Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Qualitative Health Research
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by MacDougall, C.
Right arrow Articles by Baum, F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by MacDougall, C.
Right arrow Articles by Baum, F.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Devil's Advocate: A Strategy to Avoid Groupthink and Stimulate Discussion in Focus Groups

Colin MacDougall

Department of Public Health at Flinders University of South Australia, colin.macdougall{at}flinders.edu.au

Frances Baum

Department of Public Health at Flinders University of South Australia, South Australian Community Health Research Unit

The focus group is an increasingly popular qualitative research method in health research to gain insight into complex problems. Concerns have been expressed about how best to stimulate free and open discussion; especially on controversial issues and/or when the group comprises people with different power and status. A potential pitfall of the focus group technique is group-think: the impact of censoring and conforming as described by such social psychologists as Irving Janis. The article describes an evaluation of a method to reduce groupthink and stimulate creativity and controversy in focus groups that analyzed consultation between an Australian federal government department and its communities. The article recommends to researchers using focus groups the selective use of devil's advocates to reflect different perspectives to groups, to ask questions in a different way, to introduce new questions, and to avoid groups arriving at premature solutions.

Qualitative Health Research, Vol. 7, No. 4, 532-541 (1997)
DOI: 10.1177/104973239700700407


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Qual Health ResHome page
E. R. Jenkins, G. M. Mabbett, A. G. Surridge, J. Warring, and E. D. Gwynn
A Cooperative Inquiry Into Action Learning and Praxis Development in a Community Nursing Module
Qual Health Res, September 1, 2009; 19(9): 1303 - 1320.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
BMJHome page
J. Douglass, R. Aroni, D. Goeman, K. Stewart, S. Sawyer, F. Thien, and M. Abramson
A qualitative study of action plans for asthma
BMJ, April 27, 2002; 324(7344): 1003 - 1003.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]