According to Berg and Lune (2012), focus groups are a valuable tool for an ethnographer. The focus group can be used in different ways; from gathering information to start a project, to gauging attitudes about a topic or validating information that an informant/interviewee has described. Much in the way one would get a second opinion from a doctor after a diagnosis, a focus group can strengthen the insight obtained and potentially uncover other cultural information, terminologies and even subcultures. Unlike individual interviews, a focus group can be broader reaching and more dynamic, but could potentially be sabotaged by stronger participants. It is through the group’s discussion that information is gathered, one individual’s comments …show more content…
When I originally critiqued that work, I hoped for a larger sampling size besides his one informant. If a supporting focus group was used, Rubenstein may have been able to back up the stress relievers he discovered as well as potentially uncovered more like sports, recreational activities and alcohol use. The incorporation of a focus group into my study may allow further verification that the informant’s information is encompassing and correct. Maybe a younger member of the focus group could provide further insight into use of modern technology or new terminologies. If the focus group confirms the folk terms used and echoes the sentiment of the informant, it would be supportive to the study. On the other hand, a focus group could potentially reveal that the informant was a cultural outsider, someone that is really not part of the group. Berg and Lune (2012) state: “Sometimes, persons who are willing to be guides or informants turn out to be restricted in their groups” (p. 215). This may prompt a researcher to reassess, use a backup informant or to re-interview their original