• M. R. Haberfeld
  • Joseph F. King
  • Charles Andrew Lieberman


The initial objective of this project in terms of its methodological approach was threefold. First, the team aimed at interviewing police officials in the surveyed countries regarding their training efforts to counter terrorist activities in the post 9/11 era of policing; second, the researchers hoped to be able to generate focus groups within the law enforcement communities to ascertain the level of their preparedness and their perceptions about the level of their preparedness to prevent and counter future attacks; and, finally, they hoped to interview key individuals and also to hold a number of focus groups within the communities policed by the forces that were approached. The key individuals the researchers were aiming at were local politicians, religious leaders, and media moguls who, by the virtue of their social status, were in a position to influence the perceptions and attitudes of the local population toward the phenomenon of terrorism. In this venue, for example, in Turkey the team interviewed a number of minority religious leaders, like the head of the Armenian minority and the head of the Christian minority as well as a director of the local most popular television station, which has a very significant impact on the intensity and scope of the coverage of various terrorist-related events, as well as one of the major movie directors who produces movies on terrorist movements in Turkey.


Focus Group Focus Group Meeting Focus Group Member Qualitative Research Study Small Focus Group 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Ambert, A. M., Adler, P. A., Adler, P., & Detzner, D. F. (1995, November). Understanding and evaluating qualitative research. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57(4), 879–893.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Babbie, E. (2007). The practice of social research (11th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  3. Bernard, H. R. (2000). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
  4. Burrows, D., & Kendall, S. (1997). Focus groups: What are they and how can they be used in nursing and health care research? Social Sciences in Health, 3, 244–253.Google Scholar
  5. Champion, D. J. (2006). Research methods for criminal justice and criminology. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc.Google Scholar
  6. Davis, L. E., LaTourrette, T., Mosher, D. E., Davis, L. M., & Howell, D. R. (2003). Individual preparedness and response to chemical, radiological, nuclear, and biological terrorist attacks. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.Google Scholar
  7. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
  8. Fry, G., Chantavanich, S., & Chantavanich, A. (1981). Merging quantitative and qualitative research techniques: Toward a new research paradigm. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 12(2), 145–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Green, J. M., Draper, A. K., & Dowler, E. A. (2003). Short cuts to safety: Risk and ‘rules of thumb’ in accounts of food choice. Health, Risk, and Society, 5, 33–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jick, T. D. (1979, December). Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), 602–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kitzinger, J. (1994). The methodology of focus groups: The importance of interactions between research participants. Sociology of Health and Illness, 16, 103–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kitzinger, J. (1995, July 29). Qualitative research: Introducing focus groups. British Medical Journal, 311(7000), 299–302.Google Scholar
  13. Kritzer, H. M. (1996, February). The data puzzle: The nature of interpretation in quantitative research. American Journal of Political Science, 40(1), 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Krueger, R. A. (1988). Focus groups. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
  15. Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2000). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
  16. Merton, R. K., & Kendall, P. L. (1946, May). The focused interview. The American Journal of Sociology, 51(6), 541–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Morgan, D. L. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research (2nd Eds.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
  18. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd Eds.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
  19. Smith, H. W. (1975). Strategies of social research: The methodological imagination. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  20. Thomas, L. H., MacMillan, J., McColl, E., Priest, J., Hale, C., & Bond, S. (1995). Obtaining patients’ views of nursing care to inform the development of a patient satisfaction scale. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 7(2), 153–163.Google Scholar
  21. Webb, E. J., Campbell, D. T., Schwartz, R. D., & Sechrest, L. (1966). Unobtrusive measures: Non-reactive research in the social sciences. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  22. Wolstenholme, E. F. (1999, April). Qualitative vs. quantitative modeling: The evolving balance. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 50(4), 422–428.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. R. Haberfeld
    • 1
  • Joseph F. King
    • 1
  • Charles Andrew Lieberman
    • 1
  1. 1.City University of New York, John Jay college of Criminal JusticeNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations