Repeat receipts: A device for generating visible data in market research focus groups

Qualitative Research

Volumn 4, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 285-309

  Puchta, Claudia ^a   Potter, Jonathan ^b   Wolff, Stephan ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED SCIENCES   (Germany)

^b LOUGHBOROUGH UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF HILDESHEIM   (Germany)

Author keywords

conversation analysis; data visibility; discursive psychology; focus groups; moderation; repeat receipts

Indexed keywords

EID: 85004367729     PISSN: 14687941     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1468794104047231     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Antaki, C. (1999) ‘Interviewing Persons With a Learning Disability: How Setting Lower Standards May Inflate Well-Being Scores’, Qualitative Health Research 9(4): 437-454.
2. Antaki, C. and Rapley, M. (1996) ‘“Quality of Life”Talk: The Liberal Paradox of Psychological Testing’, Discourse &Society 7(3): 293-316.
3. Antaki, C., Houtkoop-Steenstra, H. and Rapley, M. (2000) ‘“Brilliant. Next Question…”: High-Grade Assessment Sequences in the Completion of Interactional Units’, Research on Language and Social Interaction 33: 235-262.
4. Billig, M. (1989) ‘The Argumentative Nature of Holding Strong Views: A Case Study’, European Journal of Social Psychology 19: 203-223.
5. Billig, M. (1992) Talking of the Royal Family. London: Routledge.
6. Billig, M. (1996) Arguing and Thinking: A Rhetorical Approach to Social Psychology (2nd edn). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. Branthwaite, A. and Lunn, T. (1985) ‘Projective Techniques in Social and Market Research’, in R.L. Walker (ed.) Applied Qualitative Research, pp. 101-121. London: Gower.
8. Garfinkel, H. (1967) Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
9. Greenbaum, T.L. (1998) The Handbook for Focus Group Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10. Heritage, J. (1985) ‘Analyzing News Interviews: Aspects of the Production of Talk for an Overhearing Audience’, in Teun A. van Dijk (ed.) Handbook of Discourse Analysis, vol. 3, pp. 95-119. London: Academic Press.
11. Heritage, J. (2004) ‘Conversation Analysis and Institutional Talk’, in K. Fitch and R. Sanders (eds) Handbook of Language and Social Interaction, [in press]. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
12. Heritage, J.C. and Watson, D.R. (1979) ‘Formulations as Conversational Objects’, in G. Psathas (ed.) Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, pp. 123-162. New York: Irvington.
13. Houtkoop-Steenstra, H. (1995) ‘Meeting Both Ends: Standardization and Recipient Design in Telephone Survey Interviews’, in P. ten Have and G. Psathas (eds) Situated Order: Studies in the Social Organization of Talk and Embodied Activities, pp. 91-106. Washington, DC: University Press of America.
14. Houtkoop-Steenstra, H. (1996) ‘Probing Behavior of Interviewers in the Standardized Semi-Open Research Interview’, Quality and Quantity 30: 205-230.
15. Houtkoop-Steenstra, H. (1997) ‘Being Friendly in Survey Interviews’, Journal of Pragmatics 28: 591-623.
16. Houtkoop-Steenstra, H. (2000) Interaction and the Standardized Survey Interview: The Living Questionnaire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17. Hutchby, I. and Wooffitt, R. (1998) Conversation Analysis: Principles, Practices and Applications. Cambridge: Polity Press.
18. Maynard, D.W. and Schaeffer, N.C. (1997) ‘Keeping the Gate: Declinations of the Request to Participate in Telephone Survey Interview’, Sociological Methods and Research 26: 34-79.
19. Maynard, D.W. and Schaeffer, N.C. (2000) ‘Standardization and its Discontents’, in D.W. Maynard, H. Houtkoop-Steenstra, N.C. Schaeffer and J. van der Zouwen (eds), Standardization and Tacit Knowledge: Interaction and Practice in the Survey Interview, pp. 3-46. New York: Wiley.
20. Maynard, D.W., Houtkoop-Steenstra, H., Schaeffer, N.C. and Van der Zouwen, J. (2002) Standardization and Tacit Knowledge: Interaction and Practice in the Survey Interview. New York: Wiley.
21. Myers, G. (1998) ‘Displaying Opinions: Topics and Disagreement in Focus Groups’, Language in Society 27(1): 85-111.
22. Myers, G. and Macnaghten, P. (1999) ‘Can Focus Groups be Analysed as Talk?’, in R.S. Barbour and J. Kitzinger (eds) Developing Focus Group Research, pp. 173-185. London: Sage.
23. Pomerantz, A.M. (1984) ‘Agreeing And Disagreeing with Assessments: Some Features of Preferred/Dispreferred Turn Shapes’, in J.M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (eds) Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, pp. 57-101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
24. Potter, J. (1998) ‘Discursive Social Psychology: From Attitudes To Evaluative Practices’, European Review of Social Psychology 9: 233-266.
25. Potter, J. (2003) ‘Discourse Analysis’, in M. Hardy and A. Bryman (eds) Handbook of Data Analysis, pp. 607-624. London: Sage.
26. Potter, J. (2004) ‘Discourse Analysis as a Way of Analysing Naturally Occurring Talk’, in D. Silverman (ed.) Qualitative Analysis: Issues of Theory and Method (2nd edition), pp. 200-221. London: Sage.
27. Potter, J. and Wetherell, M. (1987) Discourse and Social Psychology: Beyond Attitudes and Behaviour. London: Sage.
28. Potter, J. and Wetherell, M. (1988) ‘Accomplishing Attitudes: Fact and Evaluation in Racist Discourse’, Text 8: 51-68.
29. Puchta, C. and Potter, J. (1999) ‘Asking Elaborate Questions: Focus Groups and the Management of Spontaneity’, Journal of Sociolinguistics 3: 314-335.
30. Puchta, C. and Potter, J. (2002) ‘Manufacturing Individual Opinions: Market Research Focus Groups and the Discursive Psychology of Evaluations’, British Journal of Social Psychology 41: 345-363.
31. Puchta, C. and Potter, J. (2004) Focus Group Practice. London: Sage.
32. Rapley, M. (2001) ‘The Art(fulness) of Open-ended Inteviewing: Some Considerations on Analysing Inteviews’, Qualitative Research 1(3): 303-324.
33. Rapley, M. and Antaki, C. (1996) ‘A Conversation Analysis of the “Acquiescence”of People with Learning Difficulties’, Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology 6: 207-227.
34. Schaeffer, N.C. and Maynard, D.W. (1996) ‘From Paradigm to Prototype and Back Again: Interactive Aspects of Cognitive Processing in Standardized Survey Interviews’, in N. Schwarz and S. Sudman (eds) Answering Questions: Methodology for Determining Cognitive and Communicative Processes in Survey Research, pp. 65-88. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
35. Suchman L. and Jordan, B. (1990) ‘Interactional Troubles in Face-to-Face Survey Interviews’, in Journal of the American Statistical Association 85: 232-241.
36. ten Have, P. (1999) Doing Conversation Analysis. London: Sage.
37. Verkuyten, M. (1998) ‘Attitudes in Public Discourse: Speakers’Own Orientations’, Journal of Language and Social Psychology 17(3): 302-322.
38. Wiggins, S. and Potter, J. (2003) ‘Attitudes and Evaluative Practices: Category vs. Item and Subjective vs. Objective Constructions in Everyday Food Assessments’, British Journal of Social Psychology 42: 513-531.