Boston Fights Drugs
1. Would you have selected focus groups for your methodology? Why or why not?
I would have chosen to do the focus groups out of the three as the methodology for this research as the group did. With the one on one interviews the researchers had to find kids/adolescence that would actually talk to them, and be honest about their habits to a complete stranger. This problem would eliminate a majority of the kids, but for the ones that were left I think the research would show the same findings saying “I’m not a user” because kids would not want to tell on themselves to later possibly be in trouble. Also the interviews were very costly, and the respondents would be relatively low. The city wide surveys were a good option because they were nonbiased, but they took quite a bit of time to construct. Also the response rate was low for the surveys. This option may be the best if they were going for adult responses but not so much children. 2. Describe the team’s “model” for drug abuse (i.e. non-users, regular users, drug-dependent users). Is it appropriate? Nonusers- little exposure to drugs
Experimental users- familiar with drug names, availability, and characteristics. Also had the opportunity to try illicit drugs Regular users- developed a pattern for using
Drug-dependant users- live revolved around using one or several drugs I think it is appropriate to use this model because it segments the market into the different stages of familiarity of drugs. It also is a good base in which to compare users, and their habits. 3. Are there data in the exhibits to support the team’s conclusions on page 8 of the case? Yes the data in the exhibits is well represented by the team’s conclusions. The questions asked in the different precincts around Boston for the most part had similar findings. Each conclusion had at least three different responses in the exhibits to back them up. 4. Are there alternative conclusions that can be drawn from the same...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document