Arild Holt-Jensen Professor, University of Bergen Norway

1. The case study approach;how to design a good interview guide and make arrangements for interviews Arild Holt-Jensen Professor, University of Bergen Norway

2. What is a case study? • Misunderstandings related to case studies (based on Flyvbjerg 2011) • Quantitative and Qualitative methods • Types of qualitative research • Forms of interviews • Semistructured interviews – interview guide • Formulate appropriate questions • Interviewing practice; preparation and afterwork

3. What is a case study? • ’An intensive analysis of an individual unit stressing environmental factors in relation to environment’ (Webster dictionary 2009) • Today we see case studies as a main approach to social scientific knowledge, but still many scientists think they cannot provide reliable information about general laws and structures. • Case studies are, however, the main focus in what Sayer (1984) calls ’intensive concrete research’ and recommends as a major approach in human geography

4. Types of research (Sayer 1984)

5. Misunderstandings about case studies • General theoretical knowledge is more valuable than concrete case knowledge • One cannot generalize on the basis of case studies; so useless for scientific development • Case studies useful for generating hypotheses in first stages of a total research process, but other methods needed for theory building • The case study contains a bias towards verification, a tendency to confirm researchers preconceived ideas • Difficult to summarize and develop general theories on the basis of specific case studies

6. Flyvbjerg(2011):the cited notions are wrong • Case study work needed for students to develop from booklearning beginners to virtuose experts! You learn more from experienced reality than from books or lectures! • Deviant cases are main sources of theory development and prove that ’place matters’ in a world of general globalisation. • Formal generalisation is overvalued as a source of scientific development, the ’force of the example’ and transferability are underestimated

7. Flyvbjerg (2011) continued • The case study is useful for both generating and testing of hypotheses, but is not limited to that. • You may learn more from deviant cases than the typical or average case: the region with (deviant) successful development – can ideas be transferred? • Researchers often learn from case studies that their preconceived views were wrong and lead to new ideas(AHJ:Rauland 1968)

8. Conclusion on case studies • The case study approach often lead to falsification of precoceived notions rather than theory verification, But there is danger of subjectivism (f.ex in selection of informants) . • There are more discoveries stemming from intense observations than by statistics from a large group. • Students can safely be let loose in case study reality, which provides a useful training ground with insights into real life practices which academic teaching often does not provide.

9. There is complementarity between Case studies and Statistical methods like there is between extensive ’generalisation’ and intensive ’concrete research’ in Sayer’s model. We need both quantitative and qualitative methods

10. Main types of qualitative research • Oral : most used. To get knowledge by speaking to people (interviews) • Textual : collect documentaries, fiction and also landscapes used as text (photos, paintings) • Observational: excursion, get aquainted, can be participant observation and narratives based on that.

11. ORAL METHODSGeneral methodsSpecific m. Research Biography Interviews Surveys Autobiography Biography Oral history Unstructured Semi-structured Structured Focus groups Surveys – structured Questionnaires-structured Individual * General/ Structural

12. Textual sources and observational methods • Textual sources and methods • Documentary sources: newspapers, archives, maps • Creative sources: novels, poems, films, arts and music • Landscape: as text: social differences, building types • Observational methods • Tourist lookaround: get a feeling of the place • Excursion with guide or with textual background • Participant observation: passive or active? Problem/concern: influence/affect the study/ object-subject relations- to understand semiotics (metaphors,signs)

13. Which methods should we use?Oral, textual, observational • We must use the tools most appropriate for the research questions of the case • Often we have to use a combination of methods in case investigations, but with main focus on the oral tools • Interviews gives direct access to informants. In contrast to questionnaires they do not intend to be representative; but to understand individuals.

14. My MA in Rauland mountain farm district Very simple structured interviews (questionaire)in all the 350 households. Hypotheses: transition to market economy with reduction of old farm practices lead to population and industrial decline. That summer: local festival for ‘Myllarguten’(1801-72), a famous hardanger fiddle player. Was this the new industry to live from??? Hypotheses falsified!

15. Interviews: direct access to informants • In Rauland I just had one page of factual questions as in population/agricultural census. • But used 2 summers on the survey,lived in families and used bicycle. Learned much from observations, social life, informal talks. • The questionaire approach gave statistical data like a census, but due to my presence and observations it gave indepth knowledge that was absent in the recent census! • Combination of structured questionnaire and unstructured talks was an asset, but in most case studies time limit means semi-structured interviews is the best compromise

16. Semi-structured interviews • Aim: Not to be representative – but to understand how individual people (informants) experience the problem you focus on. • Interviewing: Face to face conversation with a purpose • Critics from positivists: Interviewers bias the respondents answers by ’leading questions’. This is a problem we have to deal with! But: Objectivism; does it exsist?

17. More about forms of interviews • Structured interviews: Predetermined /standardised list of questions (’What are the sources of incomes in your household?’) • Semi-structured interviews: Degree of predetermined questions, but more like a talk based on an interview guide to secure you cover questions related to your problem formulation. • Unstructured interviews: Talks where questions are defined by the informants response (Often used: life stories or ’tell us about what you did last week’)

18. Strength of interviewing • Filling the gaps of knowledge • Investigatecomplex behaviour /motivations • Collect diversity of meaning • Opinions, experiences • Variations by position in society, ethnicity, class, gender, age / How meaning differ among people • Example: NEHOM cases: 20 in debth interviews in each urban housing area=ca 5 as ’informants’/decision makers, 15 with ’respondents’/local inhabitants, which the local initiatives we had as focus, were aimed at

19. Interviewing techniques • Interview guide:Used in semi-structured interviews to remind the researcher on issues to cover – topics and key concepts to cover – but flexibility in progress so that it works as a conversation between equals/ create trust to avoid biased answers. • Formulate appropriate and good questions: • Language:use neutral, commonly understood concepts – problems in daily speech with scientific defined concepts • Avoid ambiguity/double meanings / be neutral and non-offensive • Avoid leading questions!!!!! (Do you not also agree that the District High Scool provides many solutions to the regional development? Give us examples!)

20. Types of questions/ progress in interviews • Descriptive: Roles – ice breaking • Contextual (storytelling): Identify events /people /places • Opinions: Personal /individual meanings • Structural: Why this meanings – into peoples ideology • Contrast /comparison: Reflect on contrary meanings • Controversial questions: confronting more sensitive issues in end of interview

21. Interview guide – things to consider • Research questions are usually too broad to serve as productive interview questions So focus on the local context in which the locals are the specialists. • If you ask a question they will answer it. But this means that the ’evidence’ you are gathering may not accurately reflect real opinions. The respondent may not have understood the question. • Therefore: Prepare follow-up questions • Adress topics from ’the side’ (compare with similar cases)

22. Interview guide- things to consider • People’s espoused theories (the things they believe they believe) differ from the theories they use. So to avoid this trap: ask about concrete examples (what they have done rather than about general principles) • Interviews are social occasions. The interviewed will want to put his best foot forward. Don’t take the first answer as final. • Therefore: Ask for elaboration • Ask for opposing ideas • Ask about Other Influencing Conditions

23. Interview guide –things to consider • Testimony statement (’this is the truth’) alone is weak evidence: In general we need multiple sources of evidence with triangulation between different sources and methods. • If your study is based entirely on interviews you need to interview so many in each group of respondents that you feel you do not need more interviews to get new opinions or data. • It may be an idea to ask the same question with different phrases or from different angles.

24. Interviewing practice – preparations • Decide how many you need to interview, which groups of key informants and respondents you need to meet (considering the time at disposal). • Agree on formulations in the interview guide • Take contact by phone /internet as early as possible to arrange time of interview meetings with key informants and respondents • Decide division of work within group

25. After the interviews • Write down your notes – immediately: Write all you remember; behaviour, non-textual responses, what possibly can have biased the answers you got • Transcribe from recording device as soon as possible. • Interpretation of the data collected (Hermeneutic approach)- ’reduce your data’ • Write the report – divide the work between you and decide how to present it.

26. Structure of report (possible) • Problem formulation (aims of study) • Case study areay (based on statistics, written and internet sources) • Theory that is relevant • Methods used and weaknesses in fieldwork situation/ interviews done • Results of fieldwork (presentation of your work • Conclusions (playback to problem formulation - aims of study) TWO LAST BULLPOINTS ca 50% of report

27. Fieldwork means knowledge victory!GOOD LUCK !

28. Some references • Flyvbjerg, B.(2011) Case study p. 301-316 in Denzin,N.K. & Lincoln,Y.S(eds) The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research.4th ed. Sage; Thousand Oaks,CAL • Holt-Jensen, A. (1968) Fjellbygda Rauland. Ad Novas –Norwegian Geographical Studies. Universitetsforlaget, Oslo • Dunn, K.(2005) Interviewing.Ch.6 p. 79-105 in Hay,I.(ed):Qualitative Research Methods in Human Geography.2nd Ed. Oxford University Press; UK • Yin, R.K.(2009) Case Study Research. 4th ed. Sage; London – Thousand Oaks, CAL. Particularly Ch.4: Collecting Case Study Evidence