Technology-Assisted Qualitative Research: How Does Modality Affect Outcome? [Methods Study], North Carolina, 2014-2018 (ICPSR 39565)
Version Date: Nov 24, 2025 View help for published
Principal Investigator(s): View help for Principal Investigator(s)
Greg Guest, Family Health International
https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR39565.v1
Version V1
Summary View help for Summary
To learn about people's experiences, researchers often use one-on-one interviews and group interviews, called focus groups. Researchers can do interviews and focus groups in person or online.
In this study, the research team wanted to learn if people shared more or different information in person versus online. The team did interviews and focus groups with women about safety during pregnancy and compared the information collected in person or online. To collect information online, the team used either online video, chat, a message board, or email. The team then compared differences in the average number of words and what women discussed across the methods.
Citation View help for Citation
Export Citation:
Funding View help for Funding
Subject Terms View help for Subject Terms
Geographic Coverage View help for Geographic Coverage
Distributor(s) View help for Distributor(s)
Study Purpose View help for Study Purpose
The purpose of this study was to compare data generated from in-depth interviews (IDIs) and focus groups (FGs) across 4 data collection modalities: (1) face-to-face; (2) online synchronous video-based; (3) online synchronous text-based; and (4) online asynchronous text-based.
Study Design View help for Study Design
In-depth interviews (IDIs) and focus groups (FGs) provide data on people's thoughts and experiences in their own words. Few studies have examined how data might differ between IDIs and FGs conducted in person versus online. Data may vary in volume, measured by word count, or content, measured by the frequency of thematic codes applied.
In this study, researchers compared the volume and content of data collected through IDIs or FGs conducted in person and through three online modalities. Researchers randomly assigned women to either IDIs or FGs. Next, researchers assigned women to one of four groups:
- In person. Researchers conducted IDIs and FGs in an office conference room.
- Online video. Women used their personal computers with webcams to sign in to a private online video chat room and used a telephone conference line for audio.
- Online chat. Researchers typed questions, and women responded in a private online text chat room in real time.
- Online message board or email. For IDIs, the interviewer emailed women three to five questions at a time during a 10-day period. For FGs, the moderator posted three to five questions on an online discussion board each day for 7 to 10 days. Women responded at their convenience. Women in the IDIs and FGs discussed the Zika virus and medical risks during pregnancy.
The study included 171 women in North Carolina who had been pregnant in the previous three years and hoped to become pregnant in the next three.
Universe View help for Universe
Women over age 18 who had been pregnant between 2013 and 2016 and who were hoping to become pregnant again in the next 3 years, based in North Carolina
Data Source View help for Data Source
171 women randomized to a data collection method (IDI or FG), then assigned to a data collection modality (in person, online video, online chat, email or online message board)
Notes
The public-use data files in this collection are available for access by the general public. Access does not require affiliation with an ICPSR member institution.
ICPSR usually offers files in multiple formats for researchers to be able to access data and documentation in formats that work well within their needs. If you have questions about the accessibility of materials distributed by ICPSR or require further assistance, please visit ICPSR’s Accessibility Center.