My co-authors and I have conducted several studies of virtual focus groups, and I have followed the larger literature of this topic. In general, the content of in-person and online focus groups is very similar, but the group dynamics are very different. Specifically, online groups lack the active interaction that occurs in face-to-face groups, and thus produce less depth and detail.

A large part of the problem is indeed due to lack of non-verbal engagement, because the online participants simply stare straight ahead into their own cameras, rather than paying attention to the person who is speaking. This isn't a problem with one-to-one interviews, which are essentially the same as video phone calls.

Another alternative is dyadic interviewing, where there are just two participants. Our research indicates that this works better in an online setting than equivalent interviews with four participants. In addition, with proper settings, it is possible to have the two participants talk directly to each other, which once again matches a standard video phone call.

It depends on contexts related to geographic location of participants. If you are conducting a local study with participants nearby then physical interviews by all means would be better/interactive. However if you are conducting interviews across countries and continents, then it will not be financially or logistically feasible to do them physically. Hence virtual interviews or focus groups will be the best option. I love that technology has now made it possible to conduct studies beyond geographical boundaries.

En mi experiencia como estudiante de Trabajo Social he podido analizar las ventajas y desventajas de las entrevistas y los grupos focales, tanto en formato presencial como virtual.

Las entrevistas y grupos focales presenciales suelen generar un ambiente más cercano y de mayor confianza, lo que facilita que los participantes se expresen con más profundidad. Además, la comunicación no verbal, como gestos y expresiones faciales, aporta información valiosa para la interpretación de los datos. Sin embargo, este tipo de encuentros pueden ser difíciles de organizar debido a la necesidad de coordinar horarios, disponer de un espacio adecuado y trasladarse al lugar de la reunión, lo que puede limitar la participación de algunas personas.

Por otro lado, las entrevistas y grupos focales virtuales han abierto nuevas posibilidades en la investigación, permitiendo que más personas participen sin importar la distancia. Esto es especialmente útil cuando se trabaja con poblaciones que tienen dificultades para movilizarse o con agendas muy ocupadas. No obstante, existen desafíos como problemas de conexión, falta de concentración en algunos participantes y la dificultad para captar el lenguaje corporal, lo que puede afectar la calidad de la interacción.

Para reducir estas limitaciones, en entrevistas virtuales es clave establecer un clima de confianza desde el inicio, explicar claramente el propósito del estudio y asegurarse de que los participantes tengan un espacio tranquilo para la conversación. En los grupos focales virtuales, es recomendable usar dinámicas que fomenten la participación, como dividir en grupos pequeños o utilizar herramientas interactivas.

En definitiva, la elección entre entrevistas presenciales o virtuales dependerá del tipo de investigación, los objetivos planteados y las características de la población con la que se trabaja. En muchos casos, combinar ambas metodologías puede ser una estrategia efectiva para obtener datos más completos y diversos.

In person

Dear Jose Antonio Hernandez Vera , You may be scammed in online qualitative studies. Read this experience!

I have been scammed in my qualitative research

"We have been scammed in our online qualitative study by some fraudulent participants who falsely claimed to be pharmacists or community health workers. These participants were interviewed before we discovered that they were not who they claimed to be.

In this commentary, we describe key indicators of potential imposters, such as the number of emails received in a short period of time, emails with similar content and address structure, participants having a keen interest in the reimbursement, camera switched off during the interview, and inconsistency in the participants’ responses.

We provide recommendations on how to prevent future fraud, such as promoting the study to a closed network or groups on social media, encouraging participants to provide sources that verify their identity, ensuring that the camera is switched on during the entire interview, discouraging the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to answer questions or generate content, unless when AI-based language tools are used to facilitate translation, understanding or communication, providing reimbursements with local vouchers rather than international ones, and where the participants are healthcare professionals, checking their registration number prior to the interview.

It is important for Human Research Ethics Committee members to consider genuine measures to assess participant authenticity and reduce the risk of fraudulent participation. Additionally, universities and research institutions should develop guidance to educate researchers in this area. Published protocols, guidelines and checklists for online qualitative studies, and participant information statements and consent forms should be adapted to prevent and address potential fraud. For example, the COREQ checklist should be updated so that researchers report the actions undertaken to prevent and detect fraud and their experiences and actions if there was fraud.

Fraud in online research impacts the integrity and quality of online research. Urgent actions are needed to raise awareness of this issue within the research community and prevent further occurrences of scams."

https://researchintegrityjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s41073-025-00179-7