Peer Support as a Direct Benefit of Focus Group Research: Findings from a Secondary Analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/htwjfz93Keywords:
focus group;, peer support;, mental health;, psychiatric survivors; researchAbstract
Peer support among individuals living with mental illness can occur in formal or informal settings and result in the exchange of knowledge and acceptance. The purpose of this study is to explore peer support dynamics that spontaneously emerged within focus groups with psychiatric survivors. Thirty-four psychiatric survivors participated in focus groups as part of a mixed method research project examining poverty and mental health. A secondary supplementary analysis of the focus group data was conducted to examine instances of peer support that emerged among participants. Participants engaged in peer support in a number of ways, including the exchange of practical information, evaluation of information and services, provision of empathy and affirmation, and development of friendships. Participants noted the value of gaining information from and supporting one another. The results demonstrate that psychiatric survivors can experience personal benefits through participation in research, including the development of informal peer support relationships.
Downloads
References
Asbury, J. (1995). Overview of focus group research. Qualitative Health Research, 5(4), 414-420.
Barbour, R. (2007). Doing focus groups: Ethics and engagement. Sage Research Methods, DOI 10.4135/9781849208956.
Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, and Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (2010). Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans. Retrieved from http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/pdf/eng/tcps2/TCPS_2_FINAL_Web.pdf.
Faulkner, A. & Basset, T. (2012). A helping hand: Taking peer support to the 21st century. Mental Health and Social Inclusion, 16(1), 41-47.
Forchuk, C., Martin, M. L., Chan, L. & Jensen, E. (2005). Therapeutic relationships: From psychiatric hospital to community. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 12(5), 556-564.
Forchuk, C., Nelson, G. & Hall, G. B. (2006). “It’s important to be proud of the place you live”: Housing problems and preferences of psychiatric survivors. Perspectives in Psychiatric Care, 42(1), 42-52.
Forchuk, C., Berman, H., Coatsworth-Puspoky, R., Cohen, B., Edwards, B., Hoch, J., Lahey, P., Montgomery, P., Mulrooney, L. A., Perry, S., Rudnick, A., Schofield, R., Speechley, M. & Ward-Griffin, C. (2010-2012). Poverty and mental health: Issues, challenges and solutions. Ontario Mental Health Foundation.
Heaton, J. (2004). Reworking qualitative data. London, United Kingdom, Sage.
Hsieh, H. F. & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277-1288.
Ivanoff, S. D. & Hultberg, J. (2006). Understanding the multiple realities of everyday life: Basic Assumptions in focus- group methodology. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 13(2), 125-132.
Kitzinger, J. (1994). The methodology of focus group interviews: The importance of interactions between research participants. Sociology of Health and Illness, 16(1), 103-121.
Kondracki, N. L. & Wellman, N. S. (2002). Content analysis: Review of methods and their applications in nutrition education. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 34(4), 224-230.
Koppelman, N. F. & Bourjolly, J. N. (2001). Conducting focus groups with women with severe psychiatric disabilities: A methodological overview. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 25(2), 142-151.
Krueger, R. A. (1994). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research, 2nd edition. London, United Kingdom: Sage.
Mead, S., Hilton, D. & Curtis, L. (2001). Peer support: A theoretical perspective. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 25(2), 134-141.
Mental Health Commission of Canada (2013). Guidelines for the Practice and Training of Peer Support. Retrieved from http://www.mentalhealthcommission.ca.
Owen, S. (2001). The practical, methodological and ethical dilemmas of conducting focus groups with vulnerable clients.
Journal of Advanced Nursing, 36(5), 652-658.
Pallaveshi, L., Balachandra, K., Subramanian, P. & Rudnick, A. (2013). Peer-led and professional-led group interventions for people with co-occurring disorders: A qualitative study. Community Mental Health Journal, 50(4), 388-394.
Solomon, P. (2004). Peer support/peer provided services: Underlying processes, benefits, and critical ingredients.
Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 27(4), 392-401.
Thorne, S. (1998). Pearls, pith and provocation: Ethical and representational issues in qualitative secondary analysis.
Qualitative Health Research, 8(4), 547-555.
Webb, C. & Kevern, J. (2001). Focus groups as a research method: A critique of some aspects of their use in nursing research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 33(6), 798-805.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
