Hello realist explorers.

My question is regarding whether anyone here is aware of any differences in qualitative interviewing between a realist evaluation approach, and a broader critical realist approach. I know that this question is perhaps part of a larger question that I am still grappling with, in relation to the differences between realist evaluation and critical realism research. But as you may know, information on how to conduct critical realist research is sparse from within the philosophical/social science literature, and realist evaluation (and it's CMO configuration) is something which has been more accessible for me in planning my research thus far. 

I have read quite a bit of Pawson and Tilley's writings regarding interviewing (and an excellent article by Ana Manzano (2016) The craft of interviewing in realist evaluation, Evaluation 22(3), 342-360), so am aware of the difference between realist and a more phenomenological/constructivist focus on interviewing. I'm just concerned that I might be launching into my interviewing believing 'the subject is there to confirm, falsify and refine the theory', and with this focus, be missing something from a critical realist perspective.

Any thoughts would be helpful - thanks in advance,

Bree.