Conducting a Good Interview in Qualitative Studies

The best research interviews I conduct, meaning, the ones that generate copious amounts of qualitative data relevant to my research question, seem like relaxed, free-flowing conversations. But this is simply an illusion that conceals the carefully planned, orchestrated, and controlled nature of the interview process. Here’s what goes on behind the scenes and what I take into consideration before, during, and after.?

Note: This article relates to scheduled, face-to-face, one-on-one interviews. Some of the content, however, may also be relevant to focus groups and spontaneous questioning in the field.

THE PURPOSE

Why you choose to use the interview method in your study and the types of data you hope to generate regarding your research question are important considerations when planning interviews. I seek all of the following and plan questions accordingly:

• statements in the participant’s voice;
• details and insights related to data collected by other methods, for example, observation and document analysis;
• clues on where to focus attention, when enacting such other methods;
• stories, illustrations, and examples;
• background and contextual information;
• the participant’s frameworks, perspectives, motivations, thoughts, feelings, instincts, biases, assumptions, and whatever else cannot be directly observed;
• explanations on inconsistencies between what the participant says and what is observed.

THE SETTING?

Ideally, the setting in which the interview(s) will take place is chosen in collaboration with the participant. For participants, it should be easy to get to and psychologically and physically comfortable and safe. If it is difficult to get to, they may be reluctant to participate. If it is uncomfortable, they may need more time to relax or not relax at all. If it does not feel safe, they may be guarded in their answers or hesitate to fully engage with you.

The setting should also meet the researcher’s needs. These include a quiet space, with minimal or no distractions or interruptions, to enable a clean audio-recording and provide privacy regarding both the content under discussion and the interviewee’s participation in the study.

THE FORMAT

My interviews are usually between 45 minutes and two hours. With less than 45 minutes, it is difficult to explore ideas and thoughts, especially since it takes several minutes to settle into an interview. More than two hours is just exhausting, with a diminishing return on data. If you cannot arrange for at least 45 minutes, consider a written questionnaire, and encourage participants to take their time in offering reflective and thoughtful answers. If you require more than two hours, conduct a series of interviews. A series has added benefits, such as the opportunity to conduct preliminary analysis that informs subsequent interviews, time to revisit and probe an idea more deeply, and the ability to check for consistency over time.

I prefer a semi-structured interview format, which means, I do not lock in a sequence of questions to be asked in a particular order. This allows me to be open to and pursue unusual, unexpected, unfamiliar, and unanticipated ideas and themes, as they emerge. But it is a tricky balance to stay on track. So, I pre-plan a few re-direct statements for when the discussion strays beyond the scope of the research question. Some examples include:

• I’m interested in what you’re saying, but maybe we can go there another time.
• In the interest of time, perhaps I can ask you this question instead.
• How would you relate that to [this study]?

If you have a good rapport with the participant (see the section on ethics, below), they will understand and accommodate you, without taking offence.

Finally, I aim to have the participant talk as much as possible, since that is where the data lies. While my interviews may appear to be conversations, they are more like monologues than dialogues. I intentionally keep my voice to a bare minimum. (Unless I’m doing a narrative study where my voice is also data. But that’s for another time.)? Importantly, I actively engage in silent ways, with facial expressions and body language, such as maintaining eye contact, nodding, raising my eyebrows, leaning in, and smiling.

I do, nonetheless, begin every interview with a friendly welcome and end with a sincere thank you. This may seem trivial. So, I again refer you to the discussion on ethics, below, the importance of which I cannot overemphasize.

THE QUESTIONS

I pre-plan a set of core questions related to my research question(s). They are derived primarily from my reflections on the literature and from data previously collected. To generate thoughtful and reflective answers and explanations, the questions are open-ended and cannot be answered with “yes”, “no” or stock statements. I might ask, for example, How do you reconcile this policy on… with your professional orientation toward…? In my experience, 10 such questions, with follow ups, are plenty for a two-hour interview.

My first question, however, is much more low-key, in order to warm us up. It might be, What drew you to teaching? or How did you come to teach at this school? (I research teachers and classrooms). ?And my last question might be more hard-hitting (if things are going well) to encourage a final reflection or stance, for example, What is it about the school’s protocols and practices that you find challenging? I might also end with a question on how the participant feels about participating in this study and/or this interview. Such reflexive questions can help to interpret the data. For example, if the participant’s response is negative, the data may not be as balanced or candid as I would have hope.

Finally, for each of the core questions I prepare follow up questions that are more probing, prodding, and prompting. As suggested above, answers to these questions often provide the good stuff, the deeper and richer data that are difficult to generate using other methods. Such questions also help to stimulate participants who are less forthcoming.

Here are examples of the follow up questions I use:

• How do you know this?
• What makes you say that?
• How could things have been different?
• What happened next?
• Can you help me visualize how this might unfold?
• Can you walk me through your thinking process?
• What were you thinking/feeling at the time? Why?
• What assumptions are you making in this situation?
• What do you think others would say, if I could ask them? How do you know?
• How do you know when…?
• What effect do you think this has on…?
• Can you explain or describe this further?
• Can you give me an example or story that illustrates this?

NOTE-TAKING

Audio and video recording relieves me of continuous note taking, allowing me to fully engage with the participant. I highly recommend recording, if your participant agrees. But I still take supplemental field notes. These include observations about the participant’s body language, gestures, facial expressions, and posture. For example, Did they nod, roll their eyes, or wink, and when? Did they look uncomfortable or uneasy, and when? These notes may help to interpret comments made by the participant.

My notes also include changes to the interview protocol that are made on-the-fly, so I am able to remain accountable for the research process; newly thought of follow up questions or probes, so I avoid interrupting the participant; question ideas for subsequent interviews; and suggestions on what to watch for in observation sessions.

Finally, I like to record some speculative and reflective thoughts on how I, as researcher, the interview process, and the study itself might be affecting the participant’s answers. For example, does it seem like the participant, with best intentions for being helpful, is saying what they think I want to hear?

While it may seem arduous and archaic to jot down notes by hand, I do not recommend using a computer. The computer is a barrier to the intimacy you want to create with the participant. Burying your face in a screen can be intimidating, unsettling, and disrespectful (again, ethics!). And it’s distracting (click, click, click). I use my field notes booklet and simply explain to the participant that I have a lousy memory and jotting notes helps me stay on track (all true).

TRANSCRIBING

Transcribing audio recordings is time consuming, which means it is also expensive if you hire a professional. A general rule-of-thumb is 5-10 : 1, transcribing : recording, depending on one's level of experience and the quality of the recording. In other words, it takes 5-10 hours to transcribe every hour of interview. This is another reason to keep the participant on task and your voice to a minimum.

I do my own transcribing. And I do it within a few days of the interview, while my memory is fresh. This provides an opportunity for some early analysis and making connections to data collected with other methods, often while I’m still in the field and can use this analysis to inform upcoming observations and interviews.

The participant is usually offered a copy of the transcript to review and revise, by adding, deleting, or changing the content. A sober second thought ensures the data is accurate and complete. This is particularly helpful in shorter interviews, where the participant may not have had enough time to reflect and fully explain.?

ETHICS

Here is my big-ticket item. There are two levels of ethical considerations for interviews—general research ethics that apply to all methods and relationship ethics that are particularly important for interviews. General research ethics include informed consent, confidentiality, and privacy; the right to withdraw or refuse to answer certain questions; and protecting or securing recordings and transcripts, among other considerations. You can find plenty of resources on this.

Relationship ethics speak to the intimacy of the interview. It is important to earn participants’ trust and respect. Without both, they are unlikely to speak from the heart. Expressing the following moral values (and others you may think of) will help gain this trust and respect:

• Humility and respect for the participant’s knowledge and expertise. This includes avoiding jargon and terminology that is likely to be unfamiliar or intended to be intimidating. Remember that the participant is the expert in the room. That is why you are there;
• Gratitude for the participant’s time. While many participants enjoy talking about their craft, knowledge, and experiences, the primary beneficiary is the researcher. There is relatively little for the participant to gain;
• Sensitivity to the imbalance of power and the participant’s level of comfort. This includes recognizing when the participant is tired, frustrated, or reluctant to continue, even if not directly expressed;
• Patience to allow the participant to think, explain, and clarify, without interruption. Don’t assume you know where the participant is going with their answer. They may surprise you or articulate it in an unexpected way (hence, deeper and richer data);
• Kindness, empathy, and compassion regarding experiences the participant shares with you, especially as you are not sharing back. Avoid passing judgement;
• Fairness in how you utilize time and with the questions you ask. Be efficient and stick to your research question;
• Honesty and openness about who you are and where your interests lie. Share what you can to avoid suspicion and doubt.?

THE PROTOCOL

All of these considerations shape the interview protocol. This is a document that outlines, in detail, how the interview will be conducted. I think of it as a theatre script, with director's notes and stage directions. As such, it is practical in nature, with limited theoretical rationale. Leave that for your methodology chapter.

This protocol holds the researcher accountable to the research study and helps to ensure its rigour and trustworthiness. And it gives me confidence that valuable data will be generated, so I can relax into an interview and thoroughly enjoy the monologue.

Please let me know if you have any tips, hints, suggestions, and advice to add. Our learning is always richer when we collaborate.