All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Familiarity Doesn’t Breed Contempt: Polish Attitudes Toward European Integration in a Comparative Perspective
Unformatted Document Text:  questions have to start the dialogue, and participants should be guided in an ‘artificial’ conversation. In a focus group, the moderator - the person leading and ‘constraining’ the conversation - presents five different types of questions: (i) ‘opening’ questions, in order to let participants introduce themselves and establish ‘a sense of community’; (ii) ‘introductory’, to start the discussion; (iii) ‘transition’, moving toward the interest of the research; (iv) ‘key’, in order to understand behavior, and focus on the core of the research, and (v) ‘ending’, to close the discussion, while still highlighting the research topic (Morgan 1997). The focus groups presented in this analysis did not require ‘opening’ questions, as the participants already belonged to a community. In the first focus group, taken in Warsaw in student accommodation, the students lived together, and in the second focus group, in Zielona Góra, they attended the same class at the university of Zielona Góra. The samples were selected from just among students, as after accession they represented the average supportive category. If before joining the EU the percentage of students willing to join the EU was much higher than the percentage of farmers, and similar to the percentage of entrepreneurs, after accession students represented the average citizen, slightly less supportive than the Euroenthusiastic entrepreneurs, but still more supportive than farmers (UKIE, 2007, p. 106) and in line with the average Polish citizen. In addition, the selection profiled two important aspects when studying Poland, regions and religiosity. The focus groups were carried out in 2007, after three years of membership. In the first focus group, participants were chosen for belonging to a typical group, have already confirmed their religious attitude – to be Catholic/devout Catholic, and living in an accommodation run by a religious order. The composition of the first group produced further important results. Half of the participants were from Lubelskie, Warmíńsko-Mazurskie, and Podlaskie, which are, together with Podkarpacie and Swiętokrzyskie, the regions that received further provisions within the Financial Framework for 2006-2013 (Council 2005), as the poorest regions of the fifth enlargement. The second group was more homogeneous both by age and regional identity, all living in the western regions of Poland. The conversations opened with a general talk on the EU in order to introduce the topic, to find out how the EU had affected their lives, and if there had been changes before and after accession. In the first focus group, participants mainly spoke about opportunities and values, Poland was currently ‘part of a cultural union’. One of the students added the EU represented the ‘chance to know other cultures, but also to receive economic support’. Participants often repeated the word ‘chance’, and when ranking the way they referred to the EU, the EU was 16

Authors: Guerra, Simona.
first   previous   Page 16 of 29   next   last



background image
questions have to start the dialogue, and participants should be guided in an ‘artificial’
conversation.
In a focus group, the moderator - the person leading and ‘constraining’ the conversation -
presents five different types of questions: (i) ‘opening’ questions, in order to let participants
introduce themselves and establish ‘a sense of community’; (ii) ‘introductory’, to start the
discussion; (iii) ‘transition’, moving toward the interest of the research; (iv) ‘key’, in order to
understand behavior, and focus on the core of the research, and (v) ‘ending’, to close the
discussion, while still highlighting the research topic (Morgan 1997). The focus groups
presented in this analysis did not require ‘opening’ questions, as the participants already
belonged to a community. In the first focus group, taken in Warsaw in student
accommodation, the students lived together, and in the second focus group, in Zielona Góra,
they attended the same class at the university of Zielona Góra.
The samples were selected from just among students, as after accession they represented
the average supportive category. If before joining the EU the percentage of students willing
to join the EU was much higher than the percentage of farmers, and similar to the percentage
of entrepreneurs, after accession students represented the average citizen, slightly less
supportive than the Euroenthusiastic entrepreneurs, but still more supportive than farmers
(UKIE, 2007, p. 106) and in line with the average Polish citizen. In addition, the selection
profiled two important aspects when studying Poland, regions and religiosity.
The focus groups were carried out in 2007, after three years of membership. In the first
focus group, participants were chosen for belonging to a typical group, have already
confirmed their religious attitude – to be Catholic/devout Catholic, and living in an
accommodation run by a religious order. The composition of the first group produced further
important results. Half of the participants were from Lubelskie, Warmíńsko-Mazurskie, and
Podlaskie, which are, together with Podkarpacie and Swiętokrzyskie, the regions that received
further provisions within the Financial Framework for 2006-2013 (Council 2005), as the
poorest regions of the fifth enlargement. The second group was more homogeneous both by
age and regional identity, all living in the western regions of Poland.
The conversations opened with a general talk on the EU in order to introduce the topic, to
find out how the EU had affected their lives, and if there had been changes before and after
accession. In the first focus group, participants mainly spoke about opportunities and values,
Poland was currently ‘part of a cultural union’. One of the students added the EU represented
the ‘chance to know other cultures, but also to receive economic support’. Participants often
repeated the word ‘chance’, and when ranking the way they referred to the EU, the EU was
16


Convention
Need a solution for abstract management? All Academic can help! Contact us today to find out how our system can help your annual meeting.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 16 of 29   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.