Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Discrepancy Reduction: Conducting Focus Group with Senior Citizens in Hong Kong

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Challenges and Opportunities in Qualitative Research

  • 1043 Accesses

Abstract

Despite numerous qualitative studies conducted in the aging context (e.g., Goulding in The Gerontologist 53:1009–1019, 2012; Kania-Lundholm and Torres in J Aging Stud 35:26–36, 2015), the discussion of discrepancies and corresponding solutions for reducing them has been trivial (Olson in Essentials of qualitative interviewing. Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, CA, 2011). The limited available literature provides only a general discussion of interviews with older adults (Olson in Essentials of qualitative interviewing. Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek, CA, 2011; Wenger in Handbook of interview research: Context & method. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp 259–279, 2002). This chapter aims to enrich and elaborate on the information in this area by identifying discrepancies in age, gender, and education from the perspective of discrepancy theory and discussing the corresponding reduction of the discrepancy. In the study detailed in this chapter, a number of aging discrepancies, such as the wording of expressions, were solved by asking participants what they would like to be called. Some gender discrepancies involving arguments arising from the refusal to accept various viewpoints were addressed by emphasizing respect for various views. Educational discrepancies related to the participants’ concerns for their ability were reduced by empowering the participants by providing them with example questions and support. The following section details discrepancy theory.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abbott, P., Wallace, C., Lin, K., & Haerpfer, C. (2015). The quality of society and life satisfaction in China. Social Indicators Research, 127(2), 653–670.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adams, M. (2015). Motherhood: A discrepancy theory. Research and Theory for Nursing Practice: An International Journal, 29(2), 143–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adler, P. A., & Adler, P. (2003). The reluctant respondent. In J. A. Holstein & J. A. Gubrium (Eds.), Inside interviewing: New lenses, new concerns (pp. 153–173). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bauman, Z. (2005). Liquid life. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, U. (2010). A god of one’s own: Religion’s capacity for peace and potential for violence. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger, R. (2013). Now I see it, now I don’t: Researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794112468475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger, R., & Malkinson, R. (2000). ‘Therapeutizing’ research: The positive impact of research on participants. Smith College Studies in Social Work, 70, 307–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Binstock, R. H., & George, L. K. (2005). Handbook of aging and the social sciences. Burlington, MA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloor, M., Frankland, J., Thomas, M., & Robson, K. (2001). Focus groups in social research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Botterill, K. (2014). Family and mobility in second modernity: Polish migrant narrative of individualization and family life. Sociology, 48(2), 233–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broom, A., Hand, K., & Tovey, P. (2009). The role of gender, environment and individual biography in shaping qualitative interview data. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 12(1), 51–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crane, H. K., & Weibel, D. L. (2012). Missionary impositions. Plymouth: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diehl, M., Hay, E. L., & Chui, H. (2012). Personal risk and resilience factors in the context of daily stress. Annual Review of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 32(1), 251–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galam, R. G. (2015). Gender, reflexivity, and positionality in male research in one’s own community with Filipino seafarers’ wives. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 16(3), Art. 13.

    Google Scholar 

  • George, L. K., & Ferraro, K. F. (2015). Aging and the social sciences: Progress and prospects. In R. H. Binstock, L. K. George, K. F. Gerraro, D. Carr, J. M. Wilmoth, & D. Wolf (Eds.), Handbook of aging and the social sciences. Oxford: Elsevier Science & Technology. Retrieved from http://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/estaging/aging_and_the_social_sciences_progress_and_pro.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Germain, C. M., & Hess, T. M. (2007). Motivational influences on controlled processing: Moderating distractibility in older adults. Neuropsychology, Development, and Cognition. Section B, Aging Neuropsychology and Cognition, 14, 462–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goulding, A. (2012). How can contemporary art contribute toward the development of social and cultural capital for people aged 64 and older. The Gerontologist, 53(6), 1009–1019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, N., Ellmers, T., & Holley, J. (2014). The influence of ethnic group composition on focus group discussions. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 14, 107–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grenier, A. (2007). Crossing age and generational boundaries: Exploring intergenerational research encounters. Journal of Social Issues, 63(4), 713–728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gringart, E., Helmes, E., & Speelman, C. P. (2005). Exploring attitudes toward older workers among Australian employers: An empirical study. Journal of Aging & Social Policy, 17(3), 85–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamzeh, M. Z., & Oliver, K. (2010). Gaining research access into the lines of Muslim girls: Researchers negotiating muslimness, modesty, inshallah, and haram. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 23(2), 165–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hand, K., & Lewis, V. (2002). Fathers’ views on family life and paid work. Family Matters, 61, 26–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horowitz, J. A., Ladden, M. D., & Moriarty, H. J. (2002). Methodological challenges in research with vulnerable families. Journal of Family Nursing, 8(4), 315–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, A., Eslambolchilar, P., Lindsay, S., Hare, M., Thornton, I. M., & Tales, A. (2016). Attitudes towards attention and ageing: What differences between younger and older adults tell us about mobile technology design. International Journal of Mobile Human Computer Interaction, 8(2), 46–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kania-Lundholm, M., & Torres, S. (2015). The divide within: Older active ICT users position themselves against different ‘others’. Journal of Aging Studies, 35, 26–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kasmo, M. A., Possumah, B. T., Mohamad, Z., Hassan, W. Z., & Yunos, N. (2015). The role of religion in social cohesion within the contemporary Muslim society in Malaysia: Revisited. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6(1), 168–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Y. (2010). Female individualization? Transnational mobility and media consumption of Asian women. Media, Culture and Society, 32(1), 25–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitzinger, J., & Barbour, R. S. (1999). Introduction: The challenge and promise of focus groups. In R. S. Barbour & J. Kitzinger (Eds.), Developing focus group research (pp. 1–20). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, R. A. (1998a). Developing questions for focus groups. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, R. A. (1998b). Moderating focus groups. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lohan, M. (2000). Extending feminist methodologies: Researching masculinities and technologies. In A. Byrne & R. Lentin (Eds.), (Re)searching Women (pp. 167–187). Dublin: IPA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Longhurst, R. (2016). Semi-structured interviews and focus groups. In N. Clifford, M. Cope, T. Gillespie, & S. French (Eds.), Key methods in geography (pp. 143–156). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lu, S.-H., & Dai, Y.-T. (2009). Normal body temperature and the effects of age, sex, ambient temperature and body mass index on normal oral temperature: A prospective, comparative study. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 46(5), 661–681.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lundgren, A. S. (2013). Doing age: Methodological reflections on interviewing. Qualitative Research, 13(6), 668–684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moody, H. R. (2012). Aging: Concepts & controversies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, D. L. (1998). Planning focus groups: Focus group kit 2. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nikunen, M. (2012). Individualization and identity work: Coping with the ‘entrepreneurial’ university. In S. Ahola & D. M. Hoffman (Eds.), Higher education research in Finland (pp. 271–289). Jyväskylä: Jyväskylä University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson, H., Bülow, P. H., & Kazemi, A. (2015). Mindful sustainable aging: Advancing a comprehensive approach to the challenges and opportunities of old age. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 11(3), 494–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson, K. (2011). Essentials of qualitative interviewing. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Padfield, M., & Procter, I. (1996). The effect of interviewer’s gender on the interviewing process: A comparative enquiry. Sociology, 30(2), 355–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Padgett, D. K. (2008). Qualitative methods in social work research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pini, B. (2005). Interviewing men: Gender and the collection and interpretation of qualitative data. Journal of Sociology, 41, 201–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, L. M., & Squires, G. D. (2011). The personal costs of subprime lending and the foreclosure crisis: A matter of tryst, insecurity, and institutional deception. Social Science Quarterly, 92(1), 140–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seale, C., Charteris-Black, J., Dumelow, C., Locock, L., & Ziebland, S. (2008). The effect of joint interviewing on the performance of gender. Field Methods, 20(2), 107–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, B. A. (1999). Ethical and methodological benefits of using a reflexive journal in hermeneutic phenomenological research. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 31, 359–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stawski, R. S., Sliwinski, M. J., Almeida, D. M., & Smyth, J. M. (2008). Reported exposure and emotional reactivity to daily stressors: The roles of adult age and global perceived stress. Psychology and Aging, 23(1), 52–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, D. W., & Shamdasani, P. N. (1990). Focus groups: Theory and practice (Vol. 20). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan-Singh, S. J., Stanton, A. L., & Low, C. A. (2015). Living with limited time: Socioemotional selectivity theory in the context of health adversity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108(6), 900–916.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tarrant, A. (2016). ‘Betweenness’ and the negotiation of similarity and difference in the interview setting: Reflections on interviewing grandfathers as a young, female researcher. Gender Identity and Research Relationships, 14, 43–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Dyke, R. (2013). Investigating human trafficking from the Andean Community to Europe: The role of goodwill in the researcher–gatekeeper relationship and in negotiating access to data. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 16(6), 515–523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, G. C. (2002). Interviewing older people. In J. F. Gubrium & J. A. Holstein (Eds.), Handbook of interview research: Context & method (pp. 259–278). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yan, Y. (2011). The individualization of the family in rural China. Boundary, 38(1), 203–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Social Work, Faculty of Social Science, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China

    Yuen Hang Ng

Authors
  1. Yuen Hang Ng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yuen Hang Ng .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Education, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China

    Kwok Kuen Tsang

  2. Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway

    Dian Liu

  3. School of Humanities, Southeast University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China

    Yanbi Hong

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Ng, Y.H. (2019). Discrepancy Reduction: Conducting Focus Group with Senior Citizens in Hong Kong. In: Tsang, K., Liu, D., Hong, Y. (eds) Challenges and Opportunities in Qualitative Research. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5811-1_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-5811-1_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-13-5810-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-13-5811-1

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation