A G

1. Jayadeva de Silva (Humantalents International)
Interviewing Techniques for
Research
Jayadeva de Silva .M.Sc, FIPM, FITD
On the surface, an interview simply consists of two people talking together about some topic
which is of interest to them both. There are, in fact, a number of important differences
between interviewing someone and having a normal conversation with them as the following
set of comparisons make clear.
A conversation generally lacks an explicitly mentioned purpose. A conversation generally
lacks an explicitly mentioned purpose. An interview always has an explicitly mentioned
purpose. There are unspoken rules that you should avoid repeating yourself.
An interview always has an explicitly mentioned purpose.
Repetition of questions enables one to check that the information is reliable and can reveal
new information.
1

2. Jayadeva de Silva (Humantalents International)
In a conversation both participants can ask questions. In an interview questioning is largely
restricted to the interviewer. Both interest and ignorance are likely to be expressed only by
the interviewer. Interviewing requires that all implicit knowledge from a respondent is
brought out into the open and made explicit. Answers should always be as detailed as
possible.
Interviews differ in the extent to which they are structured. At one end of the continuum is
the most structured form of interview, in which the questioning process is tightly organised:
at the other is the wholly unstructured form.
Research students are expected to have a sound knowledge of the following
Types of interview:
Structured
Semi-structured
Unstructured
One-to-one interviews
Conversational interviews
Small-group interviews (focus groups)
E-mail and telephone interviews
Structured Interview
Structured interviews consist of the interviewer asking each respondent the same questions
with the same precise wording and sequence of questions. The precise form and direction of
the questioning is determined in advance of the interview. No interpretation of meaning
should be offered, No deviation from the order of questions on the interview schedule,
No further probing of answers should be made.
Deviation from the schedule throws doubt upon the reliability of the investigation.
Structured interviews are the nearest type of interview to a questionnaire, in its most extreme
form, it would consist simply of an interviewer reading through a prepared list of questions,
and writing down the respondent's answers. The questions may even be phrased in such a
way that a limited range of responses can be elicited.
For example: Do you think that health services in this area are excellent, good, average or
poor?
In these cases answers may be coded and subjected to quantitative analysis. Structured
interviews are generally quicker to do but they reveal considerably less data than
unstructured interviews.
Structure Interviews are used:
If the direction of your inquiry is perfectly clear from the outset
If you only need obtain answers to a set of questions which you can formulate in advance
Usually used in large scale interview-based surveys, e.g. market research
Structured Interviews – Conditions for Usage
It is much harder for the interview to be deflected from the topic in hand.
Speedy administration, it provides a relatively quick and easy way of obtaining data
2

3. Jayadeva de Silva (Humantalents International)
is economical with the interviewer's time. Respondents may feel more ready to participate
given low time/effort commitment
Interviewers need not have all the skills and experience required for unstructured procedures
as there is no need to try to think of the next question to ask. Interviews can be replicated.
Data is more objectively verifiable. Results can be reviewed (compared and analysed) by
other researchers. Results are more generalisable. and there is reduction of interpersonal bias
factors.
Disadvantages and Limitations of structured Interview
Participant limited to a structured response.
Data obtained can be trivial
Narrow range and quality of information gathered, respondents cannot express complexities
and subtleties of an issue.
Interviewer is prevented from following any new directions for the inquiry
Does not engage participant on a personal level and therefore may feel more like an
interrogation than an interview
Social desirability bias - Most people want to present a favourable impression of themselves
to other people, and this may lead them to distort their answers to personal questions.
Unstructured Interviews
Unstructured interviews have very little structure at all. The interviewer goes into the
interview with the aim of discussing a limited number of topics in great detail, sometimes as
few as one or two. The respondent takes over more of the direction of the interview
There is no set wording to questions and the researcher may explain the question quite fully.
The interviewer decides what questions to ask from moment to moment and frames the
questions on the basis of the information volunteered by the informant.
The interview might begin with the interviewer saying: I'd like to hear your views on
_________& when the flow of ideas in answer to that first question comes to an end the
researcher may ask further questions to obtain clarification of some points
Relatively natural conversation here produces:
Richer, fuller more genuine, more realistic information on interviewee's own terms;
enables capture of respondent's construction or unique perspective (interviewees can talk in
their own terms)
Not constrained by fixed-answer questions which produce rather narrow information.
Interview questions can be adapted to context, interviewee's style and thoughts, and the
general flow of answers.
Interviewer is allowing the respondent's answers to influence the questioning process.
Much more flexible approach to interviewing
Relaxed, more informed and involved respondent.
Disadvantages and Limitations of Unstructured Interviews –
Not standardized. differences in procedure could make data comparison less fair and
reliable. Difficulties in analysis of wide variety of qualitative information.
May not be generalisable, and are not amenable to statistical analysis to test hypotheses
3

4. Jayadeva de Silva (Humantalents International)
Are costly in time, both for participants and researcher, and therefore may have to be limited
in number undertaken during a study;
Interviewers may lack some of the skills necessary to conduct interviews successfully -
Should be able to make an interview seem natural, be sensitive to non-verbal cues, and they
have well-developed listening skills.
May be subject to biases (invalidity and unreliability), both because participants may not tell
the truth or may hide aspects of their experiences, and because the interviewer may have an
unintended influence on what participants say.
Semi-structured interviews:
Combine the advantages of structured and unstructured interviews and still follow the same
order of presentation and the same wording for the main questions in the interview
schedule.
Allow the interviewer the freedom to elaborate on the original response or to follow a line of
inquiry introduced by the interviewee.
An example would be:
Interviewer: “Has changes in Company policy changed your work?
Interviewee: Absolutely! The workload has increased for a start.
Interviewer: In what way has it increased?
Different kinds of questions can be used to expand answers and to discuss some topics in
more detail
Descriptive questions:
Prompt the respondent to give a general account of ‘what happened’ or ‘what it feels like
to....’ anecdotes, life histories etc.
Structural questions:
Prompt respondent to identify structures and meanings to use to make sense of the world
(e.g. what does it mean to your life to suffer from AIDS?)
Contrast questions:
Allows the respondent to make comparisons between events and experiences (e.g. Did you
prefer being in that company or the other?)
Evaluative questions:
Are about the respondent’s feelings about someone or something. (E.g. did you feel afraid
when the HIV test was taken?)
Semi structured interviews tend to work well when the interviewer has already identified a
number of aspects he wants to be sure of addressing. The interviewer can decide in advance
what areas to cover but is open and receptive to unexpected information from the
interviewee. This can be particularly important if a limited time is available for each interview
and the interviewer wants to be sure that the key issues will be covered.
4

5. Jayadeva de Silva (Humantalents International)
Semi-structured Interviews – Conditions for Usage
The semi-structured interview has the advantages of the structural approach (the form and
direction of the questioning is determined in advance), but more flexibility in the interview
allows the interviewer to select aspects of the discourse to follow up.
Richer and thicker data is obtained by semi-structured interviews
Explanations of wording can be offered when required.
Allows for analysis in a variety of ways because it is compatible with many methods of data
analysis
Easier to arrange than other forms of data collection (fewer logistical difficulties to arrange a
series of semi-structured interviews with a small number of participants)
Disadvantages and Limitations of Semi-structured Interviews
The advantages of the semi-structured interview are finely balanced against disadvantages of
weak reliability.
Still places limits on what is asked and expected of the researchers.
Still not fully conversational and therefore might only be appropriate in market research
rather then trying to glean information about a personal or traumatic event.
Data analysis is time consuming
One-to-One Interviews
This is the most common method of interview. An interview conducted by one person to
another. The interviewer will sit down with the participant and try and build a relationship
through the course of the interview. This addresses the concerns of focus group situations.
In general, one-to-one interviews allow a relationship to be built between interviewer and
participant. This permits the interviewer to establish a good rapport with the respondent.
This may allow:
The interviewer to collect richer data.
Participants to divulge personal information.
Richer data as only one person is responding.
Recording and transcription of data, however, is usually relatively straightforward.
One-to-One Interviews – Limitations
If a rapport cannot be established, then the quality of data will be severely diminished.
Difficult to conduct well - Good interviewers are able to make an interview seem natural,
they are sensitive to non-verbal cues, and they have well-developed listening skills.
Researcher has to keep their subjectivity in check or report/reflect on it accurately
These can be time consuming and expensive.
Conversational Interviews
A conversational interview takes the form of a discussion (no predetermined set of
questions). It is loosely guided by the interviewer but also allows the participant free range in
the general direction that the conversation takes.
Gives maximum flexibility to be able to pursue questioning in whatever direction appears to
be appropriate.
The participant is encouraged to do most of the talking.
5

6. Jayadeva de Silva (Humantalents International)
This interview style is chosen by the interviewer mainly because they can get more
information from people because they tend to be more honest and open because it is a
relaxed atmosphere.
Requires an interviewer knowledgeable and experienced in the content area and strong in
interpersonal skills, since he or she will have considerable discretion in directing the
interview.
Can be used in a wide range of settings, but often used in humanistic based therapy
interviews.
Conversational Interviews – Strengths
Conversational interview is highly individualized and relevant to the individual.
Conversational interviews are useful in that they are a more natural way of gaining data from
participants and have a greater ecological validity than more formal interviews.
Likely to produce information or insights that the interviewer could not have anticipated.
Conversational Interviews – Limitations
Not standardized.
Since different information is collected from different people, they do tend to present more
material that may not be relevant to the researchers’ aims. This kind of interview is not
systematic or comprehensive, and it can be very difficult and time-consuming to analyse the
data
Participant can take control of the interview if the researcher does not have proper training
or experience.
Candidates may also question ethics of the conversational approach.
Small (Focus) Group Interviews
Small group interviews usually involve a limited number of participants in one session and
are often focused upon a topic.
Focus groups can be:
homogenous (share features) or heterogeneous (are different)
pre-existing (friends or colleagues) or new
Focus groups are further characterized by the presence of a moderator and the use of a
discussion guide.
The moderator should stimulate discussion among group members – encouraged
participants to express views on each topic as well / respond the other participants.
Small (Focus) Group Interviews – Characteristics
The recommended size of a group is of 6 – 10 people.
Smaller than this limits the amount of information gained.
More than this makes it difficult for everyone to participate.
Several focus groups should be run in any research project. It would be wrong to rely on the
views of just one group.
The members of each focus group should have something in common, characteristics
important to the topic of investigation.
Focus groups are usually specially pre formed groups.
Qualitative information (feelings, perceptions and opinions).
6

7. Jayadeva de Silva (Humantalents International)
The researchers require a range of skills: groups skills in facilitating and moderating,
listening, observing and analysing.
Small (Focus) Group Interviews – Conditions for Usage
Small Group Interviews can be useful when:
The research aim is to produce data from several people who are often together in a
common situation or task.
It is possible to identify a number of individuals who share a common factor
Limited resources prevent more than a small number of interviews being undertaken.
Triangulation is desired in focus groups due to the large size of the groups, usually ranging
from 6-10. Since such interviews are in large groups, observation of the participants could be
helpful in understanding and evaluating his or her actions and replies
Small (Focus) Group Interviews – Advantages
Small group interviews can encourage more openness and more free and complex
information when respondents stimulate ideas from each other.
Relatively quick and convenient method to collect data from several individuals
simultaneously
Researcher can ask for clarification
Provides a setting that is natural, so it can be argued that it has higher ecological validity than
the one-to-one interview.
High face validity
Small (Focus) Group Interviews – Limitations
The group may be subject to factors which will limit the insight gained.
The members may be reluctant to participate or not interact well with each other
the presence of others may inhibit some individuals.
A mood of “keeping your mouths shut” may infect some groups.
Recorded group interviews for groups are not easy – data collection and analysis is time
consuming.
Pre existing purpose of the group can lead to the group having a particular bias which limits
their potential for providing information.
Not appropriate for all research questions, e.g. – sensitive matters
E-mail and Telephone Interviews
Email interviews
E mail interviews may be used when conducting an interview in person, or contacting via
telephone, is inappropriate due to location, schedule conflict, or different time zones.
Telephone interview:
Interviewers make phone calls to contact people
7