Focus Group

The most obvious way that focus group can assist in a survey is to provide evidence of how the respondents typically talk about the topic in question, and to ensure that the researcher has a picture of participants’ thinking as completely as possible (Morgan, 1988). In the context of this CV survey, focus group was held before the telephone survey so that a more in-depth insight about people’s perception/

cognition of public service broadcasting in Taiwan can be obtained, and a reasonable price level for valid bidding can thus be designed as well.

Participants were selected on a socio-economical basis: those who aged between 25-50, and those who are responsible for their household budget allocation were chosen. Participants were also selected on particular characteristics such as gender, levels of education and their number of child in order to facilitate interaction (see Table 4). Nine participants were recruited and the focus group was held on December 4 in Research Center for Survey Research, Academia Sinica.

Table 4: Characteristics of the participants in focus group

Gender Age Level of Education Marriage/ Child Participant A F 53 Senior vocational school Married/ 3

Participant B M 25 University Married/ 1

Participant C F 34 Senior vocational school Married/ 1 Participant D M 44 Senior high school Married/ 2 Participant E F 49 Vocational college Married/ 1

Participant F M 46 Junior high school Married/ 2

Participant G F 58 Junior college Married/ 0

Participant H M 25 College Single/ 0

Participant I F 39 Senior high school Married/ 2

3.1.1 Execution Process and Results

The participants are designated to execute five evaluation tasks after the warm-up asking their TV viewing habits. The tasks are: (1) WTP for use value, (2) WTP for nonuse value, (3) WTP for an ideal PSB, (4) WTP after they learned the current funding level, and (5) value estimation considering the monthly charge of cable service (600 NTD) as a reference point. At the beginning of the session,

respondents were given an answer sheet to respond their willingness to pay for PTS in terms of their use value and nonuse value. They are also required to complete a short questionnaire which is designed to evaluate their knowledge toward the current public service broadcasting in Taiwan. The hypothetical scenario dealing with the use value of PTS is framed as follow:

PTS is now funded largely by government grant so it can produce high quality programs regardless of the rating and without the intervention of political force. Imagine that now the government would no longer provide the fund to PTS, and PTS cannot but cut down the production cost, give up the production of high quality programs, and instead pursuit the maximum audience to gain the advertising revenue, just like any other commercial channels do.

Considering the benefit that PTS brings to your family, what’s the maximum amount of money that your household would be willing to pay every year to maintain the operation of public service broadcasting?

While the nonuse value scenario is framed:

PTS has a mandate to promote the public welfare and thus provide some programs for the interest of the minorities (the deaf people and the elderly).

Imagine that now the government would no longer provide the fund to PTS, and PTS cannot but cut down the production cost, sacrifice the interest of the minorities, and instead pursuit the maximum audience to gain the advertising revenue, just like any other commercial channels do. Considering the benefit that PTS bring to the society as a whole, what’s the maximum amount of

money that your household would be willing to pay every year to maintain the operation of public service broadcasting?

Instead of declaring their WTP in the group that might lead to a false response, participants are required to write down the amount of their WTP on the answer sheet.

On average, the price for nonuse value is higher that for use value.

Table 5: WTP for use value and nonuse value

Participant A B C D E F G H I

Use value ($) 2400 300 200 100 1500 500 0 1000 500 Nonuse value ($) 3600 1000 200 1000 1500 1200 1000 1200 1000

The participants are then asked to describe freely in their own words what is the raison d’être of public service broadcasting in the society? What is an “ideal public service broadcasting” should be since it is entrusted with the privileges in terms of public fund? And what’s your maximum amount of WTP to obtain the ideal PSB?

This discussion shows that the imagination of the “ideal PSB” is quite limited.

Most of the participants mentioned that PSB should provide educational/ cultural/

aesthetic programs and unbiased/in time news. In other words, the discussion is largely restricted in the level program provision; seldom do the participants talked

about the public service functions irrelevant of the content of the programs (such as universal access and devoting to digital transfer, etc.). Generally speaking, all the participants agreed that there is still room for improvement for current PTS, and they are willing to pay a little bit more (from 1000 to 3000) to maintain the ideal PSB.

The participant are given the current funding facts and asked to reevaluate their WTP. The result shows the revealed WTP reduced after they learned the current funding level. All the participants are willing to pay more than the current 150 NTD, but the average amount of WTP does decreased compared with their first bid.

Participant E said that she is startled when she knows the funding fact which is “much lower than expected”.

Finally, the participants are asked to judge the value that PTS worth when it is compared with the all the available channels within 600 NTD they pay for the cable operator every month. This method of elicitation is unusual in a typical CV research, but seems to be an alternative for value judgment. The price ranges from 10 to 100 indicating that the participants hold positive value toward PTS. But the results must be interpreted with caution for this kind of value judgment does not involve any budget considerations. After this evaluation, the participants are thanked, acknowledged and dismissed.

3.1.2 A Brief Summary for the Focus Group

The discussion in the focus group provides some ideas for the further research.

First of all, the nonuse value is approved among the participants because of the significant differences between the prices for use and nonuse value. Second, the participants’ limited understanding and poor imagination for the function of PSB suggest that the hypothetical scenario must be framed with great caution and the

scenario should be described in a colloquial language. Third, this study decides not to mention the current funding level before the contingent valuation question because doing so may cause them to hide their real WTP. Finally, the price used in the telephone interview is determined because the amounts of WTP shown in the discussion fall within the range of 150~3000 NTD.