A couple of really helpful interventions in a recent e-mail QUAL-RS list.
The general BNIM preoccupation with raising researcher consciousness about
the (inter)subjectivity happening in and after the BNIM interview is very
congruent with the top two emails below.
The Guide suggests a self-debriefing interview (which could as easily be a
real one) and other 'self-biographising memos' as the process of
interpretation proceeds.
Does anybody else have a sense of useful practices (or experiences) going in
the same direction that they'd be ready to share?
Best wishes
Tom
-----Original Message-----
From: Tony Onwuegbuzie [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 16 October 2008 02:13
Subject: Re: Questions about Interviews
Hi Cliff,
I cannot agree more with Ron Chenail about the utility of interviewing the
researcher. Nancy Leech, Kathleen Collins, and I have an article that will
appear in a future edition of the International Journal of Qualitative
Methods
entitled, "Interviewing the Interpretive Researcher: A Method for
Addressing
the Crises of Representation, Legitimation, and Praxis." In this article,
we
contend that, often, the qualitative researcher who conducts the study
alone
may not be optimally aware of information (e.g., thoughts, perceptions,
feelings, and experiences that emerge during the conduct of the research).
Therefore, being formally interviewed by another person can help
researchers to
promote reflexivity by reflecting "on their historical, socio-cultural, and
geographical situatedness, the biases they bring to the study, their
personal
investment in and commitment to the study, and so forth" (Leech &
Onwuegbuzie,
2008, p. 201).
In our article, we outline a process of conducting what we call a
debriefing
interview of an interpretive researcher. In particular, we discuss possible
questions that the interviewer might ask the interpretive researcher. These
questions are designed to tap potential sources of bias in terms of the
researcher's interview background/experience; perceptions of the
participant(s);
perceptions of non-verbal communication; interpretations of interview
findings/interpretations; perceptions of how the study might have impacted
the
researcher; perceptions of how the researcher may have impacted the
participant(s);
awareness of ethical or political issues that might have arisen before,
during, or after the interview(s); and identification of unexpected issues
or
dilemmas that emerged during the interview(s). Further, we present possible
interview questions that are designed to document the degree that the
researcher
has met the authenticity criteria prescribed by Guba and Lincoln (1989).
The
five authenticity criteria are: fairness, ontological authenticity,
educative
authenticity, catalytic authenticity, and tactical authenticity. Finally,
using Miles and Huberman's (1994) framework, we illustrate how displays
such as
matrices can be used to collect, analyze, and interpret debriefing
interview
data (e.g., partially ordered, time-ordered, role-ordered, conceptually
ordered, and effects displays), as well as leave an audit trail. We contend
that
this process of interviewing the interpretive researcher can provide richer
data that can enhance understanding (i.e., increasing Verstehen) of the
underlying phenomenon, thereby addressing, to a greater extent, the crises
of
representation, legitimation, and praxis.
I give students opportunities to practice being both interviewer and
interviewee in debriefing interviews in my qualitative research classes.
Students
then are asked to write about their experiences in these debriefing
interviews.
Also, for a long time now, I have been interviewing some of my doctoral
students who are conducting qualitative dissertation studies at several
points
during the research process. I have also been documenting the effectiveness
of
this approach and have started writing up these findings with Nancy and
Kathy.
If you are interested, I will be happy to send you the article when it is
in
print. In the meantime, good luck with your research.
Tony Onwuegbuzie
Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie, Ph.D., P.G.C.E., F.S.S.
Professor
Department of Educational Leadership and Counseling
Sam Houston State University
Editor, Educational Researcher: Research News & Comments
Co-Editor, Research in the Schools
Licensed Secondary School Teacher
References
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury
Park, CA: Sage.
Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2008). Debriefing. In L. M. Given
(Ed.),
The Sage encyclopedia of qualitative research methods (pp. 199-201).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An
expanded
sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
In a message dated 10/14/2008 11:56:34 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:
Cliff,
I think beginning interviewers can do many things to improve their skills
in
conducting interviews. In considering your questions I would suggest
instead
of using the structured-unstructured distinction that you consider using
the
term open-ended interviews because I think being open-ended aligns itself
better with discovery-oriented, naturalistic qualitative research designs.
Open-ended interviews do have a structure in which the interviewer would
organize
the interview to include both open-ended questions and more focused
follow-up questions based upon the responses supplied by the interviewee.
The challenge in conducting this type of interview comes from at least a
couple of different areas-instrumentation and bias.
By instrumentation I mean the qualitative research concept that in lieu of
a
standardized instrument like a personality inventory or questionnaire;
qualitative researchers tend to serve as the data generation instrument
themselves
as they conduct interviews or generate fieldnotes based upon their
observations/participation in the field. Just as it takes time, practice,
and
assessment to develop a reliable "paper and pencil" instrument, we too as
human
"instruments" need to develop our capacity to perform reliably as
instruments of
data generation and collection.
As for bias, the paper and pencil instruments can be prejudiced in their
form and function due to language and cultural assumptions that go on
unquestioned. The same can be said for us human instruments because we too
can have
assumptions that can make it difficult for us to engage the other openly in
an
interview or field setting. Such a bias would hinder our attempt to conduct
the open-ended interviews we desire.
Conducting pilot studies is a common approach for qualitative researchers
to
practice their interviewing skills. I also suggest for beginning
qualitative
researchers to try a pre-pilot approach I call "interviewing the
investigator" in which interviewers interview themselves or ask colleagues
to interview
themselves. The interview is conducted just like a pilot one including the
use of a recorder. The participants can start and stop the recording to go
over
performances and suggest changes to the interview structure. I also suggest
the investigator keep a journal throughout the process noting what
assumptions they had about the participants' behavior and shared
information so as to
better prepare themselves to be open to the actual participants'
participation
in the upcoming interviews. Of course the investigator can interview
role-playing interviewees too.
There are many advantages to the interviewing the investigator approach
over
the pilot study first approach. One, there may be a limited number of study
participants so the investigator my not want to lose them for the main
study;
two, the investigator may not want to waste the pilot study participants'
time while trying to practice the interviewing protocol for the first or
second
time; and three, the body that reviews the risk factors for research
studies
with human subjects may not have confidence in a instrument that was never
been tested. Interviewing of the investigator can remedy all of these
concerns.
I just presented a paper on this technique at the 2008 Advances in
Qualitative Methods Conference at Banff this
weekend(http://www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca/iiqm/aqm08program.cfm) so if you
would like a copy, please email me directly
at [log in to unmask] and I will send you a copy.
Also, if you have any questions, please let me know.
Ron
Ronald J. Chenail, Ph.D.
Vice President for Institutional Effectiveness and Director, Graduate
Certificate in Qualitative Research
Nova Southeastern University
3301 College Avenue
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33314-7796 USA
Phone: 954.262.5389 | Fax: 954.262.3970
Email: [log in to unmask] | Web: http://www.nova.edu/rpga/index.html
-----Original Message-----
From: Qualitative Research for the Human Sciences
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Cliff Moon
Sent: Monday, October 13, 2008 11:33 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Questions about Interviews
I have been reading that one should be careful about the approach to
interviews he or she takes in a research study. In a document titled, The
Methods of
Research, the author states:"Unstructured Interviews are useful for
exploring issues; they must be conducted by skilled personnel and analyzed
by
professionals..."
I had hoped to use unstructured interviews with my study sample, so that I
could get them to truly elaborate on their feelings about having to teach
English Language Learners who have been mainstreamed into their classes.
I am by no means a professional, thus, should I settle for: 1) partially
structured, 2) semistructured , 3) structured, or 4) totally structured.
I would appreciate hearing your thoughts on the type of interview I should
undertake.
Thank you,
Cliff
------------------------------------------------------------
To leave this discussion group, send this message to
[log in to unmask]: signoff QUALRS-L
Direct requests for assistance to [log in to unmask]
------------------------------------------------------------
To leave this discussion group, send this message to
[log in to unmask]: signoff QUALRS-L
Direct requests for assistance to [log in to unmask]
**************New MapQuest Local shows what's happening at your destination.
Dining, Movies, Events, News & more. Try it out
(http://local.mapquest.com/?ncid=emlcntnew00000002)
|
