The method of
structured interviews is an advantageous one; however it doesn’t provide
automatically sound evidences in a completely unproblematic way. Thus, the
design of such an interview is a highly sophisticated task demanding a lot of
prior preparation and reflection on many things such as the type of the
questions, the number and the order of them, the issues to be focused, the
alternative answers to be provided, the approach to the later data analysis
etc.
As it was
previously mentioned, structured interviews allow the interviewer to keep the
discussion focused on specific issues by following a strict series of
predefined questions. And although this feature was previously regarded as an
advantage, on the other hand and examining it under a different angle it can be
criticised as a serious disadvantage. Indeed structured interviews are not
really allow the interviewees to develop and expand freely a theme or more
importantly to raise an unexpected issue into the discussion.
Plus, the
researcher, by giving to the interviewees a set of alternative answers,
“forces” them, somehow, to adjust and identify their opinion to one and only
answer. And although, it is recommended to include one additional alternative
answer, labelled “other”, however the researcher may fail to capture small
variations and doubts in responses, like the feeling of uncertainty or the
equal preference of more than one answers or the rejection of all the answers
or other slight differentiation as examples 1 and 2 attempt to Illustrate
below.
And, even in the
case of open-ended questions, where the interviewees may answer in a rather
free and unpredictable way, still the interviewer cannot seize the immediate
and unexpected opportunity to readjust the interview, disregard the question’s
order and ask for further clarifications. So, somehow, the researcher rejects
to explore any unanticipated, exciting and “bizarre” answer or to reveal hidden
and unknown aspects of an issue and all this, due to his commitment to a strict
set of questions that he, by himself, has restrictively imposed.
Many times the
structured interviews resemble, somehow, an interrogation or a hidden test and
consequently the interviewees feel quite uncomfortably, stressed and anxious.
Concluding,
interviews, either structured or unstructured, either with closed-ended or
open-ended questions, are a method of collecting data mostly thought verbal
communication. So, both the interviewer and the interviewee, interact by
establishing a short in-between relationship, play several roles, unlock their
minds transmitting ideas, thoughts interests etc. But although it seems an
equal relationship, however it is not a free dialogue since the interviewer
almost always has the upper hand by asking the questions and by inevitably shaping
the interviewee’s responses.
Comments
Post a Comment