Exploring the Impact of Online Focus Group Gender Composition
Insights from a Study on Gender and Transport
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12470237 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Rich C McIlroy (0000-0003-0326-8101, University of Southampton, corresponding author), Katie McPeake (University of Southampton) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Volume | 42 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Publication date | 2024-11-03 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Gender Issues (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1098-092X • E-ISSN: 1936-4717 |
| Publisher | Springer Science+Business Media (PUBLISHER • DE) |
| DOI | 10.1007/s12147-024-09345-5 |
| OpenAlex | W4404011458 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 48 |
Despite considerable attention in the academic domain, end-users of transport systems are rarely directly asked what they think of gender inequity in transport. Shedding light on this could inform education strategies to address such inequities. This research addresses this research gap, revealing how people think about differences in the way transport systems support (or do not support) the safe and comfortable mobility of men and women. It does so via the use of asynchronous online focus groups, to which 114 people contributed. The research also addresses questions around the impact of focus group gender composition on participants’ responses, an issue not previously considered in online or asynchronous contexts. Results suggest there is broad acceptance of women’s transport disadvantage, with men’s views of women’s experiences largely matching women’s own reports. Women’s views of men’s experiences were less reflective of the male reality. Safety and security were commonly discussed; however, trip complexity and other constraints, driven by differences in care roles taken, were discussed less and therefore represent a potential avenue for education strategies. Group gender composition did impact upon responding, with several of the effects previously found in face-to-face focus group research also manifesting in the anonymous, online context
Composition (language · Focus (optics · Focus group · Group (periodic table · Linguistics · Political science · Sociology · Anthropology · Focus Groups and Qualitative Methods · Gender Studies · Gender, Feminism, and Media · Psychology · Social Media and Politics · Social Psychology
Gender Differences in Risk Perception
The Use of Focus Group Interviews in Pediatric Health Care Research
Online Focus Groups
Interrater reliability
Impact of role assignment and group size on asynchronous online discussion
Women’s complex daily lives
Sensitive Health Topics With Underserved Patient Populations
In-Person Versus Online Focus Group Discussions
Is traditional masculinity ideology stable over time in men and women
Using and analysing focus groups
The Effect of Childcare Use on Gender Equality in European Labor Markets
This Should be My Responsibility”
Emerging Adults and Gender Norms
Men’s Gender Norms and Gender-Hierarchy-Legitimizing Ideologies
Transmobilities
Access to Urban Leisure
Public Parks and the Geography of Fear
Using thematic analysis in psychology
Queer mobilities
Why Things (Sometimes) Go Wrong in Focus Groups
Asynchronous Online Focus Groups for Health Research
Hegemonic Masculinity
The Social Contexts of Focus Groups
The Gender System and Interaction
Focus Groups
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |