Article Abstract:
Authors S.M. Chilton and W.G. Hutchinson are correct in arguing that there has been a dearth of explicit research of the role of focus groups in economic research and a lack of explicit discussion on the difficult methodological issues involved in such surveys. Because their specific proposals for developing a specific method of using focus groups in the contingent valuation method process could easily lead to becoming more general criteria for the evaluation of research using focus groups, several implicit assumptions in their argument are drawn out and analyzed.
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Article Abstract:
Authors Peter Lunt and Bradley S. Jorgensen have each addressed issues regarding the use of focus groups in the contingent valuation method process that imply certain misinterpretations or misunderstandings have arisen regarding the argument of two of their colleagues on the matter. Thus, a clarification is made of a few key points, such as the use and acceptance of qualitative data within economics and the impression that the lack of reportage on the conduct and analysis of material results from negligence on the part of researchers.
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Article Abstract:
Authors S.M. Chilton and W.G. Hutchinson identify focus groups as one useful qualitative approach to the contingency valuation method process. They also illustrate the applicability of focus groups to the design of contingent valuation surveys. While the more rigorous application of qualitative techniques in contingent valuation research and survey development is an important assertion and worthwhile investigation, the argument presented by these authors understates the case for qualitative methods.
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic: