Purpose

This article presents focus groups as a method to enhance questionnaire design to frame and test items for a mass survey on corruption and austerity in democracy. Such methodology lacks systematization when it comes to the description of implementation procedures and the discussion of effective contribution to the development of survey questions on sensitive topics. The objective of this article is to contribute to the specialized literature on corruption by offering a novel focus group approach and a roadmap to guide researchers in the field when using this methodology to develop questionnaire items. This hands-on guide can be adaptable to other (survey) studies on issues prone to social desirability bias.

Design/methodology/approach

This article proposes an innovative multi-technique (short questionnaire, visual stimuli and exploratory discussion with expert moderation) focus group approach to collect informal impressions about corruption and austerity. By developing a focus group design through the combination of different research techniques, the authors were able to triangulate reflexive, spontaneous and interactive qualitative bottom-up information about individual perceptions and reactions to sensitive topics. By describing how to implement these groups, other than discussing what type of qualitative information can be extracted from these discussions and to what effect, the authors seek to present a hands-on guide that can be replicated and adapted to similar studies. This roadmap will help researchers to test individual perceptions and reactions to sensitive topics through the use of tailored focus groups in order to enhance the quality of survey questionnaires prior to engaging in a high-cost fieldwork.

Findings

The article concludes that the adoption of the multi-technique focus group approach to requalify and test questions for a nationwide survey gives us a better understanding of the many ethical dilemmas individuals confront when thinking about and expressing their views on sensitive topics prone to social desirability bias. The proposed multi-technique focus group approach proved to be effective to engage participants during sessions and to obtain relevant and unanticipated information for the development of new questionnaire items and the reviewing of old ones.

Research limitations/implications

Implementing Focus Group (FG) in regions with different cultural traditions and levels of development and contrasting the perceptions, values and attitudes of two generations, with different formative backgrounds is not an easy task. In order to secure the adequate number and type of participants, the Focus Group were organized in close collaboration with four higher education institutions and two lifelong learning programs where the sessions took place. Participation was voluntary and consented, in accordance with the applicable legislation and standards for social research.

Practical implications

The article presents an accessible and adaptable roadmap to researchers working in the field of corruption studies as well as anticorruption government agencies and CSOs interested in enhancing the quality of survey questionnaires on sensitive topics target of social desirability before engaging in a high-cost fieldwork and to describe relevant information that can be extracted from the discussions held.

Social implications

Most cross-country surveys on corruption tend to use basic/traditional measures to assess the phenomenon, such as questions on extension, acceptability and/or experience. They take almost for granted that people have the same understanding of this complex construct, which may not hold true, as the focus group discussions illustrate. The three-stage focus group design aims to improve the quality of a survey design regarding people's attitudes, perceptions and experiences of corruption in democracy, by contributing to the development of new questions that tap into the relationship between social condemnation and the individual's socio-economic conditions.

Originality/value

The article provides a low-cost combination of qualitative-oriented (questionnaire development through focus groups) with a quantitative-oriented research tool (mass survey implementation) to meet mixed-method research objectives and enhance the ability to capture several “non-statistical” dimensions of complex social phenomena that are often neglected when a single-methodology approach is used.

中文翻译：

---

使用三阶段焦点小组设计为大规模腐败和紧缩调查制定问卷项目：路线图

目的

本文将焦点小组作为一种改进问卷设计的方法，以构建和测试关于民主腐败和紧缩的大规模调查的项目。这种方法在描述实施程序和讨论对敏感话题调查问题的发展做出有效贡献时缺乏系统性。本文的目的是通过提供一种新颖的焦点小组方法和路线图来指导该领域的研究人员使用这种方法来开发问卷项目，从而为有关腐败的专业文献做出贡献。本实用指南可适用于其他（调查）研究，这些研究易于出现社会期望偏差的问题。

设计/方法/方法

本文提出了一种创新的多技术（简短问卷、视觉刺激和专家主持的探索性讨论）焦点小组方法来收集有关腐败和紧缩的非正式印象。通过结合不同的研究技术开发焦点小组设计，作者能够对有关个人感知和对敏感话题的反应的自反性、自发性和交互式自下而上的定性信息进行三角测量。通过描述如何实施这些小组，除了讨论可以从这些讨论中提取什么类型的定性信息以及产生什么效果之外，作者还试图提供一个可以复制并适用于类似研究的实践指南。

发现

文章的结论是，采用多技术焦点小组方法来重新限定和测试全国性调查的问题，让我们更好地了解个人在思考和表达他们对容易产生社会期望偏见的敏感话题的看法时所面临的许多道德困境。 . 事实证明，所提议的多技术焦点小组方法可以有效地让参与者在会议期间参与并获得相关和意外信息，以开发新的问卷项目和审查旧的问卷项目。

研究限制/影响

在具有不同文化传统和发展水平的地区实施焦点小组（FG），对比具有不同形成背景的两代人的观念、价值观和态度，并非易事。为确保参加者的数量和类型足够多，焦点组与四所高等教育机构和两个终身学习项目密切合作组织了会议。根据适用的法律和社会研究标准，参与是自愿和同意的。

实际影响

本文为在腐败研究领域工作的研究人员以及反腐败政府机构和公民社会组织提供了一个易于理解和适应性强的路线图，他们有兴趣在从事高成本的实地工作之前提高有关社会期望等敏感话题的调查问卷的质量，并描述可以从所进行的讨论中提取的相关信息。

社会影响

大多数关于腐败的跨国调查倾向于使用基本/传统措施来评估这种现象，例如关于扩展性、可接受性和/或经验的问题。他们几乎理所当然地认为人们对这个复杂的结构有相同的理解，正如焦点小组讨论所说明的那样，这可能不正确。三个阶段的焦点小组设计旨在通过帮助开发新的问题来探讨社会谴责与个人社会经济之间的关系，从而提高有关人们对民主腐败的态度、看法和经验的调查设计的质量。状况。

原创性/价值

文章提供了以定性为导向（通过焦点小组进行问卷开发）与以定量为导向的研究工具（大规模调查实施）的低成本组合，以满足混合方法的研究目标，并增强捕捉几个“非统计”的能力。使用单一方法论时常常被忽视的复杂社会现象的维度。