¿Cuál es la duración ideal para una sesión de grupo focal en investigación de mercados?

I’m surprised to see no mention of the optimal duration of a group also being contingent, in part, on the medium used to conduct the group. Simply put, a moderator has a lot more opportunity to keep respondents engaged in an in-person group vs. a virtual one. Furthermore, the likelihood that respondents will zone out mentally in a virtual group is far greater - in person, the moderator is mere feet away and can -must- react appropriately if respondents appear to be drifting.

It really depends on the approach, i have been moderating for 30 years now and i have done groups from 45 minutes to 3 and a half hours. If we are looking at a testing exercise like ad testing, name testing pack testing etc. we should keep it 60-80 minutes no more than 3-4 stimuli. However if it is life style, exploration etc. the it can go up to 2.5 hours but in such groups one has to add exercises like collages , personification, role playing etc. to keep the respondents interested. not to mention lots of refreshment so that the energy level of the respondent does not go down. I would say that the ideal length is dependent on the objective

I don’t think that length matters. What really is how you engage participants and how deep the discussion is to reach the goal. A creative focus group on a branding topic can’t really be 60 minutes. Culture matters in this landscape and language matters too. In some countries people are much more extrovert and talkative, in some, giving your POV is negatively perceived. Some languages like French and the way you make your sentences are longuer, which means that it is more adapted in these countries to do longer groups. Hope this is helpful.

Having moderated, observed and analysed thousands of Focus Groups as a Qualitative researcher... a general rule of thumb I follow in today's attention-deficit (and repeat respondents) times is 60-90 mins. I know my saying so might ruffle a few proverbial feathers, but my experience has been that even the best of moderators end up collecting very little useful data, beyond 90mins. Indeed there are exceptions : for instance, where the group has been positioned as an extensive exercise, not conducted in a 'typical' venue, is run as a leisure or fun exercise for participants, where they come with an open mindset not bound by time. Such interactions may extend beyond 60-90mins, and still yield rich insights.

Having led projects across South Asia, South East Asia and Middle East, length matters because different markets, different cultures conduct conversation differently- the 'respondents' that are gathered in a focus group are real people with real social norms governing their interaction with the moderator and each other. Which means that making Thai consumers sit through a long session is as damaging as rushing Indonesian consumers through a short session. There is no magic number of minutes for the ideal length of a session. It depends on the market your respondents come from, the objective, and the techniques being used in the discussion guide.

Depending on the level of involvement of the category/product, max 90 minutes. Beyond that people are tired, answers are shorter. I've been in groups where the people are very involved in the category- telecom, feminine products, and you could possibly go further. With the attention span being shorter and shorter, getting to 90mins is already a challenge.

Never longer than 90 minutes irrespective of the topic or research objective. It is up to the researcher to be skilled enough to extract enough information in that time. Beyond that people get tired and it is also an unreasonable ask of someone’s time.

Out of personal experience as focus grouos moderator with Nilsen, focus groups success has many factors starting from the recruitment team being able to bring homogeneous members, a moderator that is able to break the ice and get the group on shape than being able to dig in the information and empower the interaction. By book it should be between 60 to 90 minutes, however, sometimes it is useless to continue and it is better to close the session earlier

I find 45 minutes is ideal, the respondents start to get tired as it gets to an hour and fatigued responses are not so reliable.

I would say 80-100 minutes which includes introduction etc. it takes 5-10 minutes to break the ice, especially with women in a culture like Pakistan where they are apprehensive of any new situation.

Years ago the standard was 2 hours. This can work if the groups is engaged and vested in the subject. Today 60-90 minute on line groups are best. I try to give a short break about half where participants are journaling or reflecting to give them time to turn off the camera and just think. This can lead to better sharing and more energy with the second half of the session

I agree, but shorter sessions need to be driven by questions asked by the moderator. Due to the shortage of time these sessions need to be directed really well.

a shorter group is succinct to the point and leads to a quick revert, the respondents remain energetic through out. The moderator has to work less and it eases her into listening better. Especially for Testing Groups should be short and stimulus limited, in keeping with the human ability to focus and retain on short term multiple items.

The advantages of shorter sessions in marketing research is based on the average human's attention which has fallen to 8 seconds or could lasted for about 30 to 45 minutes. It can be more convenient and appealing for busy or hard-to-reach participants, such as professionals or experts.

In my experience, participant fatigue starts to set in at about 60 minutes. Therefore, should the discussion points be exhausted and data saturation reached in an even shorter time span, the better. That is the whole purpose. Researchers should not feel obliged to drag on just because there is a set or ideal length for focus group sessions.

Maintaining respondent engagement is critical for longer sessions, so the creative techniques, exercises and games are necessary. I wouldn't recommend longer sessions if there are no creative and interactive techniques in the methodology.

The benefits of longer sessions in the marketing research, is one of the approach that helps the typically lasting for about 90 to 120 minutes. This longer frame of session can be more suitable and productive for complex or multi-tasking topics which dives into the system of exploring attitudes and motivations of human behaviors. Longer session can help moderator or facilitator to be creative and engaging techniques to elicit more insights and feedback that needs to be engaged.

longer sessions are generally involving multiple/variate tasks on moderator's agenda and used instead of repeated/panel groups due to various reasons. From my experience, the exploratory focus groups on complex topics require a longer time due to the "serendipity" effect that might appear during interactions. The longer designed sessions the more experienced moderators should be involved since the involvement of participant should be maintained at high level.

A longer session might be warranted depending on the complexity of the topic (and, at times, on the engagement of the group). If the topic under discussion is intricate, calls for creative solutions, or requires in-depth exploration, a longer session may be necessary. Longer sessions can be useful for ideation or brainstorming sessions or in situations where you want to encourage participants to generate creative ideas or solutions. Finally, if the topic is delicate or sensitive, moderators might need more time to establish trust and have respondents share openly in this supportive environment.

Personally, I prefer 90 to 120 minutes for in-person groups (of course, assuming the topic and number of participants included in the groups warrant a deeper dive [which 90%+ of my clients' topics require]). I would never, however, allow / attempt a 2 hour focus group online, especially with a group larger than 2 to 3 participants. More than a handful online allows 1 or 2 to disengage and they become a waste of money (no matter how good the moderator is at ensuring everyone participates). At some point it becomes pulling teeth and detrimental to everyone else participating (as well as distracting to observing clients).

The law of diminishing returns certainly applies to qualitative focus groups. Depending on the scope and complexity beyond a certain number, additional groups generally do not add new information or learning on the topic (usually ~8). One way to maximize returns is to ensure knowledge builds up from one group to the next. This allows more flexibility in choosing deep-dive areas, and thereby optimizing the session length, as the study progresses.

Optimization of session-length is largely dependent on how sharply the information areas/ business questions are defined. Generally speaking, it helps to try address 3 (not more) business questions per 90minutes' session. Of 90mins, shave off 15 for introductions, warming up, closing... some groups do take longer to gel together and part ways. For the balance 75mins - pick 3 business questions you want answered. Prepare beforehand, a bank of questions for each question... this requires expertise in Qualitative Research. I see a lot of direct questioning in Discussion Guides, which makes me wonder what kind of responses are being gathered. Remember that Focus Groups, by nature, are meant to be conversations... not a structured Q&A.

In addition to your insights about optimizing, Laurie, is allowing time for thought and reflection. Ensuring that the important questions are asked a few different ways and at different times throughout the conversation so a fully thought out response is obtained. Additionally, remembering that qualitative isn't like a construction company (hammering a nail to assemble a wall / asking the exact questions we want answered). It is more like a ballet (beautifully expressing movement to elicit feeling / finessing responses by crafting exercises and questions that uncover insights that meet the objectives).

Make a research base on your target audience and use data and analytic means, and take advantage of automation in the marketing

Some groups get tired faster and it's important to cut them short. If respondents continue to show energy and interest, additional questions could be asked.

The best yielding sessions are 60-90 min; withb75 min sessions proving very successful provided objectives are clear, questions are sharp and well designed, and group dynamics are managed effectively. As importantly as optimal time is the question of optimal management of energies and focus. I have found using projectives, enabling techniques and gamification helps energies up, prevents bordemon and increases participation and engagement; saving valuable time and effort. Additionally, pruning redundant or answers that can be obtained through other means e.g. recruitment screeners, pre/post tasks or self completion tasks helps with effectiveness and efficiency.

A skilled moderator is crucial for a successful focus group and can "make or break" your sessions regardless of their length. A great moderator will have an excellent ability to create a safe an inclusive environment, manage group dynamics, and pivot when needed. They will also be instrumental in not only guiding the discussion but probing for deeper insights.

Discussions need prior briefs to enhance value. The selection of the members need to improve in my opinion as I have attended and studied many sessions where the members sometimes don’t fit or are uninterested.

There are so many more interesting ways of getting group insights than the tired old focus group. Imagine putting 500 teenagers on a party boat and seeing what they ask for when the music stops. Qualitative research is far more than just four walls and six respondents.

In order to avoid biases like for example the social desirability bias, you could consider viable alternatives such as observational, behavioral research and/or methodologies where you can have the best of both worlds: quantified metrics with qualitative depth. Given the rise of different technologies such as video and augmented reality. a lot more possibilities to scale up observational/behavioral research are available nowadays.