Interview
Analysis
(Berg & Lune, 2012;
Cohen &
Manion,2012;Kvale &
Brinkmann, 2009)
• Analytic tools have been inspired by different
philosophical traditions and assist the
interviewers in choosing modes of analysis
that are appropriate for their study.
•
However, the quality of the analysis rest to a
great extent in the craftsmanship of the
researchers, their knowledge of the research
topic and also their sensitivity in working with
language.
•
Key approaches to interview analysis: 1.Focusing on the meanings of what is said. 2.emphasising linguistic forms used to express
meanings.
1.1 Meaning Coding
•
Coding requires to attach keywords
to a segment of the information
yielded from interview in order to
facilitate later identification of
utterances and statements (Kvale &
Brinkmann, 2009) ( Berg & Lune ,
2012)
•
Categorization involves a systematic
conceptualization of a statement,
giving room for quantification.
However, both terms are often used
interchangeably (Kvale & Brinkmann,
2009)
1.-Interview
Analyses
Focusing on
Meaning
Approaches to
undertake
Meaning Coding
a) Grounded
Theory
(Glasser
&
Strauss,1967; Strauss & Corbin, 1990).
Coding stresses qualitative analysis
seeking to understand the relationship
amongst codes and to context and
actions consequences.
✓ Coding can be Data-driven, namely, the
researcher start out without codes and
develop them through reading of the
material (Gibbs, 2007). This, by
considering that the purpose is not to
test existing theory.
Approaches to
undertake
Meaning Coding
✓ Put coding into practice implies to
thoroughly code the material, defining
the actions or experiences described by
the interview in order to develop
categories that allow for an in depth
understanding of those actions and its
meanings (Charmaz, 2005)
✓ Data must be constantly compared
looking for similarities and differences,
which is characterized at first as an Open
coding strategy.
✓ Then, more focused coding is carried out and
the analysis is gradually moved from
descriptive to theoretical levels. This, until the
saturation of the material is produced, and no
new insights emerge for coding.
Approaches to
undertake
Meaning Coding
b)Content Analysis intends a systematic
examination of a body of material that leads
to quantitative description (Berg & Lune,
20012; Cohen & Manion, 2012; Kvale &
Brinkmann, 2009)
✓ Coding can be Concept-Driven, namely,
the researcher develops the codes in
advance by taking into account mainly
the extant literature in the field, but also
from the material by considering the
interviewees’ own idioms (Gibbs, 2007).
✓ Put coding into practice implies organize text’s
meaning into categories quantifying how often
specific themes are referred to, by
participants, within that text.
Approaches to
undertake
Meaning Coding
✓ Then the frequency of the topics addressed
can be compared and correlated. (Berg & Lune,
20012; Cohen & Manion, 2012; Kvale &
Brinkmann, 2009)
✓ In this way the meaning of long interview
statements can be reduced to a few simple
categories, and the occurrence or nonoccurrence of a phenomenon can be
represented or expressed by symbols or
numbers.
Example
Meaning
Coding; Content
Analysis.
From
Kvale
Brinkmann,2009: 204)
&
1.2 Meaning Condensation
Interview
Analyses
Focusing on
Meaning
• It calls for an abbreviation of the
meanings expressed by the interviewees,
so they are compressed into shorter
syntax or formulation.
• It is about rephrasing the meaning of
what has been said and not transforming
data into quantitative expressions. It is
important to maintain the participants’
everyday language to obtain rich and
nuanced description
• Put Meaning Condensation into practice
involves:
1.2Meaning
Condensation
1.-read the complete interview to have
a sense of the whole
2.-determining natural meaning units of
the text as expressed by the participants
3.-restate the themes that dominates
the natural meaning unit as simply as
possible
4.-question the meaning units in terms
of the purpose of the study
5.-the essential themes of the entire
interview are tied together into
descriptive statements
Meaning
Condensation;
example:
From
Kvale
Brinkmann,2009: 206)
&
1.3 Meaning Interpretation
Interview
Analysis,
Focusing
meaning:
on
From Kvale & Brinkmann,
(2009)
✓ The researcher or interpreter goes
beyond what is directly said to examine
structures and relations of meanings that
are not immediately apparent in a text. It
is
about
re-contextualization
of
statements within broader frames of
references.
✓ Meaning interpretation stems from
hermeneutical traditions for interview
analysis which presupposes three
important principles or issues:
1.3 Meaning
Interpretation
a) The interpretation of an interview
involves always a related distinction
whether the purpose is to analyse the
participant’s understanding of a topic, or
to
develop,
through
participants
descriptions, a broader interpretation of
the meanings concerned that topic.
b) It is important to pose a question of the
level of the interpretation –manifest
level?-latent meanings? So it is the letter
of the text or its spirit what would be
analysed.
1.3 Meaning
Interpretation
c) Is there a legitimate plurality of
interpretations? What really matter is to
explicitly formulate the evidence and
theoretical arguments that support the
interpretation, so it can be tested by others.
It is about perspectival subjectivity,
researchers can pose different questions to a
text originated from different outlooks,
which are made explicit, so becomes
comprehensible for the reader. This confers
fruitfulness to the interview research.
Participants’ statement:
1.3 Meaning
Interpretation;
examples from
different
contexts of
interpretation
I know that somebody will say that it is wheedling (“apple
polishing”) if one seems to be more interested in a subject matter
than is usual and says : “ This is really interesting “, asks a lot of
questions, wanting explanations. I don’t think it is …
In religious instruction, where we get grades (from the teacher), but
do not have an examination at the end of the school year, there is
plenty of time to talk about anything else. Well, people do their
homework during these lessons, and then we sometimes, perhaps
two or three of us, discuss something interesting with the teacher.
And then, afterwards, it sometimes happens that someone remarks:
“Well, well, somebody seems to be wheedling”
(Later on in the interview, about other pupils)Sometimes we don´t
know whether they do it in order to wheedle or not, but at other
times it seems very opportunistic. (In a tense voice) It is rather
unpleasant…It isn´t easy to figure out whether people wheedle or
whether they are just interested.
1.3.1 Example;
Context of
interpretation:
Selfunderstanding
Analysis by the researcher:
The pupil in the statement above is interested in religion and
enjoys discussing it with the teacher, but she has the
impression that other pupils may regard this as wheedling.
In other situations, she has difficulties determining whether
the other pupils wheedle or whether they are actually
interested in the subject matter. She experiences this
ambiguity as rather unpleasant .
Analysis by the researcher:
1.3.2 Example;
Context
of
interpretation:
Critical commonsense
understanding
Content
The girl’s statement may be interpreted as a manifestation of a
basic ambiguity in the teacher-pupil relationship created by
grading. Within a grade dominant perspective, the subject matter
and the human relationship in school are instrumentalised: They
become mere means toward the goal of the highest possible grade
point average. In the classroom it may appear ambiguous whether
a pupil expressed interest in a topic is genuine, or whether it is just
a means to “twist” the teacher in the interest of improving grades.
Person
The same activity of talking interestedly with the teacher is
evaluated more positively when conducted by the girl herself than
when carried out by others. The topic involves a conflict for her; her
voice is tense, and a speculative interpretation might be that she
belongs to that group of pupils whom the others accuse of
wheedling.
Analysis by the researcher:
1.3.3 Example;
Context
of
interpretation:
Theoretical
understanding
A psychoanalytical concept of projection may be useful to
understand this girl‘s statement. It would appear that at an
unconscious level the pupil projects her own non-acceptable
wheedling behaviour onto other pupils, while denying it in
herself.
This emphasises the application of linguistic tools for
analysis. These include conversation analysis and
linguistic analysis amongst others.
2.1 Conversation Analysis
2.Interview
Analysis;
Focusing
Language.
on
It is a method that focuses mainly on the structure
and the processes of linguistic interaction involving a
pragmatic theory of language. It deals with what
sentences and words do and the meaning of a
statement is the role it plays in a specific social
practice.
•
•
•
•
Conversation analysis examines:
the minute details
the sequencing of talk
turn-taking sequences
what Specific speech segments accomplishes
2.1 Conversation
Analysis
Conversation Analysis does not seek for:
• participant’s intentions in a statement
• interpretations in depth
• what is not directly said in the transcript
✓ Discourse analysis stems from a postmodern
perspective of knowledge, where knowledge is
socially and linguistically constructed. It studies
how language is used to create, maintain or
destroy different social bonds.
2.1 Discourse
Analysis
✓ Put discourse analysis into practice involves:
1.-a focus on actions performed by the participants
in here and now.
2.-An emphasis on variation and diversity
3.-An active participation of the interviewer in the
discourse
4.-A focus on the discursive production of social
practice