Interviewing
Disclosure
the aim of an interview is to get people to open up
Idiographic
study of facts or processes
particular biographic, historical case study
small number appropriate
qualitative analysis
nomothetic
study of general laws
General tendencies of populations
Large numbers required
quantitative analysis
Design issues
schedule wording
Structured
Exactly the same for everyone
same wording
semi-structured
same set of themes and basic items for everyone
allow for follow up questions and prompts
more flexible
unstructured
General themes and issues you want to discuss
less comparable across cases
Semi-structured
Schedule wording
Introduction
set the agenda
Tell them length
discuss confidentiality
Principles
Do
Funnelling - from general to specific
helps gathering detail, checking possible alternate responses
From open to closed
prompts
can you say more about, what do you mean?
Repeat back to them (almost Rogerian style)
feign ignorance
I don't know much about x, can you tell me?
don't
introduce assumptions
"don't you think that..."
Complex words or jargon
double negatives
Pilot study
Try schedule out on one or two people before using
Rapport
An informal conversation-like ambience to enhance disclosure
informal turn taking
But not
Agenda
roles of interviewer and interviewee
relaxed, atmosphere of openness, gain trust (particularly about sensitive, confidential topics)
Conduct
give space (physical and conversational)
if constrained time, then need to keep loose control
Recording issues & Transcription & coding
Recording
Take notes in session
Notes from memory
Recording devices and microphones
video (captures non-verbal communication)
transcription
1 hour interview = 6 hours transcription (more if granular)
Granularity
include duration of pauses
include 'erm' or 'um'
word stressing e.g. no I don't
NVC
Meanings, the gist, or verbatim (recommended verbatim)
Verbatim includes 'erm' and pauses.
Pauses will indicate something
'correct' punctuation will give false impression
Coding
selective coding - identify relevant material
complete coding - line by line
Research question determines what you code
identify references to research question themes/topics
vary how much in a coded chunk
too small chunk, miss detail meaning
Analysis issues
method of analysis
top down
you already know what you're interested in and look for
bottom up (thematic analysis)
note features without judgement
stay close to 'data' (language, concepts, categories of text)
Something in between
quantitative analysis
if you have 100 interviewees, then chi square etc. possible
count coded chunks (e.g. operationalise 'selfishness' and 'help' get frequency)
Detail lost
Consider time, effort, reliability
e.g. 5 interviewees, no choice for stats
Ambivalent attitudes would be lost
if someone says both yes and no in an answer, frequency loses all of this.
Interviews
theoretical orientation
explore a topic
give person a voice (humanistic, idiographic perspective)
interest in pps own language, concepts and categories
interest in subjective experience
Interviews high in validity (authenticity)
flexibility to find out and probe what is meant
questionnaires high in reliability
how many people... x but not what x means
Criticism
reliance on self-report
true of questionnaires
may be interested in feelings/perceptions in own right
some topics `(e.g. mass emergencies) no observational data of behaviour
Unstandardised makes comparison difficult
if you need to see how people respond to same question, this is possible
perhaps use questionnaire
Time
analysis, transcription, coding... takes time
Keep few participants
Interviewer effects
gender, power, appearance of interviewer
responses of interviewer (actions)
Some answers inhibited, some encouraged
match interviewer and interviewee
train interviewers in skills
responses taken at face value 'window into mind"
social interaction, not neutral medium
what said in interview might be different
keep context of interviewer
Advantages in other designs
focus groups - adds dynamics, interactions = data, more difficult to structre
ethnography (participant observation)
Piloting for questionnaires