MARYWOOD UNIVERSITY/ AASTMT

MARYWOOD UNIVERSITY/ AASTMT. FALL 2023 SLAS 6008 Qualitative Research PhD Program Summer II 2023.

The what and why of in-depth interviewing. In-depth interviewing is the most common qualitative research method, considering that it is a powerful way to gather data. This video gives a brief definition of the in-depth interview and reviews its advantages and limitations. The question of when to use in-depth interviews is then discussed. The different kinds of in-depth interviews are summarized..

What is an in-depth interview? The strengths of in-depth interviews. The limitations of in-depth interviews. When to use in-depth interviews. The different approaches to interviews. Increasing reflexivity of the interview in the contemporary period..

A conversation between two people, one of whom represents the interviewer, while the second represents the interviewee, discussing a topic of mutual interest. During this the interviewer asks questions and follows up on the interviewee in an attempt to extract as much information as possible, to produce what is known as "knowledge of the interview". In the interview, it is required that the interviewee has extensive experience in the subject of discussion. The interview should also take place in a comfortable, open, and honest atmosphere, in addition to flexible and free interaction. The interview should be kept as discreet as possible in order to notify the person of the importance of the interview and to give him the greatest opportunity to pass on as much information as possible. The length of the interview depends mainly on a set of factors, including the depth of the interviewee's answers, the topic, and the skill of the interviewer. The duration of the interview should not exceed sixty minutes. Although the interview should ideally be conducted face to face, it can be conducted over the phone, or any other application, allowing the interviewer to expand the geographical scope of the interview..

In-depth interviewing is a highly effective method for obtaining data for social research. The interview gives the researcher access to interviewees, thoughts, reflections, motives, experiences, memories, understandings, interpretations, and perceptions of the topic under consideration. It gives the researcher the opportunity to establish why people construct the world in particular ways and think the way they do. Through in-depth interviews the researcher is able to obtain an understanding of the social reality under consideration and, depending on the circumstances, collect rich data fairly rapidly. It is an extremely versatile method and can be used to study an almost limitless range of topics and research questions. Interviews elicit powerful perceptions that could not have been obtained in any other way. The material generated through in-depth interviewing can make an impact on public perceptions. As some researchers assured, interviewing people ‘can challenge long-held assumptions and help recast ineffective public policies..

The limitations of in-depth interviews.. Like any research method, in-depth interviews do have limitations. An important limitation is that the interviewee has the ability to construct a world the veracity of which is usually difficult to check, especially, in the light of questionnaire surveys are not immune to this phenomenon. Another limitation is that data obtained from interviews cannot be generalized to the population. Although interview data can suggest a definite pattern, you always need to hedge its generalizability. Interviewing is potentially a time-consuming and expensive method. Accessing interviewees, in some cases, may be difficult and involve much effort. The transcribing of interviews can be arduous if you do it yourself and, if you pay a professional, it can be costly..

When to use in-depth interviews.. Although it is difficult to obtain specific guidelines about when in-depth interviews are appropriate, in-depth interviews play an important role in many cases as follows : Cases of social research, especially when the research includes identifying how individuals view their situation and how their experiences were regarding the subject of research under study. The in-depth interview allows entry into the "everyday world" of the interviewee. Sensitive topics, such as examining the experience of racism and how people deal with it, as an in-depth interview provides the opportunity to establish a rapport with the interviewee before exploring potentially personal and challenging material. On the other hand, there are some cases in which in-depth interviews should not be used. If the research question involves trying to capture what the population thinks about a particular issue, a questionnaire is a more appropriate method than an in-depth interview. Since the questionnaire surveys if the sample is adequate and randomly selected, the results can be generalized to the population. Surveys can also measure how respondents feel about certain issues, but the ability of surveys to explain why respondents feel the way they do is limited. The importance of taking into account that the use of data of different types helps to determine the explanations of phenomena and provides complementary information that illuminates the various aspects, and therefore the survey questionnaire can be followed by in-depth interviews or vice versa. Also, a questionnaire survey can generate key demographic data, collect a large amount of data that can be generalized to the population, and allow us to understand the situation while in-depth interviews allow the researcher to investigate beyond the superficial findings of the survey..

The different approaches to interviews.. Interviews can take different forms. They may be precisely structured with set questions, semi-structured or unstructured. Although the different types of interviews are presented as “pure” categories, there is often an overlap.

The structured interview is closely aligned with the survey method. Structured interviews have set questions and the interviewer is expected to stick to the questions set and the order of questions. There is no expectation that the interviewer probes the answers given or digresses from the set questions. Rather, the emphasis is on minimizing interviewer effects by training interviewers to ask questions in a standardized fashion and limiting their non-verbal responses. The central premise is that interviews must be standardized as much as possible so as to eliminate interviewer variation and error. In the structured interview, questions are generally closed rather than open-ended. In other words, interviewees are presented with a range of predetermined possible answers to questions set..

During in-depth semi-structured interviews, the interviewer covers topics related to specific questions but there is plenty of room for digression. The interviewer is expected to cover all the key topics in the interview guide and intervene when appropriate. The semi-structured interview also gives the interviewer the space to seek clarity as to what the interviewee actually means and why they gave a particular answer. There is thus scope for a detailed discussion. Semi-structured in-depth interviews can be repeated so as to build up the rapport between the interviewer and interviewee and enhance the depth and detail of the answers ..

In unstructured interviews or open interviews there is not necessarily a pregiven list of topics and interviewees are encouraged to answer at length. The questions asked to give the interviewee the opportunity to give detailed answers and explanations and to set the agenda for the interview. In unstructured interactive interviews, participants retain considerable control over the process. The unstructured interview is often accompanied by observation, and questions arise in context..

With narrative interviews, there is an endeavour to get interviewees to tell their stories about a particular event or issue as narrative or a story. There is a good deal of overlap with life histories, as interviewees will be asked to organize their presentation temporally. There is minimal interruption by the interviewers when the interviewee tells their story and selects what they see as important. Often narrative interviews have a significant historical component, comprising an interviewee reflecting back on their life to explain an event and its consequences. Holloway and Jefferson contend that the narrative interview is more powerful than the semi-structured interview, as it gives the interviewee the chance to ‘free associate’. and thereby make connections that they would not have thought about or been prepared to reveal if the researcher was using the standard semi-structured interview method. They argue that when interviewing people about painful experiences a common phenomenon is the ‘defended subject.The defended subject or interviewee is reluctant to share painful experiences with an interviewer when the standard question-answer interview mode is used. Rather they will attempt to manage these painful experiences by giving basic and vague answers..

The life history interview gives the interviewee the space to tell their life story and key events are focused on. It gives the interviewer the capacity to assess why the interviewee is in a particular situation. Usually, the life history interview will be guided to some extent by the interviewer. It does, therefore, overlap with the semi-structured interview. However, the telling of their life story and what they focus on is left to the interviewee. The life history interview requires a good deal of trust between the interviewer and the interviewee as the latter is expected to give a comprehensive and honest account of their lives and some of the events discussed could induce painful memories..

The argument that the in-depth interview necessarily accurately captures the interviewee’s reality has been subjected to much scrutiny. There is increasing acceptance that cognizance needs to be taken of the interviewer–interviewee relationship and the way it can impact the interaction and the answers of the interviewee. Invariably the interaction will be influenced by contextual factors such as the age, ethnicity, gender, and class of the interviewer and at times, the setting. What is required is that the interviewer recognizes the potential influence of these factors and endeavors to ensure that bias is minimized..