Research Reflection On The Connection Of Time Constraints And People’S Food Choices In The University Of Limerick

The core aim of our focus group research was to understand the relationship between time constraints and the choices people make surrounding food in the University of Limerick.

My group, composed of Ashley, ChiChi, Robert and I, aimed to explore the question "how do students navigate time constraints in relation to food consumption on the University of Limerick campus?". The research methodology/design is observation and the surveying of students, using dining facilities on campus and/or bringing prepacked lunches, in order to battle the time constraints they face in their academic life. The focus group marks the second stage of qualitative research and it explored the topic surrounding students and their decisions about food consumption as made either consciously or subconsciously regarding their schedules. Ashley, Robert, and ChiChi observed the focus group, whereas I acted as a moderator, asking the questions.

Through conducting our focus group, my research group was able to experience a different type of qualitative data collection from the observation studies performed in stage one. Having never previously taken part in, or conducted a focus group, this was a new experience. This method of data collection helped us understand how the participants felt due to the observation of body language and atmosphere in the room. However, this interview format may make people feel pressured, or embarrassed and therefore reluctant to share their views and perspectives regarding food as outlined by Farnsworth and Boon, “The first is that this research instrument is reliant on group processes. Yet such processes, inherent in any grou), are themselves unstable and unpredictable”. Thus, stating that focus groups may be unreliable. Moreover, some questions I believed may have caused some hesitation, or deception in the participants responses included “11. (D) - Do you have a weekly budget for buying food on campus?” and also “13. (D) - How much do you anticipate spending on food throughout the day? How about the week?”. As the moderator, I felt a certain level of responsibility to make people feel comfortable and not pressured into answering the questions in a formal manner.

The focus group helped our group understand decisions that are necessary when scheduling is an issue. As outlined by our group, some decisions were nonchalant and based on what that particular individual was feeling on the day in question. Whereas others, were more complex and premeditated as there were more variables involved. Some of these variables include their morning routine, whether or not they have groceries bought, how many hours they will spend in college, and how much college work they have to do. The participants in our focus group outlined that they have college four days per-week, one lecture per day, and that each lecture is only three hours long, therefore, they have the time to buy food on campus or go home to prepare a meal. Additionally, some participants stated that they do not take time into consideration when it comes to food consumption. In regards to success, I believe that the focus group was unsuccessful in outlining that perhaps time is a critical issue of consideration when it comes to food consumption. It unveiled that price and nutrition were a huge factor when it came to the buying or bringing of lunch. It was crucial for us that the participants familiarised themselves with the setting, hence allowing them to open up about their consumption. However, this meant that it was difficult to keep the conversation focused on the concept of time. As a result, we found that time was not the main culprit in students decision making, but rather price and nutrition. Should my group be given the opportunity to conduct a focus group again, we would try and be more engaging and have a more interactive session through using more picture aids. We would try integrate different methods, such as getting the participants to interact and engage with the picture aids in more ways than just commenting on what they see. Additionally, as the participants of the group guided the conversation, they unintentionally answered some of our premeditated questions which as a result allowed us to ask impromptu questions. Therefore, through using the visual aids, an interactive game and, moderating the questions the focus group would stay on the topic, should we re-do our approach.

We observed some interesting caveats through conducting the focus group. Firstly, I found that as the moderator, standing up and lecturing to the focus group was not the right approach. In order to make the group dynamic more comfortable and change the atmosphere to one of casual conversation, I integrated myself into the group and sat with them. According to Farnsworth and Boon, this is done so to allow the researcher to play the, “role of ‘facilitator’ or ‘moderator’; that is, facilitator/moderator of group discussion between participants, not between her/himself and the participants”. Additionally, the difference in understanding of the words ‘snack’ and ‘meal’ were notable. The participants’ initial understanding of the word ‘snack’ was a cold, small food item, that you could consume on the go. However, when we produced the visual aid, they modified their understandings to include something small but also hot, such as a hot chicken fillet roll. It was interesting to witness first hand Bristol and Fern’s ideology that, “group discussion has been found to lead to attitude and preference shifts resulting from the exchange of persuasive information be- tween group members”. These characteristics represent two of many that as a group we found particularly interesting.

To conclude, it was obvious that the focus group was effective in its efforts to refine and enhance our research objective, but our assumed thesis surrounding the importance of time to be false. It outlined that there was not a huge focus on time, but price and nutritional value. We found that there was a deviation between our intended direction and overall image of the theme than to that preferred of the participants. The data we harvested from our focus group and the data we predicted to harvest were completely different. Therefore, our intended theme and the questions the focus group discussed were different. Thus making this one of the core reasons, our research topic has changed from scheduling constraints to the price and nutritional value of food.