory and association patterns among such variables. The focus groups discovered themes and images salient to the participants and highlighted the situational contexts that gave meaning to smoking and smoking cessation. Survey method limitations included poor sensitivity to topic salience and contextual meanings and a deductive mode that channeled interpretation of results within the boundaries predefined by the study's theoretical framework. Focus group method limitations included an overfocus on the most dramatic and uncommon evidence and lack of systematic ways to identify explanations that may underlie the participants' overt expressions. Together, the multiple findings complemented and explained each other.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Basch

C E

: Focus group interview: An underutilized research technique for improving theory and practice in health education. Health Educ Q 14: 411–448, 1987.

Leventhal

Hirschman

R S

: Social psychology and prevention, in Sanders

G S

Suis

(eds.): Social Psychology of Health and Illness. Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum, 1982, pp. 183–226

Erikson

C-G

: Fqcus groups and other methods for increased effectiveness of community intervention—A review. Scand J Prim Health Care Supp 1: 73–80, 1988.

Dervin

: Audience as listener and learner, teacher and confidante: The sense-making approach, in Rice

R E

Atkin

C K

(eds.): Public Communication Campaigns (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA, Sage, 1989, pp. 67–86

Gans

H J

: Sociology in America: The discipline and the public: American Sociological Association, 1988 presidential address. Am Sociological Rev 54: 1–16, 1989.

Novelli

W D

: Applying social marketing to health promotion and disease prevention, in Glanz

Lewis

F M

Rimer

B K

(eds.): Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass, 1990, pp. 34–68

Brewer

Hunter

: Multimethod Research: A Synthesis of Styles. Newbury Park, CA, Sage, 1989.

Manfredi

Lacey

Warnecke

Buis

: Smoking-related behavior, beliefs, and social environment of young black women in subsidized public housing in Chicago. Am J Public Health 82: 267–272, 1992.

Lacey

Manfredi

Balch

Warnecke

Allen

Edwards

: Social support in smoking cessation among black women in Chicago public housing. Public Health Rep 108: 387–394, 1993.

10.

Manfredi

Lacey

Warnecke

Petraitis

: Sociopsychological correlates of motivation to quit smoking among low-socioeconomic status, African-American women. Health Educ Behav, forthcoming

11.

Becker

M H

(ed): The Health Belief Model and Personal Health Behavior. Thorofare, NJ, Slack, 1974.

12.

Rosenstock

I M

: The Health Belief Model and preventive health behavior, in Becker

M H

(ed.): The Health Belief Model and Personal Health Behavior. Thorofare, NJ: Slack, 1974, pp. 27–59

13.

U. S. Department of Health and Human Services. The Health Consequences of Smoking for Women: A Report of the Surgeon General. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1980.

14.

Wittenberg

C K

: Summary of market research for “Healthy Mothers, Healthy Babies” campaign. Public Health Rep 98: 356–359, 1983.

15.

Gottlieb

Green

: Ethnicity and lifestyle health risk: Some possible mechanisms. Am J Health Promotion 2: 37–51, 1987.

16.

Novotny

T E

Warner

K E

Kendrick

J S

Remington

P L

: Smoking by Blacks and Whites: Socioeconomic and demographic differences. Am J Public Health 78: 1187–1189, 1988.

17.

Fiore

M C

Novotny

T E

Pierce

J P

Hatziandreu

E J

Patel

K M

Davis

R M

: Trends in cigarette smoking in the United States: The changing influence of gender and race. JAMA 261: 49–55, 1989.

18.

U. S. Department of Health and Human Resources. Cancer Prevention Awareness Survey. Bethesda, MD: National Institute of Health, 1987. (NIH Pub. No. 87–2907)

19.

Cook

T D

Campbell

D T

: Quasi-Experimentation—Design & Analysis Issues for Field Settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1979.

20.

Krueger

R A

: Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage, 1994.

21.

Suchman

Jordan

: Interactional troubles in face-to-face survey interviews. J Am Statistical Assoc 85: 232–253, 1990.

22.

Moody

P N

Gray

R M

: Social class, social integration, and the use of preventive health services, in Jaco

E G

(ed.): Patients, Physicians and Illness. New York, Free Press, 1972, pp. 250–261

23.

Dervin

: Mass communicating: Changing conceptions of the audience, in Rice

R E

Paisley

W J

(eds.): Public Communication Campaigns. Beverly Hills, CA, Sage, 1981, pp. 71–87

24.

Freimuth

V S

Mettger

: Is there a hard-to-reach audience? Public Health Rep 105: 232–238, 1990.

25.

Sudman

Bradbum

N M

Schwarz

: Thinking About Answers: The Application of Cognitive Processes to Survey Methodology. San Francisco, CA, Jossey-Bass, 1996.

26.

Sutton

S M

Balch

Lefebvre

R C

: Strategic questions for consumer based health communications. Public Health Rep 725–733, 1995.