American Association for Public Opinion Research

The Focussed Interview and Focus Groups: Continuities and Discontinuities

Author(s): Robert K. Merton
Source: The Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 51, No. 4 (Winter, 1987), pp. 550-566
Published by: Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Association for Public Opinion Research
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2749327 .
Accessed: 27/05/2013 17:40
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

American Association for Public Opinion Research and Oxford University Press are collaborating with JSTOR
to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Public Opinion Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 79.175.121.210 on Mon, 27 May 2013 17:40:06 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

THE FOCUSSED INTERVIEW AND

FOCUS GROUPS
CONTINUITIESAND DISCONTINUITIES
ROBERTK. MERTON

No one can be moresurprised

at mybeingherethanI. Fouryearsago,
I wrotemyselfa "self-emancipation
a one-pagestateproclamation,"
mentassertingthatI wouldnotagainacceptanyinvitation
fromany
sourceto writea book, edit a book, writea paper,writea review
article-or givea publiclecture(unlessit so happenedthatI had alreadywritten
or editedthatbook,written
thatpaperor reviewarticle,
orassemblednotesforthepubliclecture).Yet hereI am.Butwhatwas
one to do whenan admiredstudentof longago turnsout to be the
presidentof the New York chapterof theprofessional
organization
thatone's lifelong
at Columbiahadhelpedtofound?(You
collaborator
will instantly
recognizebothallusions:the one to Alan Meyer,the
otherto Paul Lazarsfeld.)Thatdid notprovidemanydegreesoffreedom.However,inaccordwiththespiritofthatself-emancipating
proclamation,I did prevailupontheorganizersof thissessionto bill me
as indulging
remarks.
unmistakably
onlyin impromptu
at all. I
However,thatdoesn'tmeanthatI've done no homework
hadto do some,or remainwhollysilent.The truth
ofthematter
is that
therecan'tbe manypeoplein thefieldofsocial scienceand certainly
nonein therelatedfieldof marketing
researchwho knowless about
focusgroupsthanI. If thereare, thatspellstrouble.So it was that
whenAlanbroachedthesubjectoffocusgroupsto me,he enlistedmy
at once. It had been onlya littlewhileago thatPat Kendall
curiosity
and I had learnedofthewidespreaduse offocusgroupsin marketing
research.Perhapswe had been readingthe "wrong"books and the
"wrong"journals.At any rate,whenthisdevelopment
was lately
Thisis the
at ColumbiaUniversity.
Emeritus
Professor
University
June1986,on thesubject:"How
textofa talkgivento a New YorkAAPORmeeting,
to 'Focus Groups'?"The otherspeakerswere
Did We Getfrom'FocussedInterviews'
Langer,andJ.RonaldMilavsky.Copiesoftheirpapersmaybe
PatriciaKendall,Judith
forthe
Institute
President
NY-AAPOR,c/oAmerican
obtainedfromCorinneKirchner,
Blind,15West16Street,New York,NY 10011.Onceagain,theauthorgladlyacknowlFoundation.
T. MacArthur
edgesaid fromtheJohnD. and Catherine
ROBERT K. MERTON iS

Public Opinion QuarterlyVolume 51:550-566 ? 1987 by the Amencan Association forPublic Opinion Research
Publishedby The Universityof Chicago Press /0033-362X/87/0051-04(1)/$2.50

This content downloaded from 79.175.121.210 on Mon, 27 May 2013 17:40:06 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Focussed Interview and Focus Groups

551

called to our attention

and whenthetechniquesemployedin focusgroupresearchweresaid to derivefromourworksome40 yearsago
on the focussedinterviewof groups(Mertonand Kendall, 1946;
aboutthatdevelMerton,Fiske,andKendall,1956),.myowncuriosity
thatcuriosity
at the
opmentbeganto mount.Still,I didlittleto gratify
time.Otherresearchquestionsand problemswereoccupyingmyattention.
Andas theliterary
philosopher
KennethBurkeonceobserved
(ina memorable
fashionthatI liketo describeas theBurketheorem):
"A wayof seeingis also a wayofnotseeing-a focusuponobjectA
involvesa neglectof objectB." (Thatmaxim,by theway,is clearly
one to be remembered
in the use of focussedinterviews
and focus
groups.)
So itwas thatwhenAlanMeyerinvitedmeto speaktothisassembly
temptations
he hadput
aboutthatsubject,I couldn'tresistthemultiple
beforeme. ButnowI wanttotranslate
intothecogniAlan'sinvitation
tiveterms,whichhe maynotrecognize,thathelpedbringme here.
This,then,is myinterpretation
ofwhathe was saying;hissubtextand
"Here is a
myreconstruction
ofwhatwas containedinthatinvitation:
andinformed
grandopportunity
to meetwitha groupofaccomplished
socialresearchers,
drawnpartlyfrom
manyofthemyourold friends,
theuniversities
and partlyfromthatworldof marketing
researchto
ago. Here is an
whichPaul Lazarsfeldintroduced
youhalfa century
interest
in theorigins
opportunity
also to combinea newlyemerging
and rapidgrowthof focus-group
researchwithyourlifelonginterest
in identifying
of
variouspatternsin theemergenceand transmission
in thediffusion
ofknowledge
fromone socioknowledge,
particularly
culturalworldto another.How are ideas conveyedand howare they
inthecourseofdiffusion?
modified
Whatcanbe learnedaboutpatterns
of changein the diffusion
fromscienceintopractice?
of innovations
And so on. Havingdevoteda greatpartof yourlifeto studiesin the
sociologyof science-though,unlikePaul Lazarsfeld,ratherless to
to
the sociologyof social science-you now have an opportunity
reflect
with
aloud,to speculate,aboutthissortofthingin connection
theemergenceand growthof focus-group
research."The impromptitudeof thisoccasion holdsforthe specificsubject;theunderlying
andnotverywellunderstood
questionsI wantto addressare enduring
I suspect,notby
ones; surelynotwellunderstood
bymeand,privately
manyothers.
meupI am therefore
indebtedto Judith
Langerforhavingbrought
in
the
research
art
of
the
of
on
the
to-date
state
space of
focus-group
remarks
willbe
few
minutes.
thepast
My partlypreparedimpromptu
I found
basedlargelyon whatI've just heardand on somedocuments
inancientfiles.ThosefilesareessentialsinceI don'ttakemuch
lurking
without
visiblemeansof
memories-that
stockinvagrant
is, memories

This content downloaded from 79.175.121.210 on Mon, 27 May 2013 17:40:06 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

552

Robert K. Merton

documentary
support.The filesprovidefactualcheckson memories
of
howthefocussedinterview
as concept-and-procedure
startedforme.

Prelude to the Focussed Interview

It all startedin myfirstinadvertent
unworksession-a thoroughly
plannedworksession-withPaul Lazarsfeldbackin November1941.
Thatstoryhas beentoldinprintseveraltimes(Hunt,1961;Lazarsfeld,
1975:35-37;De Lellio,1985:21-24),butneverintracing
theseedbedof
I retellit herein thatnewcontext.
thefocussedinterview.
To beginwith,Paul and I had neverheardof one anotherbefore
comingto Columbia.We had notonlynotreadone another;we had
neverheardofone another.
literally
(Actually,
thatreciprocal
ignorance
is notas strange
as itmayseem.Afterall,Paulhadcomefromoneway
of life;I, fromquiteanother.Substantively
speaking,we had quite
different
interests
andevena posteriori,
thereis littlea priorireasonto
supposethatourinterests
wouldeverconvergeand overlap.)
Butback to November1941,whenPaul, as theelderofus, invited
theMertonsto dinner.In whatI was to discoverwas typicalPauline
fashion,uponourarrivalPaul metus at thedoorand said something
likethis:"Bob, I havewonderful
newsforyou.I've just gottena call
fromtheO.F.F. in Washington
[thatwas theOfficeofFacts and Figwhich
ureswhichwas thepredecessor
oftheOffice
ofWarInformation
inturnwas, I believe,thepredecessoroftheVoice ofAmerica].They
wantme to do some testsof responsesto severalradiomoraleprograms.So here's a greatopportunity
foryou. Come withme to the
to
see
how
we
studio
testaudienceresponse."
Thus it was thatPaul draggedme intothe strangeworldof radio
research-backin thoseearlydays,unknown
tojust abouteveryone
and surelyso to me. I knewthatPaul headedup something
calledthe
OfficeofRadio Researchbutknewnothing
aboutitswork.So offwe
wentand thenit was thatI saw a strangespectacle.Do tryto see it
thatyourpresentsophistithrough
mythennaiveeyes and remember
I enter
cationis thelegacyofalmosthalfa century
ofevolvinginquiry.
a radiostudioforthefirsttime,and thereI see a smallishgroup-a
dozen,orweretheretwenty?-seatedintwoorthreerows.PaulandI
takeourplacesas observersat thesideoftheroomas unobtrusively
as
we can; thereis no one-waymirror
or anything
of thatsort.These
people are beingasked to press a red buttonon theirchairswhen
evokesa negative
anything
theyhearon therecordedradioprogram
boredom-andto pressa green
response-irritation,
anger,disbelief,
at
buttonwhentheyhavea positiveresponse.For therest,no buttons
on
all. I soonlearnthattheircumulative
responsesarebeingregistered

This content downloaded from 79.175.121.210 on Mon, 27 May 2013 17:40:06 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Focussed Interview and Focus Groups

553

of therequisitenumberof fountain
consisting
polygraph
a primitive
as itwere,toproducecumupensconnectedbysealingwaxandstring,
became
instrument
lativecurvesof likesand dislikes.Thatprimitive
we
programanalyzer.Thereafter,
knownas the Lazarsfeld-Stanton
observe one of Paul's assistantsquestioningthe test-group-the
audience-abouttheir"reasons" fortheirrecordedlikesanddislikes.
I beginpassingnotesto Paul aboutwhatI taketo be greatdeficiencies
tacticsand procedures.He was not focussing
in the interviewer's
andagindicatedreactions,bothindividual
on specifically
sufficiently
responses;he was noteliciting
guiding
gregated.He was inadvertently
spontaneousexpressionsof earlierresponseswhensegmentsof the
werebeingplayedbackto thegroup.Andso on and so
radioprogram
forme,I am
situation
thisis a newkindofinterview
on. For although
For one thing,I
withtheartand craftofinterviewing.
notunfamiliar
duringthesummerof
had spentmoretimethanI care to remember
at Harvard,helpingtokeepmyself
1932whenI was a graduatestudent
just about
on a WPA projectdevotedto interviewing
alivebyworking
all thehoboesand homelessmenand womenthatcouldbe locatedin
under
the Boston area. Havinghad the experienceof interviewing
strikesmeas prothissituation
strenuous
conditions,
thosesometimes
access to people's statesofmindand affect.
vidingalmostprivileged
is over,Paul asks me: "Well,what
At anyrate,aftertheinterview
in thegeneral
did you thinkof it?" I proceedto expressmyinterest
at somelength,
mycritiqueoftheinterviewing
format
andto reiterate,
procedure.That,of course,is all Paul had to hear.As I was to learn
co-optsme.'
overtheyearswas altogether
typicalofhim,he promptly
"Well, Bob, it happensthatwe have anothergroupcomingin fora
shouldbe done?" Thatwas
test.Willyou showus howtheinterview
suppose
mistakenly
you
might
as
question,
nota defensive-aggressive
of
the
Office
of
Director
founding
was
our
Paul,
that
it was. Rather,
dedicated
organizations
of
other
university-linked
(as
Radio Research
I allowas how
co-optation.
to socialresearch),engagedinpreliminary
I will trymy hand at it-and thusbegan mylifewithwhatwould
eventuateas thefocussedgroup-interview.
thesedayswithwhichfocusJudith
Langerspokeofthepromptitude
withwhichqualitative
groupdata are acquiredand the promptitude
unfamilreportsbased on thosedataare prepared.That'snotentirely
analypreliminary
metoworkon a distinctly
iar.I recallPaulinducing
during
thenextdays,theweekend.The
materials
sis ofthoseinterview
solved,Paul made it an
important
1. In his passionto get all problemshe thought
of
practiceto co-optassociatesof everykindto workon them-students,
enduring
course,butalso colleaguesofvariedstripe:youngandold;nearandfar;socialscientists,
ofdisinterested
Thispattern
and philosophers.
statisticians,
logicians,mathematicians,
fromthose
in printbytwoofourstudents
recaptured
has beenbeautifully
co-optation
ancientdaysofthe1940sand 50s: JamesS. Coleman(1980)and DavidL. Sills(1987).

This content downloaded from 79.175.121.210 on Mon, 27 May 2013 17:40:06 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

554

Robert K. Merton

reportwas in the Officeof Facts and Figureswithina week. That,

remember,
was inNovember1941.ThencameDecember7th,andthe
warwhichheldlittlenationalistic
meaning
butmuchmoralsignificance
formanyof us back then.Not verymuchlaterand forsome time
duringthewar,I foundmyselfservingas theliaisonresearchperson
betweenthe Columbiagroupand whathad been establishedby the
UnitedStatesArmyin Octoberofthatyearas theResearchBranchof
whatwas successivelyknownas theMoraleDivision,thentheSpecial
ServicesDivision,and finally
as theInformation
and EducationDivision.(The movement
towardeuphemisms
hadplainlybegun.)The ResearchBranchwas directedon itsresearch(notadministrative)
sideby
andpracticedsocialresearcher
theingenious
Sam Stouffer
(whowould
eventuallysee to it thata distillation
of the fieldstudiesconducted
duringWorldWarII wouldappearin theformofthefourvolumesof
TheAmericanSoldier.)2Lookinganew at volume1, I notethatPaul
and I are bothlistedas "consultants,"althoughin the event,Paul
contributed
morethanI in thatcapacity,especiallythrough
infinitely
his earlyformulation
of latentstructure
analysis(whichappearsin
volume4, devotedto methodological
innovations
by or fortheResearchBranch).
A bitmoreabouttheearlyphase in thegenesisand growthof the
focussedgroup-interview.
For a time,I foundmyselfinterviewing
groupsof soldiersin Armycamps about theirresponsesto specific
filmsand so-calledmoralefilms-someof themdesignedby
training
FrankCapra and otherdirectors
of thatcalibre.In thecourseofthat
experienceandlaterinworkat theBureauofAppliedSocial Research
(whichhad evolvedfromthe ColumbiaOfficeof Radio Research),
theredevelopedthesetofprocedureswhichcameto be knownas the
notedinhisprefaceto volume4,
focussedinterview.
As Sam Stouffer
therebecause,byagreement
with
thoseprocedureswerenotreported
himand his associateCarl Hovland,theyhad beenpublishedseveral
yearsbeforein the paper by Pat Kendall and myself(Mertonand
Kendall,1946).
focussedinterviews
As earlyas 1943,also, we wereputting
to use
withindividuals
as wellas groups.A primecase inpointis thestudyof
thena whollynewhistorical
a "radiomarathon,"
which
phenomenon,
the
promisedto providea "strategicresearchsite" forinvestigating
collectivebehaviorand social contextsof mass persuasion(Merton,
Fiske,and Curtis,[1946]1971).Duringa periodof 18hours,thepops
DuringArmyLife;
et al., The AmericanSoldier:Adjustment
2. SamuelA. Stouffer
Carl I.
et al., The AmericanSoldier:Combatand Its Aftermath;
SamuelA. Stouffer
onMassCommuniExperiments
andFredD. Sheffield,
A. Lumsdaine,
Hovland,Arthur
Princeton:
Princeton
and Prediction.
et al., Measurement
cation;SamuelA. Stouffer
Press,1949.
University

This content downloaded from 79.175.121.210 on Mon, 27 May 2013 17:40:06 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Focussed Interview and Focus Groups

555

patriot-figure,
singerKate Smith,widelyperceivedas a charismatic
spoke a seriesof preparedtextson 65 occasions,elicitingthe then
pledges.We conducted
unprecedented
totalof$39millioninwar-bond
with100New Yorkerswhohadlistenedtopartor,
focussedinterviews
in some cases, to all [!] of theSmithbroadcasts,boththoselisteners
who had respondedby pledginga war bondand thosewho had not.
in their
These interviews
were conductedwithlistenersindividually
ina radiostudio.In theabsenceoftheprogram
homes,notcollectively
werefocussed
analyzerto providepointsofdeparture,
theinterviews
conuponthebroadcasttextswhichwe had subjectedto an intensive
tentanalysis.The resultingqualitativematerialsdid muchto help
of thequantitative
data, based uponpolling
shape theinterpretation
witha representative
interviews
sampleof about a thousandNew
of
Yorkers.It was thefocussed-interview
datathatled toidentification
a publicdistrustrelatedto a sense of anomie-in which"common
in a welterof privateinterests
seeking
valueswerebeingsubmerged
satisfaction
(p. 10).Analybyvirtually
anymeanswhichareeffective"
"in place of a
sis of thesedata led us also to a social phenomenon:
ofvalues-thereintrudes
senseofGemeinschaft-genuine
community
ofpersonalconcernwiththeother
pseudo-Gemeinschaft-the
feigning
fellowin orderto manipulatehimthebetter"(p. 142); in stillother
priwords,"the merepretenseof commonvaluesin orderto further
vateinterests"(p. 144)(Merton,1975:83;Cohen,1975;Beniger,1987).
The focussedinterview
ofindividuals
did notexhibitcertainassets
and liabilitiesof the focussedinterviewof smallgroupings.(I say
"groupings"sincethesewerenot,ofcourse,groupsinthesociological
sense of havinga commonidentityor a continuing
unity,shared
norms,and goals.) Still,interaction
amongthemembersof suchpro
temcontrived
of regroupsevidently
servedto elicittheelaboration
individual
responsesbymaksponsesjust as itmayhavecontaminated
theindividual
of them.Correlatively,
ingforobservableconvergence
interviews
based on priorcontent-analysis
underexamiofthematters
by each person
nationclearlyallowedformoreintensiveelucidation
whilenot providing
by
forthe introduction
of new leads stimulated
others.
Yearslater,HarrietZuckerman
adaptedanddevelopedthistacticof
interviews
withindividuals
focussedon theprioranalysisof"texts"in
Nobel laureatesin science(Zuckerman,
her studyof an ultra-elite,
1972,1977:App. A). There,the contentbeinganalyzedin detailto
providefociforthe interview
was of coursefarmorecomplexand
behavior.It
wide-ranging
thanin the studiesof mass-communication
keyeventsand seinvolved,forexample,identifying
hypothetically
of
ofthelaureates,provisional
identification
quencesinthebiographies
theirsociometric
networks
at variousphasesoftheircareers,thespot-

This content downloaded from 79.175.121.210 on Mon, 27 May 2013 17:40:06 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

556

Robert K. Merton

tingof theirsuccesses and failuresin research,and patternedsein theirbibliographies.

quencesidentified
As Zuckermannoted,this
was a kindof"focussedinterview,"
onethatprovidesforanalysisand
interpretation
ratherthanonlyforchronicle(as is typically
the case
with"oral histories").
But back to thefocussedinterview
withgroups.Thisis plainlynot
the occasion fora systematic
accountof its essentialfeaturesas a
researchtool. However,shouldyou be able to finda copy of The
FocusedInterview-tomydismay,thepublisher
insistedon dropping
one ofthes's infocussed-you willfinda fullaccountofcomponent
proceduresand therationaleforeach ofthem.But youare notaptto
locatea copy. Thatbook, publishedby The Free Pressin 1956after
twoeditionshad beenpublishedby theBureauofAppliedSocial Researchin mimeographed
form,is thoroughly
outofprint.In fact,this
copy,whichI locatedforthisevening,containsa cardfrommysecrewhichreads: "This is theonlycopywe havein
taryofthemid-1970s
theoffice."3You mightturninsteadto themoreaccessiblepaperby
Pat Kendalland myself,
publishedin theAmericanJournalofSociologytenyearsbeforethebook (Mertonand Kendall,1946).
In lightof all this,youwillnotbe surprised
to learnthatwhatI've
heardaboutfocus-group
researchthusfartonight,
andthelittlereading
I've done on thesubject,resonates.At least,in itsboldoutlines,the
data has an amiablecongruencewith
disciplineduse of focus-group
whatwe were tryingto do withthe focussedinterview
back then.
ofJudith
However,I was struckbycertainfeatures
Langer'ssummary
oftheuses offocus-group
materials
nowadays.Theseseemto contrast
withthewaysinwhichwe hadbeen makinguse offocussedstrongly
interview
materials.You willrecallmyhavingreferred
to workwith
and theResearchBranchwhichhad involvedfocussed
Sam Stouffer
withCarl Hovland,
Thatworkwas in conjunction
group-interviews.
who headed up the Experimental
Sectionof the ResearchBranch.
Carl,who was on leave fromYale duringthewar,was possiblythe
mostaccomplished
everto workon theefexperimental
psychologist
fectsofsocialcommunication;
manyofyoumaynotknowhimsincehe
died in 1961at the age of 49, but he is remembered
and
admiringly
affectionately
by thoseof us who knewhimwell.Now, Carlwas the
one designing
anddirecting
controlled
on theresponsesof
experiments
soldiersto thosetraining
and "morale"films.Onewouldthinkthatthe
of
3. I've just foundevidence,in theformofa letterfromtheexecutivevicepresident
a dozenyearsago,thatthebookwas outofprintat least
Benson& BensonInc. written
thatuntillatersinceit providesme witha
by then.However,I'll postponereporting
untilI
and focusgroupswhichI had forgotten
bridgebetweenthefocussedinterview
cameupontheletter.

This content downloaded from 79.175.121.210 on Mon, 27 May 2013 17:40:06 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Focussed Interview and Focus Groups

557

experimental
use oftestand controlgroupswouldbe takento provide
a sufficient
designforidentifying
the effectsof the films.But Carl
wiselyrecognizedthatthiswas notso. It couldnotprovidethespecific
qualitativeinformation
we wereable to providethrough
ourfocussed
interviews.
That information
movedbeyondthe net effectsof "the
films"
-a mostcomplexsetofevocativestimuli-toidentify,
at least
provisionally,
theelementsand configurations
ofthatcomplexexperience whichmighthave led to thoseeffects.The quantitative
experimentaldesignenabledone to determine
theaggregate
effects
butprovided no clues to what it was about thefilm's contentthatmighthave

producedtheobservedeffects.The focussedinterview
was designed
to providesuch materials-itidentified,
provisionally
and subjectto
checksthrough
further
quantitative
experimental
research,theaspects
of situational
experienceleadingto theobservedoutcomes.Thiswas
so eitherin investigating
a particular
concreteexperience,as in the
case ofresponsesto a particular
filmor radioprogram,
or a recurrent
experience,
which,I takeit,is oftentheresearchfocusoffocus-group
researchthesedays.
Ourqualitativeadjunctsto theexperimental
designsoon convinced
thatbrilliant
Carl Hovlandthatbothkindsof
designerofexperiments
data wererequiredforsoundconclusions:therigorofthecontrolled
haditscostssinceitmeantgivingup access tothephenomexperiment
inenologicalaspectsof thereal-life
experienceand invitedmistaken
ferencesaboutthesourcesofthatexperienced
response;thequalitativedetailprovidedby the focussedgroup-interview
in turnhad its
costssinceitcouldlead onlyto newhypotheses
aboutthesourcesand
characterof theresponsewhichin turnrequiredfurther
quantitative
researchto testthehypotheses.
or, in thiscase, further
experimental
FromwhatI havereadandheard,I gatherthatmuchoffocus-group
researchtodayas a growing
typeofmarketresearchdoes notinvolve
thiscompositeofbothqualitativeand quantitative
inquiry.One gains
theimpression
thatfocus-group
researchis beingmercilessly
misused
as quick-and-easy
claimsforthevalidityof theresearchare notsubtest.Perhapsthepressuresofthemarjected to further,
quantitative
ketplacefor quick-and-easy-possibly,
for quick and relativelyinexpensive-researchmake for this misuse of focus groups.That
misuse-thetermseemsa smidgen
less harshthan"abuse"-consists
in takingmerelyplausibleinterpretations
derivingfromqualitative
and treating
themas thoughtheyhadbeenshownto
groupinterviews
be reliablyvalidforgaugingthedistributions
ofresponse.
remindsus that
Shannon'sfundamental
theoryof communication
has itsuses byenlarging
calculatedredundancy
theprobability
thatthe
So I say redundantly
and emphatically
messagewillgetthrough.
that,

This content downloaded from 79.175.121.210 on Mon, 27 May 2013 17:40:06 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

558

Robert K. Merton

weretakenas sourcesof
forus, qualitative
focussedgroup-interviews
with
new ideas and new hypotheses,not as demonstrated
findings
regardto the extentand distribution
of the provisionally
identified
qualitative
patterns
ofresponse.Thoseideasandhypotheses
hadtobe
checkedoutbyfurther
surveyresearch(orinthecase oftheResearch
Branchstudies,by further
experimental
research).The pointis that
limitedqualitativeresearchcannotin principle
deal withthedistribution and extentof tentatively
identified
patterns.(Medicinehad to
wereno substitute
forepidemiologdiscoverthatclinicalobservations
I can reportto you thatsome of the hypotheses
ical investigation.)
workwith
derivedfromfocussedinterviews
duringour collaborative
Carl Hovlanddid notcheckoutuponfurther
inquiry.The pointis, of
inadvanceoffurther
course,thatthereis no wayofknowing
quantitawillpan out
tiveresearchwhichplausibleinterpretations
(hypotheses)
and whichwillnot.

Focussed Interviewand Focus Groups:

Continuitiesand Discontinuities
I've been asked to speak to the subjectof continuities
betweenthe
I
focussedinterview
and thecurrent
use offocusgroups. believethat
thereare bothcontinuities
and discontinuities.
I have theimpression
thatthereis rathermoreintellectual
continuity
thanexplicitly
recognizedhistorical
continuity.
Afterall, TheFocusedInterview
soldonlya
fewthousandcopies,forthemostpartinthe1950s,I believe,andthen
wentout of print.We have no evidenceon thedistribution
of those
copies-say, as betweenacademicsand marketresearchers.
Looking
intofiles,whichovertheyearshaveprovedto be a continuing
source
of serendipitous4
and therefore
surprising
finds,I discovera longIt testifies
thatthere
reference
to a letterin themid-1970s.
forgotten
was somedirectandidentifiable
continuity
whichwas thenrecognized
byresearchpeoplein theworldofcommerce.Ratherthanparaphrase
thatletter,I'll transmit
thisarchivaltracerintact,thanksto myhome
Canonphotocopier
whichallowsme to canonizethisdocument
(withoutpossibleerror):
byRobertK.
monograph
versionofmytalkI referto an unpublished
4. In thisprinted
ofthecoinage
contexts
MertonandElinorBarber(1958).It treatsthesocialandcultural
opinionin whichit
theclimateofrelevant
in the18thcentury;
ofthewordserendipity
physicaland social
firstsaw printin the 19th;thediversesocialcirclesoflitterateurs,
thechangesof
intowhichitdiffused;
andhistorians
lexicographers,
engineers,
scientists,
and theideologicaluses to whichit has
in thecourseofdiffusion,
undergone
meaning
is readyfor
ofthefocussedinterview
doubtthatthediffusion
put.I rather
beenvariously
analysis.
a comparable

This content downloaded from 79.175.121.210 on Mon, 27 May 2013 17:40:06 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

559

The Focussed Interview and Focus Groups

Benson& Benson,Inc.
P.O. Box 269
N.J.08540
Princeton,
June17, 1976
RobertK. Merton
Professor
Hall
Fayerweather
ColumbiaUniversity
New York,N.Y. 10027
Merton:
Dear Professor
use fromourcopyofthe
Overtheyearswe have derivedconsiderable
secondeditionof TheFocussedInterview-AManual.As youundoubthas becomewidespreadin
edlyare aware,focussedgroupinterviewing
intheacademicandnon-profit
interest
circlesandis eliciting
commercial
on thesubjectin
researchsectors.Oddlyenough,littlehas beenwritten
fashion,and,in nearlyeverycase, thatwhichhas apparently
systematic
to referto the
shouldnothave been. We have urgedotherresearchers
have been toldthatcopies simplyare notto be
Manual,butinvariably
possess one of the last known
found.In otherwords,we apparently
are reluctant
to lenditout.
copiesoftheManual,and,understandably,
to receivequeriesforXeroxcopies.
Now, we are starting
suggests
thereportis
Ourcopycarriesno copyright
andtheIntroduction
in thepublicdomain.
We wouldliketo reprint
themanualand offerit forsale to interested
at about$10-$12percopy,pluspostage.We thinkitis only
researchers
the
fairthatwe consultwithyouon thisfirst.
We wouldproposeto offer
authorsa 15%royalty
on each copysold.Payment
wouldbe madesemiannually....
Sincerely,
RobertBezilla
ExecutiveVice President
Now, like a longtimequalitative researcher,I want to take you
brieflythrougha part of this document which testifiesto continuity
betweenacademe and the marketplace.Note thatit beginsby referring
to "our copy of . . . The Focussed Interview-A Manual." That must
referto the second mimeographededition put out by the Columbia
Bureau of Applied Social Research ratherthan the far more widely
circulatedletterpresseditionpublishedby The Free Press in 1956.This
I inferfromthe spellingof the word Focussed in the title,a spellingI
have always preferredand thereforeadopted in the two Bureau editions but one, as I've said, which The Free Press (as before it, the
editorof the American Journalof Sociology) had unwarrantablybut
forciblydiminishedto Focused. Thus, the two-essedFocussed serves
as a markerof the earliereditions.Note too thatby 1976,the executive
vice presidentof Benson & Benson is reportingthat "focussed [n.b.]
group interviewinghas become widespread in commercialcircles and

This content downloaded from 79.175.121.210 on Mon, 27 May 2013 17:40:06 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

560

Robert K. Mertoi

is elicitinginterestin the academic and non-profit

sectors." If his im
pression was sound, this suggests-somewhat to my startlenow an(
perhapsback in 1976-that the patternof focussed group-interviewing
had expanded to thepointof elicitingenlargedinterestin theacademic
worldwhereithad originated.Not to continuewitha line-by-line
gloss
I remarkonlynow on theintrinsicdecency ofRobertBezilla of Bensor
& Benson in suggestinga royaltyto theauthorsshouldhe be allowed ta
reprintthe manual; this, mind you, even thoughhe (mistakenly)as.
sumed thatthe work was in the public domain.
You may be curious about what happened in responseto thatgener.
ous offerto reprint,as indeed I am. But nothingin my archivalfiles
allows me to say, fromwhich I conclude thatnothingof consequencc
happened.
That is one indicationof direct continuitybetween academia anc
the marketplace.I gatherthat duringthe passage fromMorningsidc
Heights to Madison Avenue the focussed interviewhas undergone
some sea changes of thekindI've been in a positiononlyto hintat: the
quick would-beconversionof new plausible insightsintodemonstrable
gospel truths.As I say, I'm not reallyqualifiedto speak to thispoini
since I've seen nextto nothingof currentfocus-groupresearchat close
range. But I note the followingobservationby Leo Bogart (1984:82):
In the1970s,anothertypeofqualitative
researchrapidlymovedto the
theso-calledfocusgroupinterview
in whicha half-dozen
forefront:
to a
dozenpeopleareassembledandengagedina discussion.(Theterm
focus
thatconfusedsociologist
RobertK. Merton'stechgroupis a barbarism
but "focused" interview-inwhicha skillful
nique of an unstructured
attention
fromwandering
offthesubinterrogator
keepstherespondent's
ject at hand-and the traditional
sociologicaltechniqueof talkingto a
or relatedgroupofpeoplewhostimulate
each otherunder
homogeneous
theinterviewer's
can be conpracticedguidance.)*A groupinterview
withone
ductedwithlittlemoreexpensethanan intensiveinterview
but sinceeveryonein thegroupgetscounted,a respectable
individual,
can be totedup in thesample.
numberofrespondents
The mostbeguiling
aspectoffocusgroupsis thattheycan be observed
in actionbyclientsandcreativepeoplehiddenbehinda one-waymirror.
can be madeto feelthat
Thus,theplannersand executorsofadvertising
oftheconsuming
revelations
theyare themselves
privyto theinnermost
thecompetition,
thinkoftheproduct,
public.Theyknowwhatconsumers
and the advertising,
havingheardit at firsthand. The troubleis that
do notalwaysreprepeoplewhocanbe enticedintoa researchlaboratory
senta truecross-section
ofpotential
A cadreofprofessional
customers.
respondents
are alwaysreadyto volunteer,
and loud-mouths
can domi* Paul F. Lazarsfeldand FrankStantonfirst
combinedthesetechniques
in the
radioProgram
Analyzer.
Groupsofpeoplepressedbuttons
torecordtheirmomentby-moment
responsesto whattheyheard.The interviewer,
examining
thetape,
questioned
themas towhytheyreactedas theydid.CBS stillusesthistechnique
to
evaluatetelevision
programs.

This content downloaded from 79.175.121.210 on Mon, 27 May 2013 17:40:06 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Focussed Interview and Focus Groups

561

nateandswaythediscussion.Whileusefulandprovocative
ideasemerge
fromgroupsjust as theydo fromindividual
qualitative
interviews,
it is
dangerous
to acceptthemwithout
fromlarger-scale
corroboration
survey
research.
So much forcriticalobservationson some present-daypracticesin
focus-groupresearch. Now back for a few momentsto the archives.
Roaming throughmy filesof thatfullgenerationago-and you recall
what Ortega y Gasset, Karl Mannheim,and Juli'anMarias had to say
about the social realityand dynamics of generations-I have come
upon a long-forgotten
letterto JeremiahKaplan, thefoundingpresident
of The Free Press, tellinghow the mimeographededitionsof The Focussed Interviewcame to be transformed
intotheprintededition.Having shared thisletterwithmy coauthors,Marorie Fiske and Pat Kendall, I now include it in what is fastbecomingan archive-basedthough
still fragmentaryaccount of the evolution of the focussed groupinterviewas prelude to the evolvingfocus-groupmode of research.
[Mr.Jeremiah
Kaplan
The FreePress]
8 August1955
Dear Jerry,
... The newsofthemoment
inthis:I havesetmyself
a quota,during
thesecomfortable
vacation-days,
ofso manypagesa dayforrewriting
the
FocusedInterview.
Now thata weekhasgonebyandI amstillon schedthatit willbe completedby thetimeI return.
ule, I am quiteconfident
Sincemysecretary
is awaynextweek,therewillbe a littledelayintyping
thisnewversionbutthems.willdefinitely
be readyfortheprinter
bythe
endofthemonth....
Item1: Thisis a completere-writing;
scarcelyfivesentencesina chapterremainintact.Nevertheless,
itis not,in anysignificant
sense,a new
edition;thereis nextto nothing
bywayofnewmaterial
(exceptfora little
basedon focusedinterviews
on thediariesofmedicalstudents)
andlittle
by way of new ideas. I've triedonlyto eliminate
theworsthorrors
of
intheearlierprintings
exposition
and,fortherest,to makeitclear,ifnot
It seemstome,therefore,
as a
thatitshouldnotbe designated
fascinating.
newedition,butas theThirdRe-printing
so thatno excessive
(rewritten),
claimsseemtobe implied.I hopeyouagree.(I'll explainthenatureofthe
rewriting
in thepreface.)
Item2: As youknow,thisis a shortbook-it willrunto about230ms.
about25 single-spaced
pages (including
pages of an analyticaltableof
contents
whichwas foundusefulintheBureau'editions').I wouldn'tlike
to have the book be too expensive:it is all straight
text,no tablesor
charts,andshouldbe easyto setintype.Atthesametime,I hopethatSid
can designit so thatit isn't too crowded.Can you let me have your
thinking
on priceand design?. .
Yours,
[RobertK. Merton]

This content downloaded from 79.175.121.210 on Mon, 27 May 2013 17:40:06 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

562

Robert K. Merton

As can be seen, by the mid-1950s

theessentialconceptof thefocussedinterview
and itsbasic procedureswiththeirstatedrationales
had become stabilized.Indeed,these did not evolve further
at the
ColumbiaBureau. So it was thatthis interlinear
of the
rewriting
Manual,whichtookplace on thesandsof Ocean City(and thusperhapsintroduced
a newidiom,by-the-sea-change),
becametheversion
thatcoulddiffuse
and evidently
did diffuse
intovariousresearchsectors,notablyit seemsintothesectorofmarketresearch.

IntellectualDiffusionand Obliterationby Incorporation

Thatparticular
pathwayofdiffusion
intothemarketplace
was neither
I thought
intended
of
nor,as I recall,anticipated.
Speakingformyself,
thefocussedinterview
as a genericresearchtechnique,
one thatcould
be andwouldbe appliedineverysphereofhumanbehaviorandexperito mattersofinterest
in marketreence,ratherthanlargelyconfined
search.As forthe actual pathsof diffusion
takenby the focussed
I cannotsay.No case studyofthatdiffusion
interview,
hasbeenmade.
thenowavailableresourcesofcitationanalyPerhapsa studyutilizing
sis coupledwithinterview
or questionnaire
inquiriesamongrepresentativesamplesofdifferent
ofsocialresearchers
wouldpropopulations
videsomeunderstanding
oftheextentand directions
ofthatdiffusion
and readilyidentifiable
of a modest,delimited,
innovation
as well as
thekindsanddeterminants
ofdiversekindsofchangesinitas itspread
to one or anotherresearchsector.Not,mindyou,thatthediffusion
of
thistechniquewarrantssuch a studybecause of its researchimportancebut onlybecause it seems to have some of the elementsof a
ofthediffusion
researchsite5forinvestigation
ofintellectual
strategic
innovations-andthat,as manyof you know,was a subjectof deep
intheColumbiaBureauofAppliedSocialResearchbackinthe
interest
1960s,as you'llrecallfromthepath-breaking
studyby JimColeman,
ElihuKatz, andHerbMenzel(1966).Andas youcouldnotknow,that
interesthas been brilliantly
renewedon MorningsideHeightsby
RonaldS. Burt(1987) in his reanalysisof the Coleman-Katz-Menzel
data.
So muchforan excursionintotheserious,systematic
studyofthe
diffusion
of innovations.Here, in the concludingmomentsof these
I can onlyturnto thearchiveswhichonceagainyielda bitof
remarks,
pertinent
evidence-evidencewhichbearswitnessthatthefocussed
interview
was notconfined
to academeorthemarketplace
but,at least
viz.:
once,founditsway intothesphereofreligion,
in Merton,1987.
researchsiteis elucidatedsomewhat
5. The conceptofstrategic

This content downloaded from 79.175.121.210 on Mon, 27 May 2013 17:40:06 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Focussed Interview and Focus Groups

563

BoardofEducation
Church
The UnitedMethodist
DivisionoftheLocal Church
September
18, 1969
Dr. RobertK. Merton
of Sociology
Department
ColumbiaUniversity
New York,New York 10027
Dear Dr. Merton:
a majorstudyofthestateofthechurchschoolofThe
We are conducting
UnitedMethodistChurchand wouldlike to makeuse of the focused
interview
techniquewhichyou havedescribedin thebookby thattitle.
copiesofthebookandam wonI am havingdifficulty
locatingadditional
purchase
fromwhomwe might
deringifyoucoulddirectmeto a supplier
sessions.Up to thistimetheonlycopieswe
copiesforuse in ourtraining
havebeen able to discoverare thosewhichare in severallibraries.
willbe greatlyappreciated.
Yourhelpin thismatter
Cordiallyyours,
WarrenJ. Hartman
Back now to a few more bits of documentaryevidence on the continuityfromthefocussed interviewas a mode of social and psychological inquiryto the focus group. I turnto the fairlyrecentpast and the
virtualpresent for a few qualitative indicatorsof that continuity.In
1976,precisely30 years afterPat Kendall's and myfirstpublicationon
the focussed interview,an introductionin a book entitledQualitative
Research in Marketingby Danny Bellenger,Kenneth Bernhardt,and
Jack Goldstucker (published by the Chicago MarketingAssociation)
virtuallybegins by reportingthat "Merton, Fiske, and Kendall distinguishthe focus groupas followingthese criteria"and thenproceeds to
quote the paragraphon "The Nature of the Focused Interview" that
opens our book. Here you will note a diagnostic conflatingof the
focussed interviewand the focus group,at least a terminologicalconflation.We never used the term "focus group"-at least, not as I
recall-but apparentlythese authors on marketingresearch saw the
focus groupas so fullyderivativeas to have us settingdown criteriafor
focus groups.To be sure, we repeatedlyexaminethevalues and limitations of usingfocussed interviewsin groupsratherthanindependently
withlateraggregatedindividualsand thatmightbe a basic themein the
continuity-cum-change.
Recognitionof the accent on that theme is foundin a fairlyrecent
articlejust drawn to my attentionthat was published in Information
Technology and Libraries (December 1983). Introducinga research

This content downloaded from 79.175.121.210 on Mon, 27 May 2013 17:40:06 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

564

Robert K. Merton

program
forlibrary
usersandon-line
publicaccesscatalogs(OPACS),it
has occasiontoreferto "focused-group
interviews"
andgoesonto say
interview
(p. 381) that"completedescriptions
of the focused-group
methodand analysisare givenin Merton,Fiskeand Kendall'smanual
on themethod."
Early on in these remarks-so long ago thatyou are not apt to
remember-Ihazardedtheimpression
thattherewas more"intellectualcontinuity"
betweenthefocussedinterview
andfocusgroupsthan
The distinction
between
"explicitly
recognizedhistorical
continuity."
thetwokindsofcontinuity
is one thathas longseemedbasic to me in
transmission
of knowltrying
to understand
patternsin thehistorical
edge.Forinthecourseoftime,ideaswhicharetakenup andutilizedor
bothexplicit
developedbecomeso mucha partofcurrent
knowledge,
thelinesofintellectual
and tacit,thattheirsourcesand consequently
thisphenomelostto view.I haveidentified
continuity
getincreasingly
noninthetransmission
ofknowledge
as "obliteration
byincorporation
orfindings
ofthesourcesofideas,methods,
(OBI)": "theobliteration
'6 At theoutin currently
bytheirincorporation
acceptedknowledge.'
ideaormethodis knownandidentified
by
set,thesourceofa particular
thosewho makeuse of it. In due course,however,usersand conseof thatknowledgewho are thoroughly
familiar
quentlytransmitters
withits originscometo assumethatthisis also trueoftheirreaders.
notto be obviousorto insulttheirreader'sassumedknowlPreferring
edgeability,
theynolongerrefertotheoriginalsource.Andsince,inall
innocence,manyofus tendto attribute
a significant
idea, method,or
to theauthorwhointroduced
us to it,theequallyinnocent
formulation
as theoriginator.
Thusit is
transmitter
sometimes
becomesidentified
thatin the successivetransmission
of knowledge,repeateduse of it
mayeraseall buttheimmediately
antecedent
"source," thusproducingwhatI describedin On theShouldersofGiants(Merton,1965:218in which
219ff.)as a historical
palimpsest(or palimpsestic
syndrome)
butreplacedby theintertheoriginalsourceis notonlyobliterated
ofthatknowledge.
mediarybetweensourceand recipient
Withoutdoingtherequisiteresearch,I cannotpresumeto say how
and
muchoftheseemingdiscontinuity
betweenthefocussedinterview
its modified
(and,I takeit, sometimes
abused)versionin theformof
focusgroupsis actuallyanotherinstanceofobliteration
by incorporation.But thatsome OBI has occurredcan be inferred
froma recent
of sociologyat theUniversity
ofCaliforniaarticleby twoprofessors
Riverside,David L. Morganand MargaretT. Spanish(1984),which
newresearchtool" (p. 253).
describes"focusgroups"as "a relatively
6. The phenomenonof OBI is noted in Merton, 1968, and in otherwritingssince. This
summaryis drawn fromMerton, 1979; see also Garfield,1977.

This content downloaded from 79.175.121.210 on Mon, 27 May 2013 17:40:06 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Focussed Interview and Focus Groups

565

Ifthefocussedinterview
has experienced
evenoccasionalobliteration
byincorporation
intheoriginating
fieldofsociology,one is inclinedto
supposethatit is all the more(a fortiori)
likelyto have occurredin
otherfieldsintowhichit had diffused.
And now a finalword,stemming
once againfromthemarketplace,
but one which,muchto my pleasure,recognizesthatthe focussed
interview
is notat all confined
tomarket
research.Indeed,inlightofits
use by religiousand othereleemosynary
institutions,
itmightevenbe
describedas ecumenical.Butperhapsmoretellingis a reviewof The
Focused Interviewappearingin the October 1956 issue of The Journal

ofMarketing.
Understandably,
thereviewis orientedto its probable
readersinremarking
thatthebook"shouldbe ofparticular
valuetothe
studentand practitioner
ofmarketing
research."Good enough;more
But
qualitative
evidenceofdiffusion
fromacademetothemarketplace.
muchmorein pointfortheoriginalconceptofthefocussedinterview
as a genericratherthansubstantively
restricted
researchtool is the
declaration
inthereviewthat"This manualshouldbe read
concluding
by thosewho are attempting
to understand
theproblemsinvolvedin
subjectiveor motivation
researchin whateverfieldit maylie." Preciselyso. Usefulformarketing
research,to be sure,butnotonlyfor
marketing
research.Rather,a setofprocedures
forthecollectionand
datathatmayhelpus gainan enlargedsociologianalysisofqualitative
cal and psychological
in whatsoeversphereof human
understanding

experience.

References
Beniger,JamesR. (1987)
"Personalization
ofmassmediaandthegrowth
ofpseudo-community."
Research14:352-371.
Communication
Bogart,Leo (1984)
in Advertising.
Strategy
2d ed. Chicago:CrainBooks.
Burt,RonaldS. (1987)
"Social contagion
and innovation:
Cohesionversusstructural
equivalence."
American
Journal
of Sociology92:1287-1335.
Cohen,Harry(1975)
"Pseudo-Gemeinschaft:
A problemofmodernsociety."WesternSociological
Review5:35-46.
Coleman,JamesS. (1980)
"Paul F. Lazarsfeld:The substanceand styleofhiswork."Pp. 153-174in Robert
K. MertonandMatildaWhiteRiley(eds.), SociologicalTraditions
fromGeneration
to Generation:
GlimpsesoftheAmericanExperience.Norwood,NJ:Ablex
Publishing
Corp.
Coleman,JamesS., ElihuKatz, and HerbertMenzel(1966)
A Diffusion
MedicalInnovation:
Study.Indianapolis:
Bobbs-Merrill.
De Lellio,Anna(1985)
"Intervista
a RobertK. Merton:Le aspettative
socialidi durata."RassegnaItaliana
di Sociologia26:3-26.

This content downloaded from 79.175.121.210 on Mon, 27 May 2013 17:40:06 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

566

Robert K. Merton

Garfield,
Eugene(1977)
"The 'obliteration
phenomenon'
in science-and theadvantageofbeing
obliterated!"
Pp. 396-398in EugeneGarfield,
Essaysofan Information
Scientist,
vol. 2. Philadelphia:
ISI Press.
Hunt,Morton(1961)
" 'How does it cometo be so?': A profile
ofRobertK. Merton."The New Yorker,
28 January.
Lazarsfeld,Paul F. (1975)
withMerton."Pp. 35-66in Lewis A. Coser(ed.), The Idea ofSocial
"Working
Structure.
New York:HarcourtBraceJovanovich.
Merton,RobertK. [1965](1985)
On theShouldersofGiants.New York:HarcourtBraceJovanovich.
(1968)
Social Theoryand Social Structure.
New York:The FreePress.
(1975)
"On theoriginsoftheterm:pseudo-Gemeinschaft."
WesternSociologicalReview
6:83.
(1979)
Forewordto EugeneGarfield,
CitationIndexing:Its TheoryandApplication
in
and Humanities.
New York:JohnWiley.
Science,Technology,
(1987)
"Threefragments
froma sociologist's
thephenomenon,
notebooks:Establishing
and strategic
specified
ignorance,
researchmaterials."AnnualReviewofSociology
13:1-28.
Merton,RobertK., and ElinorBarber(1958)
of serendipity:
"The travelsand adventures
A studyin historical
semantics
andthe
sociologyofscience."Manuscript.
Merton,RobertK., withMarjorieFiskeandAlbertaCurtis[1946](1971)
Mass Persuasion.New York:HarperandBros.Reprint,
CT: Greenwood
Westport,
Press.
Merton,RobertK., MarjorieFiske,andPatriciaL. Kendall(1956)
The FocusedInterview.
New York:The FreePress.
Merton,RobertK., and PatriciaL. Kendall(1946)
"The focusedinterview."
American
ofSociology51:541-557.
Journal
T. Spanish(1984)
Morgan,David L., and Margaret
"Focus groups:A newtoolforqualitative
research."Qualitative
Sociology
7:253-270.
Sills,David L. (1987)
"Paul F. Lazarsfeld,1901-1976:A biographical
memoir."Pp. 251-282in National
AcademyofSciences,Biographical
The NationalAcademy
Memoirs.Washington:
Press.

Harriet(1972)
Zuckerman,
an ultra-elite."
PublicOpinionQuarterly
"Interviewing
36:159-175.
(1977)
Elite:NobelLaureatesin theUnitedStates.New York:The FreePress.
Scientific

This content downloaded from 79.175.121.210 on Mon, 27 May 2013 17:40:06 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions