,
21 tweets,
4 min read
Read on Twitter
1 I've wanted to do a thread on qual interviews for a while, as I have been reading lots of interview transcripts, so here goes - this is NOT a how to do a good interview thread but a reflection on how I learnt to interview, and how I am continually learning about interviewing
2 For starters let's ditch the semi-structured/unstructured distinction as old news - all int encounters are structured in some way & the idea that unstructured ints are somehow better & get closer to the 'truth' of the participant is problematic. These terms can be useful for...
3 Thinking about how you prepare for the int but not the encounter itself. Several experiences led me to think of my role as interviewer as showing 'interest' rather than empathy. For my PhD I interviewed gay & lesbian parents and naively assumed they would treat me as an insider
4 I wasn't a parent but was queer - it soon became apparent that my status as 'researcher' & even 'expert' was just as if not more meaningful than our shared sexuality. Likewise, interviewing people whose views I personally disagreed with troubled the notion of interviewing as...
5 an empathic encounter. I distinctly remember (as a researcher on a project on het marriage) interviewing a conservative Christian who felt Harry Potter was anti-Christian while having a Harry Potter book in my bag! How can I respond 'authentically' to this? I make a blurry...
6 messy distinction between Victoria as person & Victoria as researcher - Vic the person is present obviously, but when I'm in interviewer mode I'm Vic the researcher (predominantly) & there to show interest & curiosity about someone's experiences & sense-making.
7 Being part of a team of interviewers on this marriage project helped me to reflect on my interviewing approach & unpick why my ints were often longer, richer & contained more intimate disclosures from ps than the ints conducted by other members of the team. My interviews were..
8 Messy! All over the place, int guide abandoned, all the relevant topics covered but my ints were shaped by the ps evolving narrative & not the guide. I think this is what Rubin & Rubin mean by qual ints being 'on target while hanging loose'. Work hard on your guide - not to...
9 get it perfect so you can read the questions off it in the int, but to think & reflect about what you want to know, the potential challenges in the int, & how to navigate these... The guide is an aide memoir in the int itself & you follow the participant - listening for...
10 things that are analytically interesting & prompting & probing for depth & detail. Much of the int encounter will be spontaneous & unplanned, but you'll probably find your participant will address most of your Qs without you having to ask them. This is the magic of a well...
11 prepared for interview. But you can get the unexpected too & open up whole new avenues of enquiry. The other thing that struck me when I compared my style to the other team members was how I showed the p I was listening & encouraged them to go on. One transcriber described me
12 As a 'mooing cow'! I wasn't offended :) What they captured was that I used lots of 'guggles' (mmhms & ah-has) whereas the other ints would often say 'yes, thank you' & moved onto the next Q on the guide. My 'moos' seemed to open things up rather than close things down...
13 Along with allowing silences to develop, rather than rush on - this seemed to be one of the reasons why my ints were richer & longer. I don't think you need to be an extrovert to be a good interviewer, I'm very shy & a textbook introvert - the structured of an int is very...
14 reassuring for me, & even though I encourage diversity & creativity in method choices, I love interviewing. The key I think is to develop your own approach, one that feels comfortable for you (while holding in mind all the great guidance out there on designing questions etc.)
15 A final reflection for practitioners out there. A therapist colleague asked me to read an int they'd conducted because they felt it went badly but couldn't figure out why. What struck me was that they continually reflected back to the p which gave the int a staccato rhythm
16 & interrupted the flow of the p. What she ended up was lots of 'yeahs' from the p in response but not more depth and detail. So I'm not sure reflecting back is a useful tool for opening up int encounters. Therapists are great listeners but therapy & research ints are different
17 The other thing I've noticed is that my therapy students have a v sensitive distress/difficulty sensor & back off at the slightest hint of potential difficulty whereas my instinct as a researcher is to lean in & gently probe (while respecting the ps limits of course)
18 Something I often hear from students is that they don't want to prompt ps to talk about a partic issue - 'if it's salient they will bring it up'. This I think overlooks many people's desire to be a 'good participant' & talk about what they assume we want to hear about. Our Qs
19 provide implicit cues. So I've learnt to ask about things I'm interested in - if they are salient 4 ps they will usually have a lot to say. Things we might have missed if we hadn't asked about! But in general if you're not saying much it's probably a good sign!
20 When I have done practice ints with students the one thing they always comment on is how little I say. It often feels like I'm saying a lot but having read & heard lots of ints by different people over the years I know I'm not. The dialogue in my head provides lots of noise...
21 "Ooh must ask about that". "She's a bit guarded better move on"... An interviewer is like a fast moving duck - gliding serenely on the surface, paddling furiously underneath! 'Double listening' - listening for sense and listening analytically for points of interest.
