Editor's note: Lisa Kindig is vice president of The Qualitative Institute at Strategic Marketing Corporation, a Bala Cynwyd, Pa., research firm. She is also a member of the QRCA.

For some qualitative market research studies, using face-to-face and online methods in tandem can leverage the benefits and mitigate the drawbacks of both. To design efficient and effective projects, market research buyers and sellers must partner and consider all available methods for understanding the experiences, opinions, and motivators of targeted market segments.

At present, only a handful of studies compare online and traditional qualitative techniques. Since little formal research exists, Strategic Marketing Corporation (SMC) and Itracks International, Inc. conducted a study to compare face-to-face focus groups with both asynchronous (bulletin board) and synchronous (chat-style) online groups. The findings from this study match SMC's anecdotal experiences with face-to-face and online qualitative research.

Face-to-face research offers some distinct advantages over online methods. First, the nature of face-to-face discussion provides an effective forum for respondents who best communicate through speaking, listening and reacting to others, or body language. Traditional groups allow for the presentation of tactile, three-dimensional concepts, and support the use of hands-on projective techniques. In addition, while still permitting interactivity through demo CDs and live Web connections in the focus group room, traditional groups limit the potential for technology failure.

Also, respondent show rates are higher for face-to-face research: 50 percent higher than asynchronous online groups, and 100 percent higher than synchronous online groups. Traditional qualitative research also offers more efficient use of sample; recruiting for online groups requires five to 10 times as many pieces of usable sample as re...