IFG Moderation Sample Clauses

IFG Moderation. I was the lead moderator for the three focus groups. The role of the moderator is to guide the IFG conversation while ensuring that participants can speak freely (▇▇▇▇▇-▇▇▇▇▇ & ▇▇▇▇▇, 2007). ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇, my academic advisor, was also in attendance. ▇▇. ▇▇▇▇▇’▇ role was to take note of comments and themes emerging from the session. I began each session by welcoming participants. I also reminded participants about the recording of the call. In addition, I informed participants about the transcription service add-on feature (Otter a.i.). Next, I invited participants to introduce themselves by stating their names and geographic location. I then provided a brief overview of the study and thanked participants for returning the signed consent agreement. I also reminded participants about their voluntary participation, letting them know they could withdraw from the study anytime. I asked for a verbal acknowledgment to confirm their understanding. I stated that I might use quotes to support the data; however, I would remove any identifiable details to maintain their confidentiality. I finished the introduction by asking each person to consent to maintain the confidentiality of their fellow participants. I called attention to the data excerpts included in their email invitation. I explained that the excerpts were from AI practitioners participating in my research. I paused to allow everyone a moment to read the excerpts projected on the Zoom screen. I explained the intention of using the excerpts as prompts and that we may or may not discuss all six excerpts. Once everyone had indicated they were ready to begin the discussion, I invited them to offer their reflections about any tensions they noticed and their thoughts about how the data compares or contrasts to their experiences navigating tensions in AI. I informed the group that anyone could start the conversation focusing on any excerpt, meaning proceeding linearly from excerpt one to excerpt two was unnecessary. I emphasized the intention to have a free-flowing conversation that allowed everyone to speak while honoring one voice at a time. In the first two IFGs, which included five members each, we noticed that participants initially wanted to know more about the conditions leading up to the tension. We encouraged them to focus on whether the excerpts presented were realistic and if they had experienced similar situations in their AI practice. In the first and second sessions, two people stated they had not ...