2/28/2019
Interviews
LING401: Research Methods
Lecture 6
Oksana Afitska
Today’s lecture
Today we’re going to do the following:
• Discuss the strengths and weaknesses
of the interview method
2
1
2/28/2019
Discussion
• What are interviews good at doing? Why?
• What are they not so good at doing? Why?
• How could you use interviews to do research
in an area of linguistics you’re interested in?
• In what ways could interviews be used
inappropriately? Why?
• What different types of interview can you
think of (e.g., in terms of duration, style,
number of people, purposes, etc.)?
3
Interview format
Interviews can be in several different
formats. They can be face-to-face
interactions, larger group interviews/focus
groups, or can be held over the phone,
done via Skype, or via email.
Let’s look at the three main types of
interview which researchers normally
talk about…
4
2
2/28/2019
Interview design
Structured
Semi-structured
Open/Unstructured
5
The Standardised/Structured Interview
 Questions exactly the same for each interviewee
 Questions asked in the same order to each
interviewee
 Interviewer has a complete list of questions on
their sheet; just asks each one in turn
 Like a spoken questionnaire
 Short answers, often ‘Yes/No’ questions, ticking
boxes
 Like a market research interview
 Good for collecting QUANTITATIVE data
6
3
2/28/2019
The Semi-Standardised/Semi-Structured Interview
 Researcher will have SOME of the questions on
their sheet only
 Researcher will ask different/additional
questions, depending on each interviewee’s
responses to questions on sheet
 So each interview different to some extent
 Order of questions may vary
 Very different from a questionnaire
 Often much longer answers
 Used for collecting QUALITATIVE data
7
The Non-Standardised/Unstructured/Open Interview
‘Here interviewers simply have a list of topics
which they want the respondent to talk about,
but are free to phrase the questions as they
wish, ask them in any order that seems
sensible…, and even join in the conversation by
discussing what they think of the topic
themselves’ (Fielding & Thomas 2001: 124)
8
4
2/28/2019
Why use qualitative interviews?
To explore beliefs, experiences
 ‘If you choose qualitative interviewing it may be
because [your research questions explore]
people’s knowledge, views, understandings,
interpretations, experiences, and interactions….
Perhaps most importantly, you will be interested
in their perceptions.’ (Mason 2002: 63)
9
Why use qualitative interviews?
To uncover beliefs and generate lengthy
accounts
Compare:
‘Is honesty important to you?’ Yes/No
[STRUCTURED]
vs.
‘Tell me about an experience when a family
member was dishonest’ [SEMI-STRUCTURED]
10
5
2/28/2019
Why use qualitative interviews?
As part of a mixed methods study
 You may use qualitative interviews in tandem
with other methods.
For instance, many studies of teachers’
beliefs observe the teachers in their
classrooms, and then use things that
happened in the lessons they observed as
the basis for their qualitative interview
questions.
11
Why use qualitative interviews?
To allow the interviewee more control,
making the research EMIC
 Interviewees have far more freedom to change
the direction of the interview than they would
if you were following a traditional structured
interview format, or a questionnaire.
 While emic research allows us to interpret things
through the eyes of the informant, etic enquiry
involves interpreting things through the eyes of
the researcher
Hence the interviewee can set the agenda to
some extent, raising issues important to
him/her
12
6
2/28/2019
Strengths of interviews:
To avoid reactivity
• They avoid the reactivity problem:
‘Because retrospective accounts allow researchers
to get a glimpse into writers’ strategies and
decisions after the fact, they have the advantage of
allowing writers to explain and reflect on their
decisions without interfering directly with their
attention to the task, freeing the writer from the
“cognitive load”…that the concurrent verbalization of
a think-aloud would require.’ (Greene & Higgins
1994: 118)
13
Weaknesses of interviews
14
7
2/28/2019
Weaknesses of interviewing:
Will interviewees tell the truth?
For instance, if we observed a teacher in their
classroom, and then interviewed the teacher about
what we saw, we might ask why she didn’t pay
much attention to a student in the lesson. The
teacher could reply: ‘That student prefers to be left
alone to work things out for herself’. But there is
always the possibility that this isn’t the real
reason…
Can you think of a couple of other reasons the
teacher might not pay student x much
attention?
15
Weaknesses of interviewing:
Interviewee behaviour, personality
 Respondents might be over-polite, shy, or
anxious to impress the interviewer. They might
‘tell the interviewer what they think she wants to
hear’
16
8
2/28/2019
Weaknesses of interviewing:
The tendency to forget and simplify
accounts of behaviour
 ‘Retrospective accounts of writing rely on
people’s memory, and it appears clear that
people remember relatively little of the momentto-moment thinking and action they have
engaged in. […] The farther the separation
between the event and the recall, the more likely
that the account will contain…
conventionalization and simplification….
Details drop out and new ones are added.’
(Prior 2004: 184-5)
17
Weaknesses of interviewing:
An example of forgetting
• Tomlinson (1984: 434) cites Donald Murray, a
writing scholar who was asked to account for his
composing behaviour, and who found that he had
forgotten because he wasn’t asked immediately
after he had finished writing:
“It is certainly true that debriefing by the researcher
at some distance from the time of writing was
virtually useless. I could not remember why I had
done that. In fact, the researcher knows the text
better than I do.” (Murray 1983:70)
18
9
2/28/2019
Weaknesses of interviewing:
Beliefs, not ‘facts’
 ‘…the interview method is heavily dependent on
people’s capacities to verbalize, interact,
conceptualize and remember. It is important not
to treat understandings generated in an
interview… as though you were simply
excavating facts’. (Mason 2002: 64)
19
Getting more specific when
interviewing
• Greene & Higgins (1994) therefore suggest more
specific interviews are to be preferred:
‘Since…writers have a tendency to generalize
information, we need to provide prompts or cues
that can help writers better access detailed
information…. The use of concrete examples,
contextual cues, and “critical incidents”…is helpful
for this purpose. […] Writers may have a hard time
explaining their strategies when they do not have a
specific experience or example in mind.’ (pp.123-4)
20
10
2/28/2019
Weaknesses of interviewing:
Interviewee cooperation
 ‘…some informants may be more willing and/or
able to introspect than others: hence while CS6,
for instance, carefully accounted for every single
citation in his fairly lengthy text, others tended to
account for their citations in “clumps” (‘This
citation is doing X…And so are all the others on
that page’).’ (Harwood 2009: 517)
21
Different types of questions
Have a look at the interview extract on
your handout from Richards’ (2003)
book and try to identify 5 different
types of questions; that is, questions
which play different functions.
22
11
2/28/2019
Different types of questions
1. Opening: …it’s often a good idea to begin by inviting a
fairly lengthy response. Spradley (1979) describes this
as a ‘grand tour’ approach (e.g. ‘Talk me through that
lesson’)…. This often provides a natural springboard
for further questions… [Extract 01-2]
2. Check/reflect: If you’re in any doubt about whether
you’ve understood something, it’s always worth
checking this or reflecting a statement back to the
speaker. This may also prompt the speaker to develop
a point further…. [Extract 08-9]
3. Follow-up: When the speaker has raised something or
perhaps given a subtle indication that there is more to
be discovered on this topic, the interviewer may decide
23
to follow it up…. [Extract 12-13]
Different types of questions
4. Probe: …points will emerge during the interview that
demand more careful excavation…. The most
straightforward method is by direct invitation to add more
detail, or through the use of directed questions. You can
use Wh- questions, but too many of these produce a
staccato effect in the interview and can cast it in too
interrogatory a light. [Extract 18-19]
Indirect probes can be very useful, especially where
topics are sensitive. Questions like ‘What do people
think about X?’ can be even more revealing than ‘What
do you think about X?’….
5. Structuring:…it may be necessary to mark a shift of topic
by using structuring moves such as, ‘Can we move on
to…’ (Richards 2003: 56-7)
24
12
2/28/2019
More about different types of interview
questions…
25
The fixed alternative question
 The respondent chooses from 2 or more
alternatives, such as agree—disagree, or yes—
no. Sometimes a 3rd option, like don’t know or
undecided is also included. Cohen et al (2000:
275) give the following example of a fixed
alternative question:
 Do you feel it is against the interests of a school to make
public its examination results?
Yes
No
Don’t know
What are the pros and cons of using fixed
alternative questions?
26
13
2/28/2019
Fixed alternative questions: pros and
cons
Pros
 guaranteed that every interviewee will be asked the
same question, which gives the interview greater
reliability than a more open-ended, unstructured format
 easier to code and interpret the results
Cons
 superficial
 the informants might not find any of the [3] choices
suitable, and provide an answer which isn’t what they
believe
 ‘These weaknesses can be overcome, however, if the
items are written with care, mixed with open-ended ones,
and used in conjunction with probes on the part of the
27
interviewer.’ (Cohen et al 2000: 275)
Open-ended questions
 Open-ended questions identify the question
topic, but place ‘no…restrictions on either the
content or the manner of the interviewee’s
reply’ (Cohen et al 2000: 275). Cohen et al give
the following example of an open-ended
question:
 What kind of television programmes do you most prefer
to watch?
What are the pros and cons of using openended questions?
28
14
2/28/2019
Open-ended questions: pros and cons
Pros
 flexible
 ‘allow the interviewer to probe so that she may go into
more depth if she chooses, or to clear up any
misunderstandings’ (Cohen et al 2000: 275)
 ‘they allow the interviewer to make a truer assessment
of what the respondent really believes’ (p.275)
 ‘Open-ended situations can also result in unexpected or
unanticipated answers which may suggest hitherto
unthought-of relationships or hypotheses’ (p.275)
Cons
 may be more difficult to measure and quantify than fixed
response questions
29
The scale question
 Cohen et al (2000: 275) give the following
example of a scale question:
 Attendance at school after the age of 14 should be
voluntary:
Strongly agree
Agree
Undecided
Disagree
Strongly disagree
What’s the obvious type of follow-up
question which comes next?
30
15
2/28/2019
Problematic interview questions
To finish, let’s have a look at some interview questions
that can be seen as problematic…
These questions are from interviews with political
science lecturers about:
(i) The types of different texts they write (e.g., journal
articles, articles for newspapers, politics blogs, etc.);
and
(ii) What being an ‘author’ or ‘writer’ means to them
Why are the strengths and weaknesses of these
questions?
How could you improve them by rewriting them?
31
Problematic questions (1)
I’ve asked you lots of questions today and
last time. What are the right questions to
ask a political scientist about writing?
Have I been asking you the right
questions?
32
16
2/28/2019
Problematic questions (1)
Strengths:
May enable the interviewee space to talk about what the
crucial issues are FOR HIM/HER, rather than answer
researcher’s questions about what RESEARCHER thinks are
the important issues
So enables exploration of important issues (to the
interviewee) the researcher didn’t anticipate
Weaknesses:
‘Meaning of life’-type question? (‘What are the right
questions to ask about writing’? How/Where do you start
answering that?!)
Will interviewee really admit: ‘No, you’ve been asking me all
the wrong questions’?
33
Asks two questions at once
Problematic questions (2)
Tell me about all the different kinds of
things you write.
34
17
2/28/2019
Problematic questions (2)
Tell me about all the different kinds of things you write.
Strengths:
Good that the interviewer is not presuming the interviewee only
write a narrow range of genres (books, journal articles), and is
prepared to explore more widely. The interviewee may write
more genres than interviewer has anticipated.
Weaknesses:
Another very broad question
How do we know the interviewee will be able to recall all the
genres? (Better to give the question in advance of the interview
for interviewee to think about?)
Write in what context? When using, for instance, social media?
When in role as an academic, writing articles? In public or in
private?
35
‘Tell me about…’. Tell you what?
Problematic questions (3)
[All of this question is put on a prompt card and handed to the
interviewee]
How does the experience of writing these different types of texts compare
in terms of the following?
 how satisfied you are with the outcome
 the sense of fulfillment/achievement it gives you
 the level of freedom to express what you really think
 level of prestige the publication provides
 level of response the text has had
 how easy/difficult it was to write and publish it
 how easy/difficult it was to find the right language to express yourself
 how enjoyable or not each was to write
 the types of pressures (if any) you felt while working on it
 audience (how wide / specialist?)
 how these texts represent you as an author to your audience
 how these texts represent you as a person to your audience
36
 any other important dimension of difference
18
2/28/2019
Problematic questions (3): Strengths
Strengths:
They could generate lots of detail.
They could generate accounts of SPECIFIC
experiences of writing.
Some prompts may elicit lengthy stories, e.g., ‘level
of
response the text has had’ may lead to stories about
people who have written to the interviewee about
their books and articles
 The final item (‘any other important dimension of
difference’) allows the interviewee the space to talk
about an issue the interviewer hasn’t anticipated.
Better chance of emic data emerging.
37
Problematic questions (3): Weaknesses
Weaknesses:
Lots of different things to talk about; where does one begin? So
question intimidating?
They’re big questions; but won’t they just be answered superficially—
especially as they come with lots of OTHER questions? Doesn’t this
encourage the interviewee to only VERY BRIEFLY talk about (too
many) things?
If we want interviewees to talk about specific texts, don’t we need
these texts in front of us? Don’t we need to have asked these questions
in advance to allow interviewees to reflect and recall exactly what
happened/plan what they want to tell us?
Some are very specific questions, but seem unlikely to elicit specific
detail (e.g., ‘how easy/difficult it was to find the right language to
express yourself’)
Some seem pretty deep (e.g., ‘how these texts represent you as an
author to your audience’). Will everyone understand the meaning of the
question? Even if they will, wouldn’t they need time to think about their 38
answers?
19
2/28/2019
Problematic questions (4)
[All of this question is put on a prompt card and
handed to the interviewee]
What is your reaction to these statements by
academic writers?
Writing is about a means of saying who you are, and
locating yourself in the world, and representing
yourself in the world…So my way of representing
myself in the world has been through writing. So that
it’s been an essential part of me.
Writing is not about who I am; it’s simply a matter of
getting the job done.
39
Problematic questions (4)
Strengths:
An attempt is made to avoid bias by giving interviewees a
quote from one person who sees writing as part of his
identity and another quote which sees writing in purely
instrumental terms. The interviewee can ‘take sides’ with
one or the other—or neither. (In contrast to only asking
whether writing is part of the interviewee’s identity—
expecting a ‘yes’ answer)
Weaknesses:
How much depth will responses to these statements
elicit? The interviewee is being asked to make vague,
generalised statements about what writing means to
40
him/her.
20
2/28/2019
TASK 2: Practising qualitative
interviewing
In your group suggest a topic/problem for which collecting data via the interview
procedure could be appropriate.
Individually develop 5 interview questions for this topic.
Interview one person from another group using your questions.
Compare your questions (and answers) with the rest of your group. What
makes some questions ‘better’ than others?
What did you learn about interviewing?
41
Good and bad interviewing
Watch the following:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9t_hYjAKww&src_vid=FGH2tYuXf0s&feature=
iv&annotation_id=annotation_554130
42
21
2/28/2019
TASK 3: Reading
 Hermanowicz, J.C. (2002) The great interview:
25 strategies for studying people in bed.
Qualitative Sociology 25(4): 479-499.
And the chapters on interviewing in:
Cohen, L. et al (2007) Research Methods in
Education (7th ed.). London: Routledge Falmer.
Richards, K. (2003) Qualitative Inquiry in TESOL.
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
43
References
Cohen, L. et al (2000) Research Methods in Education (5th ed.). London:
RoutledgeFalmer.
Fielding, N. & Thomas, H. (2001) Qualitative interviewing. In N Gilbert (ed.),
Researching Social Life (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
Greene, S. & Higgins, L. (1994) “Once upon a time”: the use of retrospective accounts
in building theory in composition. In P. Smagorinsky (ed.), Speaking About Writing:
Reflections on Research Methodology. Thousand Oaks: Sage, pp.115-140.
Harwood, N. (2009) An interview-based study of the functions of citations in academic
writing across two disciplines. Journal of Pragmatics 41(3): 497-518.
Mason, J. (2002) Qualitative Researching (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
Murray, D. (1983) Response of a laboratory rat—or, being protocoled. College
Composition & Communication 34: 169-172.
Prior, P. (2004) Tracing process: how texts come into being. In C. Bazerman & P. Prior
(eds.), What Writing Does and How It Does It. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, pp. 167-200.
Richards, K. (2003) Qualitative Inquiry in TESOL. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Spradley, J. (1979) The Ethnographic Interview. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Tomlinson, B. (1984) Talking about the composing process: the limitations of
retrospective accounts. Written Communication 1(4): 429-445.
44
22