INTERVIEWING INDIVIDUALS AND GROUPS: FACE TO FACE AND ON-LINE

1. INTERVIEWING INDIVIDUALS AND GROUPS: FACE TO FACE AND ON-LINE

2. Outline • three forms of qualitative interview: in-depth unstructured/ interview-as-conversation, on-line interview and focus group: • relationship between nature and form of qualitative research (epistemology, reflexivity, voice, power/ethics). • generation of group data and management of group research; • Power issues in interview research

3. Why interview? • Events can be understood adequately only if seen in context - qualitative researcher immerses her/himself in the setting. • Contexts of inquiry not contrived. • Qualitative researchers attend to experience as a whole, not as separate variables. • Aim of qualitative research: to understand experience as unified. • Interview as flexible research instrument

4. Ethics, power and knowledge • interview is a social interaction between researcher and researched. • qualitative researchers strive to 'give voice' to the researched. This raises issues of: • objectivity (taking sides) • epistemology (whose point of view?) • politics (how do you judge empowerment? ) • Transcription (written language is not speech written down)

5. Knowledge and interviewing • the constructed nature of the data received through the informant’s answers (Holstein and Gabrium 1997 ): The process of interviewing is the production of meanings and it is also the interpretation of reality. A kind of knowledge which is neither predetermined nor absolutely unique is the effect of this interpretative practice.

6. The question of subjectivity: life-story interviewing • How to match the micro-scope of individual biographies to the macro-perspective of cultural processes and the social world? In collecting life histories, social researchers discover the patterns of social practices which provide a guide to understanding the ‘underlying sociostructural relations’ (Bertaux 1981). Biographical narratives are a manifestation of habitus: (auto)biography is the individual practice of representation of one’s life trajectory in respect of the norms and values of society (Bourdieu 2000)

7. Ethnographic interviewing • Context-informed interviews as part of triangulation ‘There are distinct advantages to combining participant observation with interviews; in particular, the data from each can be used to illuminate the other’ (Hammersley and Atkinson 1995: 131) • Ethnographic interviews are often semi-structured but have a strong tendency to become unstructured (conversation-like). • Power-relationships: interviewing process as an exchange between a researcher and researched. But how much can an ethnographer reveal his/her personal opinions/circumstances? • Ethical dilemmas: confidentiality, privacy, etc.

8. Challenging authority Slava: To be honest, you’ve just become a friend (drug). You’ve become a friend (drug), a friend (podruga). You’re like, funny, it’s fun to talk with you, it’s fun to have a laugh with you… Interviewer: [interrupting] You mean make fun of me… Slava : Make fun of you? Make fun of you even. Lots of things are fun with you. You, you don’t always behave as you should, in some situations, seriously. Look, I’m looking at you now, take your glasses off, I prefer looking at you without them. Seriously. Right. And, seriously, yes, you behave not wholly appropriately. It’s not your thing. Seriously, I understand sociologists. You know last year, I looked at you, you were somehow, for a sociologist, you’re stupid. Interviewer: [laughs] Slava : Seriously. You’re really stupid for a sociologist… Interviewer: Maybe ‘inexperienced’ rather than ‘stupid’? Slava : No. You’re stupid. Inexperienced. Yeah, that’s what I’m talking about. How do you mean you’re inexperienced? You’re stupid. Do you know what you are stupid about? Interviewer: Life? Slava : … You are really stupid sociologists… Why are you stupid? You kept on [asking], I remember from last year, ‘Can I photograph here?’ Who gives a fuck? Excerpt from: H.Pilkington, E.Omel’chenko and A.Garifzianova (2010) Russia’s Skinheads: Exploring and Rethinking Subcultural Lives, London and New York: Routledge.

9. Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) • A democratic form of exchange? • ‘User-friendly’ • Race-, gender-, age- and sexuality-blind BUT • Structured interviews do not produce rich data • Often misunderstandings of the inquiry’s essence • Lack of spontaneity • New strategies of visibility

10. Focus groups • Two meanings of ‘focus’: • a topic for discussion that all participants focused upon’ • The group dynamic and social construction of meaning is the focus of the research.

11. Benefits • Group members can challenge the researcher’s agenda. • Generation of diverse views therefore particularly useful where the subject of the research is complex or contentious . • Analysis of how meanings are made, negotiated and challenged • Safer experience for those who prefer to discuss issues within a group rather than individually; • May lead to unanticipated findings [e.g. from young Russians’ reception of ‘American’ images in advertising]; • Allows a large number of interviewees to be accessed.

12. Problems • How to document data so that you are sure who has said what [video recording]; • Group dynamics may silence or exaggerate particular views [importance of skilled moderator]; • Economics of interviewing collectively vs. organizational effort required to ensure all can participate [venue, video recorder, moderator]; • Issues of confidentiality • The extraordinary environment of the focus group makes difficult, if possible at all, to reconstruct the everyday social interactions.

13. Discussion Questions • What challenges did you encounter in timing, organising, recording your interview? • How comfortable did you feel as an interviewer? What would you do differently next time? • How useful do you think the interview was as ‘data’? How could it have been improved? • Reflect on the power relations within the interview situation and any ethical issues that arose.