Secondary Logo

Journal Logo

Using Focus Groups to Design a Valid Questionnaire

McLeod, Peter J. MD; Meagher, Tim W. MB; Steinert, Yvonne PhD; Boudreau, Don MD


The authors planned to study the roles and concerns of senior faculty members at their institutions. To elaborate the aims of their study and to help them design a valid questionnaire, they conducted focus groups with senior faculty. The authors describe how the information gleaned from the focus groups helped them develop their questionnaire.

Dr. McLeod is professor of medicine and pharmacology, McGill University (MU); Dr. Meagher is associate physician-in-chief, MU Health Centre; Dr. Steinert is associate professor, family medicine, MU; and Dr. Boudreau is associate dean for undergraduate education, MU; all in Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

Address correspondence and requests for reprints to Dr. McLeod, Department of Medicine, The Montreal General Hospital, 1650 Cedar Avenue, Montreal, Quebec H3G 1A4, Canada; e-mail: 〈〉.

Faculty leaders regularly address issues important to junior faculty members, but the former generally pay little attention to their senior members.1 Interested in researching this overlooked area, we decided to develop a questionnaire to gather information from senior physicians about their particular concerns and interests. We hypothesized that senior faculty would be concerned about such issues as keeping current with medical information and new technologies, and they they would find particularly satisfying their roles as mentors and their problem-solving abilities. To elaborate the aims of our study and to help us design a valid and useful questionnaire, we decided to conduct focus groups.

To begin, each of us independently developed questions designed to elicit the concerns and experiences of older faculty members; each list was circulated to all authors for comment. After several iterations we found that the questions could roughly be categorized into the four classic domains of a medical school: research, teaching, practice, and administration. For each domain, three to four open-ended “trigger questions” evolved. For example, one trigger question in the teaching domain was “How have your teaching skills evolved as you have matured?”

Next, we recruited a sample of senior academic physicians 50 or older to participate in one of two focus groups. The first group consisted of four physicians whose career emphasis was clinical practice and teaching; the second group was composed of three physicians with research-oriented careers. One of the authors (PJM) and a research assistant met with each group for two hours. Using the list of trigger questions, we encouraged the participants to share ideas and concerns about achieving senior status and to talk about their own experiences and their suggestions for others reaching senior status. We audiotaped and transcribed each session for content-analysis purposes.

All groups members' concerns fit the four academic domains, although their individual emphases varied. We learned that some of our hypotheses were on the mark and others were not. For example, contrary to our initial assumptions, all of the senior faculty felt comfortable with their clinical practice skills, and found that new technology in the clinical or research domains presented no threat, since technicians and junior colleagues with technical expertise were readily available. As we suspected, they perceived their clinical judgement and problem-solving skills to be at their peak.

We used the focus-group data to develop a questionnaire based on the four career domains. We then sent the questionnaire to a convenience sample of ten senior academic physicians to assess its readability and comprehensibility; this led to some further modifications. The final version of the questionnaire was three pages long, with seven parts of ten questions each.

We predict that the information we acquire from a faculty-wide survey of senior academic physicians can be used to address the real concerns of senior faculty, to guide administrators, and to formulate practical advice for faculty approaching senior status. Our results suggest that focus groups can be helpful in facilitating the development of useful and valid research questionnaires.

Back to Top | Article Outline


1. Mathis CB. Academic Careers and Adult Development: A Nexus for Research—Current Issues in Higher Education. No. 2. Faculty Career Development. Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education, 1979:21–4.
© 2000 Association of American Medical Colleges