Interviewing in qualitative research Lecture 5

Measure not all the features of an object, inevitably coarsen

a measurement & measured objects.
Qualitative methods are aimed at obtaining a maximum information about a small number of objects
Maximum of accuracy
Maximum of characteristics in question.
Qualitative methods have focus on
the most detailed description of behavior & attitudes of social groups to discover unobserved arguments& meanings (method of focus groups, ethnomethodology)
description of unique small groups (politicians, businessmen, artists, doctors, etc.).

research
theories and concepts emerge from the data
Interpretivist epistemology
Constructionist ontology
Emphasis on

words/text rather than numbers
Diversity of approaches

rather an approach to generating theory from data

Data collection

and analysis are done hand-in-hand, with constant checking back and forth

Useful in producing concepts

in the field
Qualitative interviewing
in-depth, semi- or un-structured
Focus groups
Discourse / conversation

analysis (analysis of respondents’ utterance recorded for multiple playback. Interpretation of nonverbal details (silence, repetitions, gestures, facial expressions, etc.))
Documentary analysis

the study of the overall picture of the event or

case in the unity of its components, the interaction of objective and subjective meanings.
Qualitative research also allows us to study new phenomena or processes that are not widespread, especially in the context of dramatic social changes in the conduct, organization and analysis of data and, most importantly, - a different understanding and perception of social reality

definitive concepts in qualitative research:
because the indicators ‘fix’ the concept
because

what phenomena have in common becomes more important than their variety

…and in favour of sensitizing concepts:
giving a general sense of reference and guidance
allowing discovery of varied forms of phenomena
capable of being gradually narrowed down

change of meaning
quality, rigour and wider potential
external reliability (replication)
internal reliability

(inter-observer consistency)
internal validity (good fit between data and theory)
external validity (generalization)

internal validity)
Dependability (a parallel for reliability)
Transferability (a parallel for external

validity)
Confirmability (a parallel for objectivity)

Authenticity
Ontological (better understanding of the social situation)
Educative (better appreciation of others’ perspectives)
Catalytic (impetus for change)
Tactical (empowerment of participants)
Does the research fairly represent different viewpoints?

problems within an organization
Designed to assist in their solution

Involving an

iterative process of problem identification, planning, action, and evaluation

Researcher plays an active role throughout

More common in business and management research than in other fields

must be plausible
But cannot have direct access to social worlds
Assess

credibility of researcher’s truth claims
Adequacy of evidence as ‘true representation’
‘Relevance’ criterion
Contribution the study makes to the field

If in the case of quantitative methods, this procedure is

desirable, in the case of qualitative-mandatory.
Can be implemented by using different methods or different questions within the same interview. It may be useful to analyze the responses of respondents that have been confirmed by triangulation and those that have been disproved by it.
Validation – when a researcher provides results to participants of a study. Allows to establish more trustful and direct relationship. On the other hand, it can cause undesirable rejection of respondents from researchers, or censorship of the first.

of those studied
Taking the role of the other
Understanding the meanings

people attribute to their world
Unexpected findings

Description and emphasis on context
Detailed account of the social setting
‘Thick descriptions’ of what is going on

patterns of events unfold over time
Social worlds characterized by change

and flux
Flexibility and limited structure
No ‘prior contamination’ by rigid schedules
Sensitizing concepts
Concepts and theory grounded in the data

to replicate
Unstructured format

Problems of generalization
Samples not ‘representative’ of all cases

Lack

of transparency
Often unclear what researcher actually did

conventions:

Focused on a specific research problem (rather than sensitizing concepts

/ grounded theory)

More structured data collection (codified conversation analysis)

More structured data analysis (CAQDAS)

Greater transparency

concern with answering research questions
The concern with relating data analysis

to the research literature
The concern with variation
The significance of frequency as a springboard for analysis
The control of deliberate distortion
The importance of transparency
The question of error
The appropriateness of research methods to questions

participant’s viewpoint,
encourage ‘rambling’ off the topic,
are more flexible,
seek rich, detailed

answers,
aim to understand rather than to generalize.

free response
Conversational style

Semi-structured interview
List of specific topics to cover (interview

guide)
Flexible question order and phrasing

flow and create impromptu questions as the interview progresses. Although

there is no preset list of questions, an informal interview, as with every type of data collection, requires preparation and focus to be effective).
Guided (follows an outline of questions, but not all of the prescribed probes, transitions, and follow - ups are established prior to the interview. The interviewer is given freedom to deviate from the interview questions as needed to pursue serendipitous findings and fruitful directions).
Structured (follows a set of prescribed questions. The structured interview is written with probes, transitions, and follow - up questions. Because the questions in a structured interview are the same for each and every interview, the data from one interview to another are comparable. It is therefore more likely that themes and patterns that emerge across a number of respondents may be generalizable to others. More time efficient, the data are also easier to synthesize and analyze).

topics.
Focus on research questions: ‘what do I need to know

about?’
Use comprehensible and relevant language.
Avoid leading questions.
Record ‘facesheet’ information (name, age, gender, position etc.).

world, so that you will be able to understand their

remarks.

Make sure you have a compelling answer to any questions they might have about their involvement.

Get a reliable tape recorder and microphone – and test it beforehand.

Try to arrange a quiet setting for the interview.

Learn how to be a ‘successful’ interviewer (Kvale, 1996).

of the interview.
Structuring: gives purpose for interview; rounds it

off.
3. Clear: asks simple, easy, short questions; no jargon.
4. Gentle: lets people finish; gives them time to think.
5. Sensitive: listens to what is said and how it is said.
6. Open: responds to what is important to interviewee.
7. Steering: knows what he or she wants to find out.
8. Critical: is prepared to challenge what is said.
9. Remembering: relates what is said to what has previously been said.
10. Interpreting: clarifies and extends meanings of interviewees’ statements.

interviewee talkative, cooperative, nervous, well-dressed/scruffy, etc.)?

Where did the interview take

place?

Did the interview open up new avenues of interest?

What was the setting like (busy/quiet, many/few other people in the vicinity, new/old buildings)?

information as demographics (e.g., age, marital status, education level, socioeconomic

status), pertinent personal history, factual questions. Demographic and factual questions (easy to answer, and beginning with this type of question can help to put the respondent at ease).
The second part of the interview should address the respondent ’ s experience with the group, culture, or program under study. In this part of the interview, description questions are used: “What is your job description? ” “You’ve just walked in the door of your office. Describe what you do first. What do you do next, and next?” “You said you prepare for the morning conference. How do you prepare for the conference meeting? ”
Sensory questions are a specific type of description question. Sensory questions ask respondents what they see, hear, smell, touch, and taste as part of the experience under study. The researcher must play the naïve observer in this part of the interview.

the interview should explore the respondent ’ s meanings, interpretations,

and associations in regard to the experiences described. To get at these underlying constructions of meaning, it is sometimes helpful to ask comparison questions.
To ascertain meanings, interpretations, and associations, it is also helpful to ask feeling questions ( “ How do you feel about . . .”), opinion questions (“What do you think or believe about . . . ”), and value questions (“To what extent is this good/moral or bad/immoral?”).
Seidman (1991) recommends using a three - interview format, with each interview dedicated to one of the three foci: background, experience, and meaning. This allows the researcher to use the background information to develop questions about the experience and to use the understanding of the experience to develop questions about the meanings and associations of key concepts.

you mean by that?”)
Probing (“Could you tell me more about…?)
Specifying

(“What happened next?”)
Direct (“Do you think that…?”)
Indirect (“What do most people think about…?”)
Structuring (“Let’s move on to…”)
Silence
Interpreting (“Do you mean that…?”)

should avoid “why?”
Open-ended questions require more than a dichotomous yes

- or - no or one - word response. A subtle change in wording elicits a more descriptive response, even the most reticent interviewee will find it difficult to give short answers to truly open - ended questions.

should avoid “why?” 2
Interview questions, like survey questions, should also

be single-issue formats.
Multiple-issue questions confound the respondent with thoughts of: What do you really want to know? Which question should I answer? I would answer each of those questions differently, what should I do?

should avoid “why?” 3
The final consideration when developing interview questions

is to avoid “why” questions. The “why” questions are difficult to answer: a person’s motivation for behavior or attitudes is complex and typically involves a multitude of reasons, some of which are conscious and some of which are unconscious.
One way to tap into motivations and justifications is to break them into smaller categories. To ascertain why teenagers smoke, you could break this issue down into parts: school satisfaction questions, family support questions, beliefs about the health effects of smoking, sex/gender role questions, and own - parent modeling questions. It is then possible to ask follow - up questions specific to each participant ’ s responses to compare the importance of these factors in their decision: “Which was more important to your decision to start smoking, tension at home or problems at school?”

other material can be used to stimulate discussion:
Vignettes
Documents
Photographs
Material objects
Physical world

(the ‘walking interview’)
These prompts can be researcher or participant driven.

and a closing. Each of these components serves important functions

for the interviewer - respondent relationship.
The set up informs the participant of the roles and expectations for the interviewer and interviewee. The purpose of the interview, the estimated length of the interview, and the type of questions to be explored should be previewed.
Affirmation and feedback are particularly important to build rapport . As the respondent reveals more personal information, the nonverbals of the interviewer must communicate interest, respect, appreciation, empathy, and acceptance. Head - nodding, a forward lean, and nonfluencies such as “ uh - huh ” are useful feedback techniques when used subtly and in moderation. Verbal feedback may, in certain situations, be appropriate, but should be used with caution.
The closing of the interview should bring the respondent back to the present environment. This means that you cannot leave a respondent in the depths of interpretation and disclosure. The skillful interviewer gradually decreases the intensity of the questions in the closing process. An open - ended closing question such as “ Is there anything else that you ’ d like to add? ” or “ Is there anything that I haven ’ t covered in the interview that you ’ d like to talk about? ” gives the respondent an opportunity to address, redirect, and/or correct the research agenda.

focus on listening and interpreting.
Corrects limitations of memory and intuitive

glosses (Heritage, 1984).
Detailed and accurate record of interviewee’s account.
Opens data to public scrutiny.

Good quality digital recorders are now widely available.

Transcriber or transcription software?

Selective transcription saves time.

is much cheaper and reduces travel time etc.
Useful for physically

dispersed samples.
Some evidence suggests little difference in the answers given via telephone and in-person (e.g. Sturgis and Hanrahan, 2004).

But there are also some drawbacks.
Some groups may have limited access to a telephone.
Telephone conversations are much more vulnerable to disruption, and termination.
Very difficult to observe body language and situational cues. Skype?
Issues of technology.

their entire life.
Reveals how they interpret, understand and define the

social world (Faraday & Plummer, 1979).
Shows how life events have unfolded.
Naturalistic, researched or reflexive (Plummer, 2001).

Oral history interview
Subject reflects on specific events in the past.

exchanges, direct messaging, forums.
Asynchronous/synchronous.
Delivery of questions/answers made one-at-a-time, small batches,

all-at-once?
Editing – issues of reliability.
‘Spamming’ – issues of validity.

Evidence currently suggests a nuanced picture when comparing with face-to-face interviews (e.g. Curasi, 2001).

through PCs, tablets, and smartphones. Similar to a telephone but

with live video.
Retains visual element of the face-to-face interview.
Flexible.
Useful for dispersed samples.
Savings in terms time and cost.
Participant convenience.
Fewer concerns around researcher safety.
Little evidence to suggest problems with rapport etc.

There are, however, particular issues of concern.
Accessibility.
Quality of connection.
Transcription (unlike personal online interviews).
Respondents may be affected by visual characteristics of interviewer.
Evidence to suggest respondents more likely to ‘no show’ than in face-to-face interviews.

eyes
Learning the native language
Taken for granted ideas more likely to

be revealed
Access to deviant or hidden activities
Sensitivity to context of action
Flexibility in encountering the unexpected
Naturalistic emphasis
Embodied nature of the experience

resistant to observation
Interviewees reflect on past events / life course
More

ethically defensible
Fewer reactive effects
Less intrusive
Longitudinal research (follow-up interviews)
Greater breadth of coverage
Specific focus

20. (Dropbox)
Vanderstoep S.W., Johnston D.D. Research Methods for Everyday life.

Blending qualitative and Quantitative approaches. Chapters 9 and 10. (Dropbox)
Lomand T.C. Social Science Research. A Cross Section of Journal Articles for Discussion and Evaluation. 7th edition. Chapters (Articles) 7, 8 and 29.

Home reading for the forthcoming seminar