Effectiveness of Interviews as a Tool for Data Collection (original) (raw)
Related papers
Qualitative research remains central to the enhancement and intellectual development of the social sciences. Sociologists use this umbrella term in reference to a variety of research methodologies including sensory data, participant observation, and interviewing. This paper provides an in-depth exploration of qualitative interviewing, endeavouring to highlight theoretical and practical elements of consideration to be sought within the data collection and analysis procedure, drawing upon potential strategies for broaching these issues should they arise. Empirical examples presented will demonstrate the appropriate use of interviewing as a tool to elicit valid, relevant, and insightful information for sociological analysis. Latterly, the use of material objects as elicitation devices will be examined as part of an effective strategy for enhancing interview quality.
Role of Interviews, Observation, Pitfalls and Ethical Issues in Qualitative Research Methods
Journal of Educational Policy and Entrepreneurial Research, 2015
The main objective of this study was to discuss the role of interviews, observation, pitfalls and ethical issues in qualitative research methods. Data collection can be gathered from a number of sources, which include document analysis, observation, telephone, Internet surveys, focus groups, field notes, questionnaires, tape recording and interviews. This article focuses on interviews and observation as the methods of data collection and some of the pitfalls and ethical issues involved in conducting interviews. The researcher carried out analytical review of relevant literature concerning the topic and came up with this piece of paper.
Research methodology series Interviewing in qualitative research: The one-to-one interview
Q ualitative research is concerned with the nature, explanation and understanding of phenomena. Unlike quantitative data, qualitative data are not measured in terms of frequency or quantity but rather are examined for in-depth meanings and processes (Labuschagne, 2003). Interviews are widely used as a data collection tool in qualitative research. They are typically used as a research strategy to gather information about participants' experiences, views and beliefs concerning a specific research question or phenomenon of interest (Lambert and Loiselle, 2007). Sandelowski (2002) purports that one-to-one interviews are the most commonly used data collection tools in qualitative research.
Interviewing as a data collection method
Towards this end, various methodologies qualitative and quantitative are available for data collection, of which interviewing is a part of. It is this paper's purpose to discuss interviewing as a data collection method, particularly focusing on its value, strengths and weaknesses. For purposes of this discussion, interviews shall be defined as controlled conversations that the interviewer uses to obtain data required from the respondent by means of asking serious questions verbally (Akbayrak: 2000). The essay will not delve into the different interviewing techniques, but tackle interviewing in the collective. Interviews are a key qualitative data collection method for social research. There are many reasons to use interviews for collecting data and using it as a research instrument. They are mainly useful in cases where there is need to attain highly personalized data, as well as in cases where there are opportunities for probing to get underlying factors. They also become a viable option where there are limited respondents and a good return rate is important, and also where respondents are not fluent in the native language of a country, or where they have difficulties with written language (Gray: 2004). The main advantage of interviews stems from their capability to offer a complete description and analysis of a research subject, without limiting the scope of the research and the nature of participant's responses (Collis & Hussey, 2003). Interviews are thus useful for gaining insight and context into a topic. They can provide information to which the interviewee was previously privy to, unlike other data collection methods such as questionnaires may act as blinkers to the responses required. They thus become critical for discovery oriented researches where the researcher is, in advance, only roughly aware in of what they are looking for. In an interview, there is leeway for a respondent to describe what is important to them, and from their responses useful quotes and stories can also be collected. In response to the need to seek complete description and analysis of subject matter, interviews from the onset, facilitate for the accurate screening for the right interviewee. Due to the nature of information sought, which has to be in depth, accurate, and reliable, the interviewer has to find the right individual who has the desired information. If the assessment is around certain work processes, then individuals directly involved in the work, or those directly affected by the work are purposefully sampled. In line with the above, face to face interviews will go further in making screening more accurate, as an individual being interviewed is unable to provide false information during screening questions such as gender, age, or race(Akbayrak: 2000).
The qualitative research interview
BACKGROUND Interviews are among the most familiar strategies for collecting qualitative data. The different qualitative interviewing strategies in common use emerged from diverse disciplinary perspectives resulting in a wide variation among interviewing approaches. Unlike the highly structured survey interviews and questionnaires used in epidemiology and most health services research, we examine less structured interview strategies in which the person interviewed is more a participant in meaning making than a conduit from which information is retrieved.
2016
Interviews are a staple method used in qualitative research. Many authors hold face-to-face interviews to be the gold standard, or the assumed best mode in which to conduct interviews. However, a large number of research projects are based on conducting interviews via telephone. While some scholars have addressed the advantages and disadvantages of using telephones to conduct interviews, this work is scattered across multiple disciplines and lacks a cohesive, comprehensive framework. The current article seeks to rectify this gap in the literature, by explicitly developing the constructs of the interviewer context and the respondent context. By examining key components in each of these contexts, the qualitative interviewer can make an informed, reflective decision about the best interview mode to use for a particular project.