Interviews

Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research iNtervieving

Steinar Kvale and Svend Brinkmann

Kvale and Brinkmann argue that interviewing is a complex and multifaceted activity that is not simply about asking questions and recording answers. Instead, they see interviewing as a form of social interaction that involves the construction of meaning between the interviewer and the interviewee. They argue that the interviewer’s role is not to be a neutral observer, but rather a participant in the research process who shapes the interview through their own background, assumptions, and biases.

Three Interview Sequences

  1. Familiarization Interview: During the familiarization interview, the researcher seeks to establish rapport with the interviewee and gain a general understanding of their background and experiences. This interview helps the researcher to tailor the subsequent interviews to the interviewee’s specific needs and interests.

  2. Topic-Oriented Interview: The topic-oriented interview focuses on specific research questions or themes. The interviewer uses open-ended questions to encourage the interviewee to provide detailed and in-depth responses. This interview can be conducted over multiple sessions to allow for the exploration of complex and nuanced topics.

  3. Life History Interview: The life history interview is a comprehensive approach that delves into the interviewee’s entire life story. The interviewer asks a series of chronological questions to trace the interviewee’s experiences, challenges, and achievements. This interview provides a rich understanding of the interviewee’s life trajectory and the factors that have shaped their identity and worldview.

The choice of interview sequence depends on the research question, the nature of the research topic, and the characteristics of the interviewee. For example, a researcher interested in understanding the experiences of a group of refugees might conduct a series of familiarization interviews to gain a general understanding of their experiences before conducting more in-depth topic-oriented interviews.

In addition to the three main interview sequences, Kvale and Brinkmann also discuss specific techniques for conducting effective interviews. These techniques include:

  • Establishing Rapport: The interviewer should build rapport with the interviewee to create a comfortable and safe environment for open and honest communication.

  • Active Listening: The interviewer should listen actively to the interviewee’s responses, showing empathy and understanding.

  • Non-verbal Communication: The interviewer’s non-verbal cues, such as body language and facial expressions, should convey interest and engagement.

  • Probing Techniques: The interviewer should use probing techniques to encourage the interviewee to elaborate on their responses and provide more detail.

  • Reflection: The interviewer should reflect on the interviewee’s responses to identify patterns, themes, and areas for further exploration.

  • Data Analysis: The interviewer should analyze the interview transcripts to identify key themes, draw conclusions, and develop theoretical insights.

Methodological issues

  1. The Construction of Meaning: Interviews are not simply a neutral exchange of information; they are a process of co-construction, where the interviewer and interviewee mutually shape the meaning of the conversation. This raises questions about how the interviewer’s own background, assumptions, and biases can influence the interview process.

  2. Reliability and Validity: Qualitative research interviews often rely on subjective interpretation, raising concerns about reliability and validity. Kvale and Brinkmann propose strategies for enhancing the reliability and validity of qualitative research interviews, such as triangulation, member checking, and reflexivity.

  3. Ethnographic Interviewing: When conducting ethnographic interviews in unfamiliar cultural contexts, researchers need to be mindful of cultural sensitivities and avoid imposing their own cultural assumptions. They should also strive to develop rapport with participants and demonstrate respect for their cultural norms.

  4. Interviewing Vulnerable Populations: Research involving vulnerable populations, such as children or individuals with disabilities, requires special ethical considerations. Researchers must obtain informed consent from appropriate guardians or representatives, ensure confidentiality and anonymity, and minimize potential harm to participants.

Ethical Issues

  1. Informed Consent: Researchers must obtain informed consent from participants, clearly explaining the purpose of the study, the potential risks and benefits, and the participant’s right to withdraw at any time.

  2. Confidentiality and Anonymity: Researchers must protect the confidentiality of participants’ personal information and ensure anonymity, unless participants explicitly agree to be identified.

  3. Power Dynamics: The power dynamics between the interviewer and interviewee can influence the interview process. Researchers should be mindful of their power position and strive to create a respectful and collaborative environment.

  4. Exploitation and Harm: Researchers should avoid exploiting participants or causing them any harm. They should prioritize the well-being of participants throughout the research process.

  5. Dissemination and Reporting: Researchers should disseminate their findings responsibly, considering the potential impact on participants and society. They should also acknowledge the limitations of their research and avoid making unsubstantiated claims.

To address ethical issues in research interviewing, Kvale and Brinkmann recommend the following strategies:

  1. Establish clear ethical guidelines and protocols: Researchers should develop clear ethical guidelines for their research, outlining their responsibilities towards participants, confidentiality, and data management.

  2. Seek institutional review board (IRB) approval: Researchers should submit their research proposals to an IRB for ethical review and approval. This ensures that research adheres to ethical standards set by the institution.

  3. Conduct reflexive research: Researchers should engage in reflexivity, critically examining their own positionality, biases, and influences on the research process. This can help minimize biases and ensure ethical conduct.

  4. Maintain transparency and accountability: Researchers should be transparent about their research methods, findings, and ethical considerations. They should also be accountable for their actions and willing to address any ethical concerns that arise.

 
 
Conversation as research

According to Kvale and Brinkmann, conversations in qualitative research interviews serve several purposes:

  1. To establish rapport and trust: Conversations help to establish rapport and trust between the interviewer and interviewee, creating a safe and comfortable environment for open and honest communication. This rapport is crucial for obtaining rich and meaningful data.

  2. To elicit narratives and experiences: Conversations allow interviewees to share their personal narratives and experiences in their own words, providing a deeper understanding of their perspectives and worldviews.

  3. To explore hidden meanings and interpretations: Conversations can reveal hidden meanings and interpretations embedded in the interviewees’ responses. This can lead to new insights and understandings of the research topic.

  4. To co-construct knowledge: Conversations are not simply about extracting information from the interviewee; they are also about co-constructing knowledge in a collaborative process between the interviewer and interviewee.

  5. To understand the context of meaning: Conversations allow for a deeper understanding of the context in which the interviewee’s experiences and perspectives are situated. This contextual understanding is essential for interpreting the data accurately.

Kvale and Brinkmann emphasize that qualitative research interviewing should not be seen as a one-way process of data collection. Instead, it should be viewed as a collaborative and interactive conversation that contributes to the co-construction of knowledge.

In addition to the benefits of conversation, Kvale and Brinkmann also acknowledge the challenges associated with conducting research interviews as conversations. These challenges include:

  1. Managing the flow of the conversation: Researchers need to balance their role as a facilitator with the need to guide the conversation towards the research topic.

  2. Encouraging elaboration and depth: Researchers need to use probing techniques to encourage interviewees to elaborate on their responses and provide more detail.

  3. Handling silences and unexpected responses: Researchers need to be comfortable with silences and be prepared to adapt their interviewing style to unexpected responses.

  4. Assessing the validity and reliability of the data: Researchers need to consider the potential influence of the interviewer’s own perspective and biases on the data.

 

Phenomenological Method

authors Steinar Kvale and Svend Brinkmann discuss phenomenology as a relevant philosophical approach for qualitative research interviewing. They argue that phenomenology, with its emphasis on understanding the lived experiences of individuals, aligns well with the goals of qualitative research interviewing.

According to Kvale and Brinkmann, phenomenological interviewing involves the following key principles:

  1. Focus on lived experiences: Researchers seek to understand the subjective experiences of individuals, rather than simply their external behavior or observable actions.

  2. Holistic understanding: Researchers strive to understand the experiences of individuals in their entirety, considering the context, background, and meaning-making processes involved.

  3. Empathy and understanding: Researchers adopt an empathetic and understanding stance towards participants, acknowledging their experiences and perspectives.

  4. Inductive approach: Researchers approach data analysis inductively, drawing themes and insights from the data itself rather than imposing pre-existing theories or frameworks.

  5. Verbalization and description: Researchers encourage participants to describe their experiences in detail, using their own language and expressions.

Kvale and Brinkmann emphasize that phenomenological interviewing is not a rigid method but rather an approach that can be adapted to different research contexts and questions. They provide examples of how phenomenological interviewing can be used to study various topics, such as personal narratives, everyday experiences, and the impact of social phenomena.

In addition to its philosophical underpinnings, phenomenological interviewing also offers several practical benefits:

  1. Depth of understanding: Phenomenological interviewing can provide a deeper understanding of the lived experiences of individuals, revealing their subjective perspectives and interpretations.

  2. Empathy and engagement: Phenomenological interviewing fosters empathy and engagement between the researcher and the participants, leading to a more collaborative and respectful research process.

  3. Contextual insights: Phenomenological interviewing can provide insights into the context in which individuals’ experiences are situated, helping to understand the broader influences on their lives.

  4. Resonance and validity: Phenomenological findings often resonate with participants, suggesting that the research findings are valid and meaningful to the individuals involved.

However, Kvale and Brinkmann also acknowledge the challenges of conducting phenomenological interviewing:

  1. Subjectivity and interpretation: Phenomenological research relies heavily on subjective interpretation, making it susceptible to biases and misinterpretations.

  2. Data analysis complexity: Phenomenological data analysis can be complex and time-consuming, requiring careful and detailed interpretation.

  3. Transferability of findings: Phenomenological findings may not be easily generalizable to other contexts or populations, limiting their applicability.

Twelve aspects of Qualitative Research Interviews

uthors Steinar Kvale and Svend Brinkmann identify twelve key aspects of qualitative research interviews. These aspects encompass the various dimensions of the interview process, from the planning and preparation stage to the analysis and interpretation of data.

1. The Research Question:

The research question serves as the foundation for qualitative research interviews, guiding the selection of participants, the development of interview questions, and the interpretation of data. A well-defined research question provides clarity and focus for the entire research process.

2. The Interview Sequence:

The interview sequence refers to the overall structure and flow of the interview process. Common interview sequences include the familiarization interview, the topic-oriented interview, and the life history interview. The choice of interview sequence depends on the research question, the nature of the topic, and the characteristics of the participants.

3. Interviewer Roles and Responsibilities:

The interviewer plays a crucial role in the research process, acting as a facilitator, a guide, and a listener. Effective interviewers establish rapport with participants, ask open-ended questions, and use probing techniques to encourage elaboration.

4. Interviewer Influence and Bias:

The interviewer’s own background, assumptions, and biases can influence the interview process and the interpretation of data. Reflexivity, the process of critically examining one’s own positionality, is essential for minimizing bias and ensuring ethical conduct.

5. The Role of Language and Meaning:

Language is a fundamental element of qualitative research interviews, as it shapes the way participants express their experiences and meaning. Researchers need to be sensitive to the nuances of language and the potential for misunderstandings.

6. The Construction of Meaning:

Interviews are not simply a matter of exchanging information; they involve the joint construction of meaning between the interviewer and the interviewee. Researchers need to consider how the interview process itself influences the construction of meaning.

7. Reliability and Validity:

Qualitative research interviews often rely on subjective interpretation, raising concerns about reliability and validity. Researchers need to employ strategies to enhance the rigor of their data collection and analysis, such as member checking and triangulation.

8. Data Analysis and Interpretation:

Data analysis is a central aspect of qualitative research interviews, involving the organization, interpretation, and categorization of interview transcripts. Researchers draw upon techniques such as thematic analysis, discourse analysis, and narrative analysis to make sense of the data.

9. Ethical Considerations:

Qualitative research interviews raise ethical concerns related to informed consent, confidentiality, anonymity, and the protection of participants’ well-being. Researchers need to adhere to ethical guidelines and obtain appropriate institutional review board (IRB) approval.

10. Cultural Sensitivity:

When conducting interviews in diverse cultural contexts, researchers need to be mindful of cultural sensitivities, avoid imposing their own cultural assumptions, and strive to build rapport with participants.

11. Power Dynamics:

The power dynamics between the interviewer and interviewee can influence the interview process. Researchers should be aware of their power position and strive to create a respectful and collaborative environment.

12. Reflexive Research:

Reflexivity, the process of critically examining one’s own role in the research process, is essential for minimizing bias and ensuring ethical conduct. Researchers should reflect on their own assumptions, motivations, and potential influences on the research.

Life World

According to Kvale and Brinkmann, the lifeworld is the foundation for qualitative research interviewing, as it provides the context for understanding the meaning and significance of individuals’ experiences. They argue that by exploring the lifeworld of participants, researchers can gain a deeper understanding of their subjective perspectives and interpretations of the world around them.

Kvale and Brinkmann identify several key elements of the lifeworld that are important for qualitative research interviewing:

  • Intersubjectivity: The lifeworld is a shared social and cultural space where individuals interact with and influence each other.

  • Meaning: The lifeworld is the source of meaning and significance for individuals; it shapes how they understand and interpret their experiences.

  • Experience: The lifeworld is rooted in lived experience; it is the tangible and immediate reality that individuals encounter in their everyday lives.

  • Habitus: The lifeworld shapes the habitus, or the patterned ways of thinking, feeling, and acting that individuals develop through their experiences.

  • Embodiment: The lifeworld is experienced through the body; it is the physical and sensory world that individuals interact with through their senses.

By understanding these elements of the lifeworld, researchers can better approach qualitative research interviews from a phenomenological perspective, focusing on the subjective experiences and meanings of participants. They can also identify potential biases and assumptions that may arise from their own lifeworld and take steps to minimize their influence on the research process.

Twelve aspects:

Life World – The topic of qualitative research interviews is the interviewee’s lived everyday worlds.

Meaning – The interview seeks to understand the meaning of central themes of the subjects lived wold.

Qualitative – The qualitative interview seeks qualitative knowldedge as expressed in normal language, it does not aim at quantification.

Descriptive – The qualitative interviewer encourages the subjects to describe as precisely as poissible what they experience and feel and how they act.

Specificity – Descriptions of specific situations and actions are elicited not general opinions.

Deliberate naiveté – The interviewer exhibits openness to new and unexpected phenomana, rather than having ready made categories and schemes of interpreation.

Focused – the interview is focused on particular themes. It is neither strictly structured with standard questions nor entirely “nondirective”.

Ambiguity – the interviewee’s answers are sometimes ambiguous. One statement can imply several possibilites of interpretation adn the subject may also give apparently contradictory statements during an interview. The task of an interviewer is to clarify it as much as possible.

Change – In the course of an interview, the subjects can change their descriptions of and attitudes toward a theme. The subjects may themselves discover new aspects of the themes they are describing and suddently see relations that they had not been aware of earlier.

Sensitivity – Different intervieweres, using the same interview guideš may produce different statements on the same themes, due to varying levels of sensitivity toward and knowledge about. the topic of the interview.

Interpersonal Situation – The research interview is an interview where knowledge is constructed in the intaraction between two people. The interviewer and the subjecta ct in relation to each other and reciprocally influence each other.

Positive Experience – A well-conducted research interview may be a rare and enriching experience for the subject who may obtain new insights into his or her life situation.

 

 

 

Power assymetry

Steinar Kvale and Svend Brinkmann discuss the concept of power asymmetry as a key issue in qualitative research interviewing. They argue that power is always present in the interview relationship, shaping the dynamics between the interviewer and interviewee.

Power asymmetry can arise from various sources, including:

  • The researcher’s position of authority: Researchers typically have more knowledge and expertise than participants, which can give them a sense of power over the interview process.

  • The researcher’s control over the interview setting: Researchers often select the location, time, and duration of the interview, which can create an imbalance of power.

  • The researcher’s ability to set the agenda: Researchers typically determine the questions to be asked, which can limit the scope of the interview and restrict the participant’s ability to share their perspectives.

  • The researcher’s role as a gatekeeper: Researchers have the power to decide whether or not to include participants’ data in the research, which can influence the outcomes of the study.

Kvale and Brinkmann argue that power asymmetry can affect the quality of qualitative research interviews in several ways:

  • It can limit the openness and honesty of participants’ responses. Participants may feel intimidated or uncomfortable sharing their true thoughts and feelings if they perceive the interviewer as having more power.

  • It can lead to the interviewer asking leading or biased questions. Researchers may unconsciously or intentionally ask questions that steer the interview in a particular direction, potentially influencing the findings of the study.

  • It can make it difficult for the interviewer to establish rapport with the participant. The power imbalance can make the interview feel more formal and impersonal, hindering the development of trust and mutual respect.

To address power asymmetry in qualitative research interviews, Kvale and Brinkmann recommend the following strategies:

  • Establish rapport and trust: The interviewer should actively build rapport with the participant from the start of the interview, creating a comfortable and supportive environment.

  • Use open-ended questions: Open-ended questions allow participants to express their thoughts and feelings freely, reducing the interviewer’s control over the direction of the interview.

  • Be reflexive: The interviewer should critically reflect on their own positionality and potential biases throughout the research process, aiming to minimize their influence on the interview and interpretation of data.

  • Seek participant feedback: The interviewer can seek feedback from participants on their experience of the interview, which can help identify areas where power asymmetry may have been present.

By implementing these strategies, researchers can strive to create a more equitable interview relationship that promotes open communication and genuine engagement with participants. This can lead to more meaningful and insightful qualitative research findings.

 

Mayo’s Method of Interviewing

Mayo’s method of interviewing was characterized by the following key features:

  • Empathetic Listening: Mayo emphasized the importance of empathetic listening, encouraging interviewers to fully engage with participants’ responses and show genuine interest in their perspectives.

  • Non-Directive Approach: Mayo advocated for a non-directive approach to interviewing, avoiding leading questions or imposing the interviewer’s own agenda. He believed that participants should be given the freedom to express their thoughts and feelings without feeling pressured or guided.

  • Therapeutic Rapport: Mayo saw interviewing as a form of therapeutic interaction, aiming to create a safe and supportive environment where participants felt comfortable sharing their experiences.

  • Focus on Subjective Experiences: Mayo’s method focused on exploring the subjective experiences and perceptions of participants, rather than simply relying on observable behavior or productivity metrics.

Kvale and Brinkmann argue that Mayo’s method of interviewing has several strengths, including:

  • Depth of Understanding: Mayo’s method can provide a rich and nuanced understanding of participants’ perspectives and experiences.

  • Empowerment of Participants: Mayo’s approach empowers participants to share their voices and perspectives, promoting a more democratic and participatory research process.

  • Humanistic Approach: Mayo’s method emphasizes the human dimension of workplace issues, recognizing the importance of social and psychological factors in employee well-being.

However, Kvale and Brinkmann also acknowledge some limitations of Mayo’s method, including:

  • Subjectivity and Interpretation: Mayo’s method relies heavily on subjective interpretation, making it challenging to assess reliability and validity in a traditional sense.

  • Limited Generalizability: The findings from Mayo’s method may not be generalizable to other contexts or populations, as they are based on in-depth interviews with a relatively small number of participants.

  • Potential for Bias: Mayo’s method may be susceptible to interviewer bias, as the interviewer’s own background and perspectives can influence the interpretation of data.

Overall, Kvale and Brinkmann suggest that Mayo’s method can be a valuable tool for qualitative research interviewing, but it should be used in conjunction with other research methods and approaches to ensure rigor and validity.

Epistemological Issues of Interviewing

Steinar Kvale and Svend Brinkmann discuss several epistemological issues that arise in qualitative research interviewing. Epistemology is the branch of philosophy that deals with the nature of knowledge and how we can justify our claims to knowledge.

Kvale and Brinkmann argue that qualitative research interviewing is fundamentally a subjective endeavor, as it involves the interpretation of human experiences and perspectives. This raises questions about the validity and reliability of qualitative research findings.

Validity

Validity refers to the accuracy or truthfulness of research findings. In qualitative research interviewing, validity is often assessed through the following criteria:

Credibility: The extent to which the research findings are believable and resonate with participants’ experiences.

Transferability: The extent to which the research findings can be generalized to other contexts or populations.

Dependability: The extent to which the research findings are consistent and reproducible across different researchers and research contexts.

Confirmability: The extent to which the research findings are supported by the evidence and can be traced back to the original data.

Reliability

Reliability refers to the consistency or stability of research findings. In qualitative research interviewing, reliability is often assessed through the following criteria:

Interrater Reliability: The extent to which different researchers agree on the interpretation of the same data.

Intrarater Reliability: The extent to which the same researcher agrees with their own interpretation of the data over time.

Kvale and Brinkmann argue that the traditional concepts of validity and reliability may not be fully applicable to qualitative research interviewing due to the subjective nature of the data. They suggest that alternative approaches to validity and reliability are needed in qualitative research, such as:

Heuristic Validity: The extent to which the research findings are insightful and lead to new understandings.

Dialectical Validity: The extent to which the research findings are open to critique and debate.

Emancipatory Validity: The extent to which the research findings challenge power structures and promote social change.

Overall, Kvale and Brinkmann argue that epistemological issues in qualitative research interviewing are complex and require careful consideration. They suggest that researchers should adopt a critical and reflexive approach to their work, acknowledging the subjective nature of their data and the potential for bias. By doing so, they can enhance the validity, reliability, and trustworthiness of their research findings.

Knowledge and interviews in a positivist conception

Steinar Kvale and Svend Brinkmann discuss the positivist conception of knowledge and its implications for qualitative research interviewing. Positivism is a philosophical tradition that emphasizes objective, measurable, and verifiable knowledge.

According to the positivist view, knowledge is obtained through empirical observation and experimentation. This approach emphasizes the importance of collecting data that is quantifiable and statistically significant.

In the context of qualitative research interviewing, positivism suggests that interviews should be structured and focused on specific questions that can be answered with objective data. The interviewer should take a neutral stance and avoid expressing personal opinions or interpretations.

Kvale and Brinkmann argue that the positivist conception of knowledge is not fully compatible with qualitative research interviewing. They point out that interviews often involve subjective experiences and interpretations that cannot be easily measured or quantified.

They suggest that qualitative research interviewing is more aligned with a constructivist or interpretive approach to knowledge, which emphasizes the subjective nature of human experience and the role of interpretation in understanding the world.

In a constructivist view, knowledge is not simply discovered but is actively created through the interaction between the researcher and the participant. Interviews are seen as a collaborative process of meaning-making, where both the interviewer and the participant contribute to the construction of knowledge.

Kvale and Brinkmann argue that qualitative research interviewing can provide a rich and nuanced understanding of human experiences that is not possible through traditional positivist methods. They advocate for a more flexible and interpretative approach to qualitative research interviewing that embraces the subjective and interpretive nature of human experience.

Ethical Issues of interviewing

authors Steinar Kvale and Svend Brinkmann discuss several ethical issues that arise in qualitative research interviewing. Ethics are principles that guide moral decision-making and behavior.

Informed Consent

Informed consent is a fundamental ethical principle in research that requires researchers to obtain voluntary and informed consent from participants before involving them in the research process. This means that researchers must clearly explain the purpose of the research, the procedures involved, the potential risks and benefits, and the participants’ rights to privacy and confidentiality.

Confidentiality

Confidentiality is another key ethical principle that requires researchers to protect the privacy of participants’ personal information. This means that researchers should not share participants’ names, identifying information, or sensitive details about their experiences without their explicit consent.

Anonymity

Anonymity is a higher level of protection than confidentiality. It means that participants’ identities cannot be linked to their responses at all, even with their consent. This can be achieved by using pseudonyms, removing identifying information from transcripts, and ensuring that only authorized personnel have access to the data.

Debriefing

Debriefing is a process of providing participants with feedback about the research findings and addressing any questions or concerns they may have. This can help to minimize any potential harm or distress caused by the research and promote open communication between researchers and participants.

Power Relations

Power relations can be a significant ethical issue in qualitative research interviewing, as the interviewer typically holds more power than the interviewee. This can lead to potential exploitation or manipulation of participants. Researchers should be mindful of these power dynamics and take steps to minimize their influence on the research process.

Reflexivity

Reflexivity is the process of critically reflecting on one’s own positionality, biases, and assumptions as a researcher. This can help to identify potential sources of bias in the research and ensure that the findings are grounded in the participants’ experiences rather than the researcher’s own perspectives.

Data Storage and Access

Researchers have a responsibility to store and manage research data securely to protect the confidentiality of participants. This includes using appropriate data storage methods, limiting access to authorized personnel, and destroying data after its purpose has been fulfilled.

Dissemination and Publication

When disseminating research findings, researchers should be mindful of the potential impact on participants. They should obtain participants’ consent for publication, avoid identifying participants without their permission, and use pseudonyms or anonymization methods when necessary.

Overall, ethical considerations are essential for conducting responsible and ethical qualitative research interviewing. By adhering to ethical principles, researchers can minimize potential harm to participants, protect their privacy, and ensure that the research is conducted with integrity and transparency.

Ethical Issues at Seven Research stages

Thematizing

The purpose of an interview study should beyond the scientistic value of the knowledge sought, also be considered with regard to improvement of the human situation investigated

Desingning

Ethical issues of design involve obtaining the subjects informed consent to participate in the study, securing confidentality and considering the possible consequeces of theš study for the subjects.

Interview situation

The personal consequences of the interview interaction for the subjects need to be taken into account such as stress during the interview and changes in self-understanidng.

Transcription

The confidentality of the interviewees needs to be protected and there is also the question of wheteer a transcribed text is loyal to the interviwee’s oral statements.

Analysis. Ethical issues in analysis involve the question ofhow penetrating the interviews can be analyzed and or wheter the subjectgs should have a say in how their statements are interpreted.

Reporting

There is again the issue of confidentality when reporting private interviews in pulbic and of the consequences of the published report for the interviwees and for the groups they belong to.

Kantian deontology

Kantians (Jurgen Habermaas) have tried to devise a universal procedure that will generate just moral rules and principles binding to all rational creatures.

Utilitarians such as Hume and Bentham argue that the relevant moral procedure is a kind of universal calculus with which to compute the greatest sum of happiness for all sentient creatures.

 

Conceptions of Research Interviewing

In their book InterViews: Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing, authors Steinar Kvale and Svend Brinkmann identify four key conceptions of research interviewing:

1. Conversation

The conversational conception of research interviewing sees interviews as informal, open-ended conversations that aim to explore the experiences and perspectives of participants. The interviewer acts as a facilitator who encourages participants to share their stories and ideas in their own words. This approach emphasizes the collaborative and dialogical nature of the interview process.

2. Interrogation

The interrogation conception of research interviewing views interviews as structured and focused interactions that aim to gather specific information from participants. The interviewer acts as a questioner who guides the interview by asking a series of predetermined questions. This approach emphasizes the systematic and methodical nature of the interview process.

3. Performance

The performance conception of research interviewing sees interviews as staged performances where participants construct and present their identities and experiences for the interviewer. The interviewer acts as an audience who observes and interprets the participant’s performance. This approach emphasizes the social and performative aspects of the interview process.

4. Ritual

The ritual conception of research interviewing sees interviews as symbolic acts that follow a set of established rules and conventions. The interviewer and participant act out their roles within the context of the interview, which can have symbolic meaning for both parties. This approach emphasizes the social and ritualistic aspects of the interview process.

Kvale and Brinkmann argue that these four conceptions of research interviewing represent different ways of understanding the purpose, role, and dynamics of the interview process. They suggest that researchers should consider these conceptions critically and choose the approach that best aligns with their research question, methodology, and epistemological perspective.