Interviews are among the most challenging and rewarding forms of
measurement. They require a personal sensitivity and adaptability as well
as the ability to stay within the bounds of the designed protocol. Here, I
describe the preparation you need to do for an interview study and the
process of conducting the interview itself.
Preparation
The Role of the Interviewer
The interviewer is really the "jack-of-all-trades" in survey research.
The interviewer's role is complex and multifaceted. It includes the
following tasks:
- Locate and enlist cooperation of
respondents
The interviewer has to find the respondent. In door-to-door surveys,
this means being able to locate specific addresses. Often, the
interviewer has to work at the least desirable times (like immediately
after dinner or on weekends) because that's when respondents are most
readily available.
- Motivate respondents to do good job
If the interviewer does not take the work seriously, why would the
respondent? The interviewer has to be motivated and has to be able to
communicate that motivation to the respondent. Often, this means that
the interviewer has to be convinced of the importance of the
research.
- Clarify any confusion/concerns
Interviewers have to be able to think on their feet. Respondents may
raise objections or concerns that were not anticipated. The interviewer
has to be able to respond candidly and informatively.
- Observe quality of responses
Whether the interview is personal or over the phone, the interviewer
is in the best position to judge the quality of the information that is
being received. Even a verbatim transcript will not adequately convey
how seriously the respondent took the task, or any gestures or body
language that were evident.
Last, and certainly not least, the interviewer has to conduct a good
interview! Every interview has a life of its own. Some respondents are
motivated and attentive, others are distracted or disinterested. The
interviewer also has good or bad days. Assuring a consistently
high-quality interview is a challenge that requires constant
effort.
Training the Interviewers
One of the most important aspects of any interview study is the
training of the interviewers themselves. In many ways the interviewers are
your measures, and the quality of the results is totally in their hands.
Even in small studies involving only a single researcher-interviewer, it
is important to organize in detail and rehearse the interviewing process
before beginning the formal study.
Here are some of the major topics that should be included in
interviewer training:
- Describe the entire study
Interviewers need to know more than simply how to conduct the
interview itself. They should learn about the background for the study,
previous work that has been done, and why the study is
important.
- State who is sponsor of research
Interviewers need to know who they are working for. They -- and their
respondents -- have a right to know not just what agency or company is
conducting the research, but also, who is paying for the
research.
- Teach enough about survey research
While you seldom have the time to teach a full course on survey
research methods, the interviewers need to know enough that they respect
the survey method and are motivated. Sometimes it may not be apparent
why a question or set of questions was asked in a particular way. The
interviewers will need to understand the rationale for how the
instrument was constructed.
- Explain the sampling logic and
process
Naive interviewers may not understand why sampling is so important.
They may wonder why you go through all the difficulties of selecting the
sample so carefully. You will have to explain that sampling is the basis
for the conclusions that will be reached and for the degree to which
your study will be useful.
Interviewers need to know the many ways that they can inadvertently
bias the results. And, they need to understand why it is important that
they not bias the study. This is especially a problem when you are
investigating political or moral issues on which people have strongly
held convictions. While the interviewer may think they are doing good
for society by slanting results in favor of what they believe, they need
to recognize that doing so could jeopardize the entire study in the eyes
of others.
- "Walk through" the interview
When you first introduce the interview, it's a good idea to walk
through the entire protocol so the interviewers can get an idea of the
various parts or phases and how they interrelate.
- Explain respondent selection
procedures, including
It's astonishing how many adults don't know how to follow
directions on a map. In personal interviews, the interviewer may need
to locate respondents who are spread over a wide geographic area. And,
they often have to navigate by night (respondents tend to be most
available in evening hours) in neighborhoods they're not familiar
with. Teaching basic map reading skills and confirming that the
interviewers can follow maps is essential.
In many studies it is impossible in advance to say whether every
sample household meets the sampling requirements for the study. In
your study, you may want to interview only people who live in single
family homes. It may be impossible to distinguish townhouses and
apartment buildings in your sampling frame. The interviewer must know
how to identify the appropriate target
household.
Just as with households, many studies require respondents who meet
specific criteria. For instance, your study may require that you speak
with a male head-of-household between the ages of 30 and 40 who has
children under 18 living in the same household. It may be impossible
to obtain statistics in advance to target such respondents. The
interviewer may have to ask a series of filtering questions before
determining whether the respondent meets the sampling
needs.
You should probably have several rehearsal sessions with the
interviewer team. You might even videotape rehearsal interviews to
discuss how the trainees responded in difficult situations. The
interviewers should be very familiar with the entire interview before
ever facing a respondent.
In most interview studies, the interviewers will work under the
direction of a supervisor. In some contexts, the supervisor may be a
faculty advisor; in others, they may be the "boss." In order to assure
the quality of the responses, the supervisor may have to observe a
subsample of interviews, listen in on phone interviews, or conduct
follow-up assessments of interviews with the respondents. This can be
very threatening to the interviewers. You need to develop an atmosphere
where everyone on the research team -- interviewers and supervisors --
feel like they're working together towards a common end.
The interviewers have to understand the demands being made on their
schedules and why these are important to the study. In some studies it
will be imperative to conduct the entire set of interviews within a
certain time period. In most studies, it's important to have the
interviewers available when it's convenient for the respondents, not
necessarily the interviewer.
The Interviewer's
Kit
It's important that interviewers have all of the materials they need to
do a professional job. Usually, you will want to assemble an interviewer
kit that can be easily carried and includes all of the important materials
such as:
- a "professional-looking" 3-ring
notebook (this might even have the logo of the company or
organization conducting the interviews)
- maps
- sufficient copies of the survey
instrument
- official identification (preferable a
picture ID)
- a cover letter from the Principal
Investigator or Sponsor
- a phone number the respondent can
call to verify the interviewer's authenticity
The Interview
So all the preparation is complete, the training done, the
interviewers ready to proceed, their "kits" in hand. It's finally time to
do an actual interview. Each interview is unique, like a small work of art
(and sometimes the art may not be very good). Each interview has its own
ebb and flow -- its own pace. To the outsider, an interview looks like a
fairly standard, simple, prosaic effort. But to the interviewer, it can be
filled with special nuances and interpretations that aren't often
immediately apparent. Every interview includes some common components.
There's the opening, where the interviewer gains entry and establishes the
rapport and tone for what follows. There's the middle game, the heart of
the process, that consists of the protocol of questions and the
improvisations of the probe. And finally, there's the endgame, the
wrap-up, where the interviewer and respondent establish a sense of
closure. Whether it's a two-minute phone interview or a personal interview
that spans hours, the interview is a bit of theater, a mini-drama that
involves real lives in real time.
Opening
Remarks
In many ways, the interviewer has the same initial problem that a
salesperson has. You have to get the respondent's attention initially for
a long enough period that you can sell them on the idea of participating
in the study. Many of the remarks here assume an interview that is being
conducted at a respondent's residence. But the analogies to other
interview contexts should be straightforward.
The first thing the interviewer must do is gain entry. Several
factors can enhance the prospects. Probably the most important factor is
your initial appearance. The interviewer needs to dress professionally
and in a manner that will be comfortable to the respondent. In some
contexts a business suit and briefcase may be appropriate. In others, it
may intimidate. The way the interviewer appears initially to the
respondent has to communicate some simple messages -- that you're
trustworthy, honest, and non-threatening. Cultivating a manner of
professional confidence, the sense that the respondent has nothing to
worry about because you know what you're doing -- is a difficult skill
to teach and an indispensable skill for achieving initial
entry.
You're standing on the doorstep and someone has opened the door, even
if only halfway. You need to smile. You need to be brief. State why you
are there and suggest what you would like the respondent to do. Don't
ask -- suggest what you want. Instead of saying "May I come in to do an
interview?", you might try a more imperative approach like " I'd like to
take a few minutes of your time to interview you for a very important
study."
If you've gotten this far without having the door slammed in your
face, chances are you will be able to get an interview. Without waiting
for the respondent to ask questions, you should move to introducing
yourself. You should have this part of the process memorized so you can
deliver the essential information in 20-30 seconds at most. State your
name and the name of the organization you represent. Show your
identification badge and the letter that introduces you. You want to
have as legitimate an appearance as possible. If you have a three-ring
binder or clipboard with the logo of your organization, you should have
it out and visible. You should assume that the respondent will be
interested in participating in your important study -- assume that you
will be doing an interview here.
At this point, you've been invited to come in (After all, you're
standing there in the cold, holding an assortment of materials, clearly
displaying your credentials, and offering the respondent the chance to
participate in an interview -- to many respondents, it's a rare and
exciting event. They hardly ever get asked their views about anything,
and yet they know that important decisions are made all the time based
on input from others.). Or, the respondent has continued to listen long
enough that you need to move onto explaining the study. There are three
rules to this critical explanation: 1) Keep it short; 2) Keep it short;
and 3) Keep it short! The respondent doesn't have to or want to know all
of the neat nuances of this study, how it came about, how you convinced
your thesis committee to buy into it, and so on. You should have a one
or two sentence description of the study memorized. No big words. No
jargon. No detail. There will be more than enough time for that later
(and you should bring some written materials you can leave at the end
for that purpose). This is the "25 words or less" description. What you
should spend some time on is assuring the respondent that
you are interviewing them confidentially, and that their participation
is voluntary.
Asking the
Questions
You've gotten in. The respondent has asked you to sit down and make
yourself comfortable. It may be that the respondent was in the middle of
doing something when you arrived and you may need to allow them a few
minutes to finish the phone call or send the kids off to do homework. Now,
you're ready to begin the interview itself.
- Use questionnaire carefully, but
informally
The questionnaire is your friend. It was developed with a lot of care
and thoughtfulness. While you have to be ready to adapt to the needs of
the setting, your first instinct should always be to trust the
instrument that was designed. But you also need to establish a rapport
with the respondent. If you have your face in the instrument and you
read the questions, you'll appear unprofessional and disinterested. Even
though you may be nervous, you need to recognize that your respondent is
most likely even more nervous. If you memorize the first few questions,
you can refer to the instrument only occasionally, using eye contact and
a confident manner to set the tone for the interview and help the
respondent get comfortable.
- Ask questions exactly as written
Sometimes an interviewer will think that they could improve on the
tone of a question by altering a few words to make it simpler or more
"friendly." DON'T. You should ask the questions as they are on the
instrument. If you had a problem with a question, the time to raise it
was during the training and rehearsals, not during the actual interview.
It is important that the interview be as standardized as possible across
respondents (this is true except in certain types of exploratory or
interpretivist research where the explicit goal is to avoid any
standardizing). You may think the change you made was inconsequential
when, in fact, it may change the entire meaning of the question or
response.
Once you know an interview well, you may see a respondent bring up a
topic that you know will come up later in the interview. You may be
tempted to jump to that section of the interview while you're on the
topic. DON'T. You are more likely to lose your place. You may omit
questions that build a foundation for later questions.
Sometimes you'll be tempted to omit a question because you thought
you already heard what the respondent will say. Don't assume that. For
example, let's say you were conducting an interview with college age
women about the topic of date rape. In an earlier question, the
respondent mentioned that she knew of a woman on her dormitory floor who
had been raped on a date within the past year. A few questions later,
you are supposed to ask "Do you know of anyone personally who was raped
on a date?" You figure you already know that the answer is yes, so you
decide to skip the question. Instead, you might say something like "I
know you may have already mentioned this, but do you know of anyone
personally who was raped on a date?" At this point, the respondent may
say something like "Well, in addition to the woman who lived down the
hall in my dorm, I know of a friend from high school who experienced
date rape." If you hadn't asked the question, you would never have
discovered this detail.
I don't know about you, but I'm one of those people who just hates to
be left hanging. I like to keep a conversation moving. Once I know where
a sentence seems to be heading, I'm aching to get to the next sentence.
I finish people's sentences all the time. If you're like me, you should
practice the art of patience (and silence) before doing any
interviewing. As you'll see below, silence is one of the most effective
devices for encouraging a respondent to talk. If you finish their
sentence for them, you imply that what they had to say is transparent or
obvious, or that you don't want to give them the time to express
themselves in their own language.
Obtaining Adequate Responses - The
Probe
OK, you've asked a question. The respondent gives a brief, cursory
answer. How do you elicit a more thoughtful, thorough response? You
probe.
The most effective way to encourage someone to elaborate is to do
nothing at all - just pause and wait. This is referred to as the
"silent" probe. It works (at least in certain cultures) because the
respondent is uncomfortable with pauses or silence. It suggests to the
respondent that you are waiting, listening for what they will say
next.
At times, you can encourage the respondent directly. Try to do so in
a way that does not imply approval or disapproval of what they said
(that could bias their subsequent results). Overt encouragement could be
as simple as saying "Uh-huh" or "OK" after the respondent completes a
thought.
You can encourage more information by asking for elaboration. For
instance, it is appropriate to ask questions like "Would you like to
elaborate on that?" or "Is there anything else you would like to
add?"
Sometimes, you can elicit greater detail by asking the respondent to
clarify something that was said earlier. You might say, "A minute ago
you were talking about the experience you had in high school. Could you
tell me more about that?"
This is the old psychotherapist trick. You say something without
really saying anything new. For instance, the respondent just described
a traumatic experience they had in childhood. You might say "What I'm
hearing you say is that you found that experience very traumatic." Then,
you should pause. The respondent is likely to say something like "Well,
yes, and it affected the rest of my family as well. In fact, my younger
sister..."
Recording the
Response
Although we have the capability to record a respondent in audio and/or
video, most interview methodologists don't think it's a good idea.
Respondents are often uncomfortable when they know their remarks will be
recorded word-for-word. They may strain to only say things in a socially
acceptable way. Although you would get a more detailed and accurate
record, it is likely to be distorted by the very process of obtaining it.
This may be more of a problem in some situations than in others. It is
increasingly common to be told that your conversation may be recorded
during a phone interview. And most focus group methodologies use
unobtrusive recording equipment to capture what's being said. But, in
general, personal interviews are still best when recorded by the
interviewer using pen and paper. Here, I assume the paper-and-pencil
approach.
- Record responses immediately
The interviewer should record responses as they are being stated.
This conveys the idea that you are interested enough in what the
respondent is saying to write it down. You don't have to write down
every single word -- you're not taking stenography. But you may want to
record certain key phrases or quotes verbatim. You need to develop a
system for distinguishing what the respondent says verbatim from what
you are characterizing (how about quotations, for
instance!).
You need to indicate every single probe that you use. Develop a
shorthand for different standard probes. Use a clear form for writing
them in (e.g., place probes in the left margin).
- Use abbreviations where possible
Abbreviations will help you to capture more of the discussion.
Develop a standardized system (e.g., R=respondent; DK=don't know). If
you create an abbreviation on the fly, have a way of indicating its
origin. For instance, if you decide to abbreviate Spouse with an 'S',
you might make a notation in the right margin saying
"S=Spouse."
Concluding the Interview
When you've gone through the entire interview, you need to bring the
interview to closure. Some important things to
remember:
Don't forget to do this. Even if the respondent was troublesome or
uninformative, it is important for you to be polite and thank them for
their time.
- Tell them when you expect to send
results
I hate it when people conduct interviews and then don't send results
and summaries to the people who they get the information from. You owe
it to your respondent to show them what you learned. Now, they may not
want your entire 300-page dissertation. It's common practice to prepare
a short, readable, jargon-free summary of interviews that you can send
to the respondents.
- Don't be brusque or hasty
Allow for a few minutes of winding down conversation. The respondent
may want to know a little bit about you or how much you like doing this
kind of work. They may be interested in how the results will be used.
Use these kinds of interests as a way to wrap up the conversation. As
you're putting away your materials and packing up to go, engage the
respondent. You don't want the respondent to feel as though you
completed the interview and then rushed out on them -- they may wonder
what they said that was wrong. On the other hand, you have to be careful
here. Some respondents may want to keep on talking long after the
interview is over. You have to find a way to politely cut off the
conversation and make your exit.
- Immediately after leaving -- write
down any notes about how the interview went
Sometimes you will have observations about the interview that you
didn't want to write down while you were with the respondent. You may
have noticed them get upset at a question, or you may have detected
hostility in a response. Immediately after the interview you should go
over your notes and make any other comments and observations -- but be
sure to distinguish these from the notes made during the interview (you
might use a different color pen, for instance).
|