Collecting data by in-depth interviewing

Presenter: Dr. Rita S. Y. Berry

Affiliation: University of Exeter & Hong Kong Institute of Education
Home address: Flat H, 29/F, Block 52, City One Shatin, N.T., Hong Kong.
E-mail address: rsyberry@ied.edu.hk

Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference,

University of Sussex at Brighton, September 2 - 5 1999

Abstract
Interviews have been used extensively for data collection across all the disciplines of the
social sciences & in educational research. There are many types of interviews, as suggested
in the literature. However, this paper does not attempt to look at every single type of
interview. Instead, it focuses on one particular type in-depth interviewing. In the
presentation, the presenter will briefly explain her interpretation of in-depth interviewing &
report on how she used this research method to collect data for her study.
Introduction
In the 1980s, there was a considerable growth in using interviewing as a method for
educational research and now it is generally agreed that interviewing is a key method of data
collection. There are many kinds of interviews. Hitchcock (1989:79) lists nine types:
structured interview, survey interview, counselling interview, diary interview, life history
interview, ethnographic interview, informal/unstructured interview, and conversations. Cohen
& Manion (1994:273), however, prefers to group interviews into four kinds, including the
structured interview, the unstructured interview, the non-directive interview, and the focused
interview.
In-depth interviewing
In-depth interviewing, also known as unstructured interviewing, is a type of interview which
researchers use to elicit information in order to achieve a holistic understanding of the
interviewees point of view or situation; it can also be used to explore interesting areas for
further investigation. This type of interview involves asking informants open-ended
questions, and probing wherever necessary to obtain data deemed useful by the researcher. As
in-depth interviewing often involves qualitative data, it is also called qualitative interviewing.
Patton (1987:113) suggests three basic approaches to conducting qualitative interviewing:
(i) The informal conversational interview

This type of interview resembles a chat, during which the informants may sometimes forget
that they are being interviewed. Most of the questions asked will flow from the immediate
context. Informal conversational interviews are useful for exploring interesting topic/s for
investigation and are typical of ongoing participant observation fieldwork.
(ii) The general interview guide approach (commonly called guided interview)
When employing this approach for interviewing, a basic checklist is prepared to make sure
that all relevant topics are covered. The interviewer is still free to explore, probe and ask
questions deemed interesting to the researcher. This type of interview approach is useful for
eliciting information about specific topics. For this reason, Wenden (1982) formulated a
checklist as a basis to interview her informants in a piece of research leading towards her
PhD studies. She (1982:39) considers that the general interview guide approach is useful as it
allows for in-depth probing while permitting the interviewer to keep the interview within the
parameters traced out by the aim of the study.
(iii) The standardised open-ended interview
Researchers using this approach prepare a set of open-ended questions which are carefully
worded and arranged for the purpose of minimising variation in the questions posed to the
interviewees. In view of this, this method is often preferred for collecting interviewing data
when two or more researchers are involved in the data collecting process. Although this
method provides less flexibility for questions than the other two mentioned previously,
probing is still possible, depending on the nature of the interview and the skills of the
interviewers (Patton 1987:112).
The study
Informants
The participants in this investigation were 20 Hong Kong Chinese students: 10 boys and 10
girls, aged 12 to 18 enrolled at an independent school in the UK. They shared similar family
and educational backgrounds and their level of English ranged from elementary to
intermediate. They all started to learn English as a second language at about 5 or 6 years of
age in Hong Kong. Although Hong Kong is a leading international trade and financial centre,
English is not used as a mainstream language of communication there. "The Report of the
Working Group set up to Review Language Improvement Measures" (Hong Kong Education
Department 1989:4) notes that:
the use of English in Hong Kong does not fulfil an integrative social function and is only
used for social communication when non-speakers of Chinese are involved.
In addition, Lai (1994:101) points out that:
The use of English is instrumental and is generally confined to official, formal contexts of
business, government, and education where non-speakers of Chinese are involved. Hong
Kong students exposure to and opportunities for the use of English inside school are limited,
in spite of the fact that about 90% of Hong Kong secondary school students are enrolled in
the "Anglo-Chinese" schools where English is to be used as the medium of instruction in all
subjects except Chinese and Chinese History. It is a widely known fact that a mixed code of

instruction and code-switching are prevalent in almost all subjects (Education Commission,
1990; Johnson & Lee, 1987). Ip & Chan (1985) reported that the use of spoken Cantonese for
instructional purposes, in both English and non-English lessons, has been on the increase in
recent years.
Generally speaking, when the Hong Kong students first arrived at the school, they all had
difficulty in communicating with people in English, though in different degrees.
Research method
It was decided to use in-depth interviewing as the main method to collect data for the study
since an interpretative approach (qualitative in nature) was adopted for the investigation. The
central concern of the interpretative research is understanding human experiences at a holistic
level. Because of the nature of this type of research, investigations are often connected with
methods such as in-depth interviewing, participant observation and the collection of relevant
documents. Maykut & Morehouse (1994:46) state that:
The data of qualitative inquiry is most often peoples words and actions, and thus requires
methods that allow the researcher to capture language and behavior. The most useful ways of
gathering these forms of data are participant observation, in-depth interviews, group
interviews, and the collection of relevant documents. Observation and interview data is
collected by the researcher in the form of field notes and audio-taped interviews, which are
later transcribed for use in data analysis. There is also some qualitative research being done
with photographs and video-taped observations as primary sources of data (see, for example,
Erikson and Wilson 1982, Wagner 1979).
As this paper is about in-depth interviewing, other methods used will not be discussed here
(For the details of other methods used, please refer to Berry 1998b). To enhance my skills in
conducting interviewing, I referred to relevant literature as a first step and subsequently tried
to gain some hands on experience by interviewing several of the students in the target
group.
Interviewing techniques informed by the literature
One essential element of all interviews is the verbal interaction between the interviewer/s and
the interviewee/s. Hitchcock (1989:79) stresses that central to the interview is the issue of
asking questions and this is often achieved in qualitative research through conversational
encounters. Consequently, it is important for the researchers to familiarise themselves with
questioning techniques before conducting interviews.
(A) Questioning techniques
Individuals vary in their ability to articulate their thoughts and ideas. With good questioning
techniques, researchers will be more able to facilitate the subjects accounts and to obtain
quality data from them. Current literature suggests some questioning techniques, summarised
in the following ten points:
1. Ask clear questions

Cicourel (1964) reflects that many of the meanings which are clear to one will be relatively
opaque to the other, even when the intention is genuine communication. Accordingly, it is
important to use words that make sense to the interviewees, words that are sensitive to the
respondents context and world view. To enhance their comprehensibility to the interviewees,
questions should be easy to understand, short, and devoid of jargon (Kvale 1996:130).
2. Ask single questions
Patton (1987:124) points out that interviewers often put several questions together and ask
them all as one. He suggests that researchers should ask one thing at a time. This will
eliminate any unnecessary burden of interpretation on the interviewees.
3. Ask truly open-ended questions (Patton 1987:122-3)
Truly open-ended questions do not pre-determine the answers and allow room for the
informants to respond in their own terms. For example, "What do you think about your
English?" "How do you feel about the method of English teaching in your home country?"
"What is your opinion of English lessons in the UK?"
4. Ask experience/behaviour questions before opinion/feeling questions
(Patton 1987:115)
It is useful to ask questions about experience or behaviour before asking questions about
opinions or feelings as this helps establish a context for the informants to express the latter.
For example, asking "What happened?" before "How do you feel now?"
5. Sequence the questions (Cohen & Manion 1994:277)
This refers to using a special kind of questioning technique called Funnelling, which means
asking from general to specific, from broad to narrow. Cohen & Manion quote an example
from the study by Sears, Maccoby and Levin:
All babies cry, of course. Some mothers feel that if you pick up a baby every time it cries,
you will spoil it. Others think you should never let a baby cry for very long. How do you feel
about this? What did you do about it? How about the middle of the night?
(Sears, Maccoby and Levin, 1957, cited in Cohen & Manion 1994:277)
6. Probe & follow-up questions (Patton 1987:125-126)
The purpose of probing is to deepen the response to a question, to increase the richness of the
data being obtained, and to give cues to the interviewee about the level of response that is
desired. This can be done through direct questioning of what has just been said, for example,
"Could you say something more about that?"; "Can you give a more detailed description of
what happened?; "Do you have further examples of this?" Alternatively, a mere nod, or
"mm," or just a pause can indicate to the subject to go on with the description. Repeating
significant words of an answer can lead to further elaboration (Kvale 1996:133).
7. Interpret questions (Kvale 1996:149)

Throughout the interview, the researchers should clarify and extend the meanings of the
interviewees statements to avoid misinterpretations on their part. Kvale (1996:135) suggests
that researchers may use question like Is it correct that you feel that?"; "Does the
expression.. cover what you have just expressed?" to allow the interviewees to confirm or
disconfirm what has been interpreted by the researchers.
8. Avoid sensitive questions
It is advisable to avoid deep questions which may irritate the informants, possibly resulting in
an interruption of the interview. Cicourel (1964) agrees that the respondent may well feel
uneasy and adopt avoidance tactics if the questioning is too deep.
9. Encourage a free rein but maintain control
The researchers should be prepared to let the interviewees travel wherever they like, but a
rough checklist of ideas or areas the former want to explore is useful. Palmer (1928:171)
suggests that proficient interviewers should be always in control of a conversation which they
guide and bend to the service of their research interest.
10. Establish rapport
This can be achieved by, for example, respecting the informants opinions, supporting their
feelings, or recognising their responses. This can also be shown by the researchers tone of
voice, expressions or even gestures. In addition, Kvale (1996:128) suggests that a good
contact is established by attentive listening, with the interviewer showing interest,
understanding, and respect for what the subjects say. He (1996:148) continues, [a good
interview] allows subjects to finish what they are saying, lets them proceed at their own rate
of thinking and speaking.
(B) Other techniques informed by the literature
In addition to questioning techniques, there are other factors which may have an impact on to
interview. Cohen & Manion (1994:286) cites Tuckmans (1972) guidelines for interviewing
procedures, as follows:
At the meeting, the interviewer should brief the respondent as to the nature or purpose of the
interview (being as candid as possible without biasing responses) and attempt to make the
respondent feel at ease. He should explain the manner in which he will be recording
responses, and if he plans to tape record, he should get the respondents assent. At all times,
an interviewer must remember that he is a data collection instrument and try not to let his
own biases, opinions, or curiosity affect his behaviour.
Tuckman (1972)
Interviewing the sample group
The in-depth interviews with the sample group were conducted in three different phases.
First phase

The informal conversational interview was used for the first phase. This phase involved
individual casual chats with five Hong Kong overseas students. From the conversations with
these students, I had the impression that they struggled to cope with their second language
when they first arrived, and their ways of coping differed tremendously.
Second phase
With this in mind, I furthered the investigation by conducting a second phase interview. The
interviews had a dual purpose: to explore topics for investigation, and to use them as pilot
studies. Five more one-to-one interviews with the students in the sample group were carried
out, using a mixed interview method a combination of the informal conversational
interview and the general interview guide approach. The interview method was regarded as a
mixed one because it only had a very vague checklist and a further exploration of research
focus was still needed. The results of this stage of interviewing brought the focus down to
language learning strategies, with special attention being paid to learners school learning
environment and their language problems (For the details of how the focus was narrowed
down, please refer to Berry 1998a).
It was found that in-depth interviewing was a very good method in eliciting data from the
informants, and that the interviewing techniques suggested by the current literature were
found to be very helpful. Additionally, I made several useful discoveries from this hands on
experience. First, it was helpful to start the interview with a topic the informants felt more
comfortable with. Something related to their life in the new school environment was found to
be a good starting point for conversations. Second, finding the optimal time for interviewing
was important. Interviewing students after a long school day tended to be inappropriate. One
students interview had to be cut short because fatigue was noticeable in his after-school
interview. While arranging appointments with the students, things such as their school
activities, everyday routines, and lessons time-table should be taken into consideration. Third,
it was found that these students sometimes gave contradictory information in the interviews.
When this happened, reconfirmation of their comments would be needed. Fourth, on some
occasions, the interviews were interrupted. To avoid disturbances during the interviews, it
would be useful to put a note on the door, stating Interview in progress.
Third phase
This phase was carried out in two different stages, using the general interview guide approach
(commonly called guided interview). During these interviews, questions were directed at
uncovering information related to the specific focusses derived from the second phase. There
were two other purposes in the second stage interviews. The first was to check the reliability
of the data collected from the informants in the first interviews. Before the second interviews,
the informants were asked to read the transcriptions of their first interview to see if there were
any misinterpretations on the part of the researcher. For those students who were less able in
English or who found reading English transcriptions daunting, I verbally reported the
transcriptions to them in their first language. A few misinterpretations were found and duly
corrected. The second purpose of the second interviews was to supplement the first
interviews.
From this phase of interview, I identified 9 useful probing techniques for in-depth
interviewing, listed and demonstrated in examples, as follows:

 Contradicting
This entails deliberately giving an opinion opposite the informants one, attempting to arouse
his/her further comments.
Linking
Linking up informant's comment with the information which the researcher wants to know.
Faking puzzling
Pretending to be confused, indicating elaboration is needed.
Challenging
Demanding more information to prove the validity of the informant's previous claims.
Encouraging
Giving compliments to encourage the informants to carry on.
Showing understanding + allowing time for elaboration
Making the informant know that his/her comments are understood and treasured + allowing
him/her time for further comments.
Acknowledging
Repeating the informants answer to show attention.
Direct question
Asking question to get more information.
Procuring details
Asking further questions to see if more information can be obtained.

R - researcher
I - informant

Example 1:

R: Why did you decide to further you studies in the UK?

I: The school I attended in Hong Kong was not very good. Also, it is rather difficult to enter a
good secondary school there.
R: Which school did you go to when you were in Hong Kong?
I: T S Government Primary School.
R: [Contradicting] Isn't it a good school?
I: No. The English standard is low. Chinese is the best subject there.
R: [Linking] How was English taught there?
I: It was very different from here (UK). Here, I am asked to write essays. In T S Government
Primary School, students were asked to buy their own course books and the teachers taught
us chapter by chapter.
R: [Fake puzzling] Is there anything wrong with that?
I: Teaching was slow and our teachers sometimes taught things repeatedly.

Example 2:
I: When I saw some words I didn't understand on the board. I copied them.
R: What did you do afterwards?
I: When I returned to the house, I checked their meaning one by one in the electronic
dictionary. Then I studied them.
R: Did this use up a lot of your time?
I: Yes, indeed! I did use a lot of time doing this when I first arrived.
R: [Challenging] I understand that students at your Prep School only have one hour prep
time. I bet that after doing all your prep, you didn't have much time for doing this. How did
you find time for doing your checking?
I: I did it in my prep time. Students like us (international students who newly arrive) had
easier prep. For example, my history teacher let us know the exact paragraphs in the book for
the answers. All we needed to do was to write the answers in our own words.

Example 3:

I: ...... I wrote the meaning down.

R: [Procuring details] After writing the meaning down, what else did you do?
I: I read the whole page again to see if I understood it.
R: [Procuring details] Did you do anything else?
I: Not normally......

Example 4:
R: Can I ask what percentage you got in your exams?
I: Maths 81%, English 88%.
R: [Encouraging] Very good.
(Understanding that it is rather unusual for an overseas student to get such high marks in an
English exam.)
I: I did not have the same exams as the English students. I did the exam paper set by the EFL
Centre.
R: [Showing understanding + allowing time for elaboration] I see.
I: The composition exam was the same as the English students. There were two papers all
together. One paper was essay writing and the other was fill in the blanks, etc.
R: [Direct question] How was English tested for the local students?
I: Similar to ours. The papers were set by the teachers.
R: [Acknowledging] Um. Set by the teachers. What were the questions like?
I: Similar to ours. Students were asked to fill in the missing words in the sentences. The
sentences were very difficult, somewhat like poems.

Example 5:
I: Yes, I did [I remembered the English which the English boys used].
R: [Encouraging] You were very good! Do you know why you could remember so well?
I: Because I didn't try to remember other things. I remembered more English.

R: [Asking for elaboration] What do you mean?

I: For example, I tried not to remember the unimportant things. Just like.....

Conclusion
To conclude, in-depth interviewing is now widely used in educational research and is
generally regarded as a powerful tool in extracting data, in particular qualitative in nature. Indepth interviewing has the distinct features of being an open situation, allowing new research
direction to emerge through using techniques such as probing. Researchers who would like to
use this method for data collection are advised to first familiarise themselves with the
techniques informed by the literature, followed by having a hands-on experience of these
techniques. Finally, there are many factors which inevitably differ from one interview to
another. To ensure success, researchers should be sensitive to individual situations and allow
flexibility in different interviewing circumstances.

INTERVIEWING REFERENCES

Berry, R. S. Y. (1997) "Language learning strategies." International Association of Teachers

of English as a Foreign Language (IATEFL) 1997 Brighton Conference Selections. Kent:
IATEFL.
Berry, R. S. Y. (1998a) A Study of the Strategies used by Hong Kong Chinese Learners in
Learning English in an Independent School Environment in the UK. Unpublished PhD thesis:
University of Exeter.
Berry, Rita S. Y. (1998b) "Conducting a piece of educational research: choice of topic,
adoption of suitable research, methodology and narrowing down of investigative focus."
EERA 98 Conference Paper (The European Educational Research Association). Leeds, UK:
Education-line (http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educ).
Blaxter, L., C. Hughes & M. Tight (1996) How to Research. Buckingham: Open University
Press.
Borg, W. R. & M. D. Gall (1989) Educational Research. An Introduction (5th ed.). New York:
Longman.
Briggs, C. (1986) Learning How to Ask: A Sociolinguistic Appraisal of the Role of the
Interview in Social Science Research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cannell, C.F. & R.L. Kahn (1968) "Interviewing", in G. Lindzey and A. Aronson (eds), The
Handbook of Social Psychology, Vol.2, Research Methods. New York: Addison Wesley.

Cicourel, A. U. (1964) Method and Measurement in Sociology. New York: Free Press.
Douglas, J.D. (1985) Creative Interviewing. London: Sage Publications, Inc. Holstein, J.A. &
J.F. Gubrium (1995) The Active Interview. London: Sage Publications, Inc.
Hitchcock, G. & D. Hughes (1989) Research and the Teacher: A Qualitative Introduction to
School-based Research. London: Routledge.
Hong Kong Education Department. (1989) Report of the Working Group set up to Review
Language Improvement Measures.
Kvale, S. (1996) Interviews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. London:
Sage Publications.
Lai, C. (1994) "Communication failure in the classroom: an exploration of cause." In RELC,
Vol.25, No.1, 99-129.
Mason, J. (1996) Qualitative Researching. London: Sage Publications.
Maykut, P. & R. Morehouse (1994) Beginning Qualitative Research: A Philosophic and
Practical Guide. London: The Falmer Press.
Palmer, V. M. (1928) Field Studies in Sociology: A Students Manual. Chicago. Ill.:
University of Chicago Press.
Patton, M. Q. (1987) How to Use Qualitative Methods in Evaluation. California: Sage
Publications, Inc.
Powney, J. & M. Watts (1984) "Reporting interviews: a code of good practice." In Research
Intelligence. No.17, September.
Powney, J. & M. Watts (1987) Interviewing in Educational Research. London: Routledge &
Kegan Paul.
Robson, C. (1993) Real World Research. A resource for social scientists and practitionerresearchers. Oxford: Blackwell.
Spindler, G & L. Spindler (1993) "Crosscultural, comparative, reflective interviewing in
Schnhausen and Roseville." In Schratz, M. (ed.) Qualitative Voices in Educational
Research. London: The Falmer Press.
Spradley, J (1979) The Ethnographic Interview. New York: Holt.
Tuckman, B. W. (1972) Conducting Educational Research. New York: Holt, Rinehart &
Winston.
Wenden, A. (1982) The Process of Self-directed Learning: A Study of Adult Language
Learners. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation: Teachers College, Columbia University.

Woods, P. (1986) Inside Schools - Ethnography in Educational Research. London: Routledge

& Kegan Paul.
This document was added to the Education-line database 28 September 1999

What are in-depth interviews?

In-depth interviews are similar to group discussions, but usually only one person (but sometimes two) is
interviewed at a time. The format remains unstructured, the interview is generally conducted by a researcher,
and projective techniques may also be used.
The advantages and uses of in-depth interviews
In-depth interviews are ideal for investigating personal, sensitive, or confidential information which is unsuitable
to cover in a group format. They are also the best method for advertising pre-testing, where we are seeking
individual interpretations and responses.
In-depth interviews are also valuable for researching people with busy lifestyles who would be unlikely to attend a
focus group - e.g. senior businesspeople or doctors, or simply for those who cannot practically attend, e.g.
farmers or solo parents with young children.
Disadvantages of in-depth interviews
The disadvantage of in-depth interviews is that the respondent may feel like a bug under a microscope and be
less willing to open up than in the relaxed atmosphere of a group. A skilled interviewer can overcome this to a
large degree, through the establishment of good rapport and trust.
In-depth interview variations
In-depth interviews can vary by the objectives of the research. The examples below show how these can vary:
Paired / Coupled interviews, which are useful for gaining an understanding of particular behaviours or
decisions which consumers usually make in pairs, e.g. husband and wife interviews about home improvements
or car buying.
Accompanied shopping / observations are when a researcher accompanies a respondent on a given
activity, observing and questioning the respondents behaviour as they proceed.
Intercept interviews, when interviewers approach people in a public place such as a shopping mall,
street, sports event, or similar - whatever is best for the research objectives. These interviews are ideal for
cost-effectively targeting select types of people, but the interviews must be short, as respondents are usually en
route elsewhere.
Business interviews, which are ideal for interviewing senior and/or very busy businesspeople, as the
respondents can discuss commercially sensitive information; be interviewed at their most convenient times and
places; and be given the level of respect they may be accustomed to.

In-Depth or One-On-One Interviews

In-depth interviews are a marketing research interviewing technique used in situations where
expert opinions are needed, or to gather detailed information from customers or users of
competing products or services. In-depth interviews are used when, because of geography,
logistical issues, or the sensitive or complex nature of the topics to be explored, conducting focus
groups or face-to-face interviews is either impractical or inappropriate.
The In-depth interview methodology is often employed by Market Street Research when
surveying business owners, high-level executives, community and business leaders, key opinion
influencers, technicians, specialists, and other professionals about complex or highly sensitive
topics. This marketing research methodology is also used as a technique for learning more about
an industry's specific characteristics and practices directly from those individuals who specialize in,
and often who are leaders of, that industry.
In-depth interviews are most often conducted by telephone during a prearranged for time, but can
also be conducted:

Face-to-face, either at an individual's home or office or in a central location, such as a

mall, community center, or other publicly accessible space

As people exit a physical space (e.g., an office, a plant, a public building, a retail or service
establishment, or a health or human service provider-for example, MSR has effectively
interviewed intravenous drug users with HIV/AIDS and/or hepatitis by approaching them
as they leave clinics)

In "captive audience" situations, such as during conferences, classes, workshops, or

meetings

The point of in-depth interviews is to allow for a semi-structured discussion in which the
respondents are treated with great respect as "experts" in whatever field or situation they happen
to represent. In-depth interviews are often used in place of focus groups when having a group of
people with similar characteristics together for the purpose of stimulating a conversation on a
specific topic is unnecessary.
In-depth interviews can range in length (but are usually between 10 and 30 minutes), and can
be conducted with an almost unlimited number of identified individuals, although typically the
number of respondents interviewed is under 100, and usually are in the 25-75 respondent range.
Market Street Research has had substantial, positive experiences in conducting in-depth
marketing research interviews with many different groups at all levels of society, ranging from
homeless adults to hospital patients, people receiving outpatient mental health care, teachers,
clerical and administrative workers, doctors, lawyers, nurses, manufacturers, members of school
boards, users of a specific technology or application, government officials, owners of retail and
service establishments, members of boards of directors, politicians, legislators, and even very
young children - who delight in giving their opinions about all kinds of topics, as long as they are
asked appropriately and listened to with respect.

Healthcare Marketing Research

Market Street Research has considerable experience and expertise in utilizing the in-depth
interview methodology in the research we conduct for clients in many industries, including for
organizations in the healthcare field. In fact, conducting healthcare marketing research is one of
Market Street Research's greatest strengths. Since 1980, MSR has designed and conducted many
hundreds of healthcare marketing research studies for healthcare providers ranging from
internationally respected academic medical centers such as Massachusetts General Hospital,
Cleveland Clinic and Johns Hopkins, health systems such as Partners Healthcare and Memorial
Hermann, as well as for many regional and community-based hospitals, specialized clinics, and

physicians' practices serving urban, suburban and rural markets across the United States. Learn
more about our expertise in the field of healthcare marketing research.

Name of Interviewer________________________

Date____________________________________
Name of Interviewee_______________________
Staff Position____________________________

Appendix B1
Sample Indepth Interview Guide

This guide was designed for interviews to be conducted after the project has been active for 3 months. For later
interviews, the guide will need to be modified as appropriate.

Interview with Project Staff

"Good morning. I am ________ (introduce self).

This interview is being conducted to get your input about the implementation of the
Undergraduate Faculty Enhancement workshops which you have been conducting/involved
in. I am especially interested in any problems you have faced or are aware of and
recommendations you have."
"If it is okay with you, I will be tape recording our conversation. The purpose of this is so that
I can get all the details but at the same time be able to carry on an attentive conversation with
you. I assure you that all your comments will remain confidential. I will be compiling a report
which will contain all staff comments without any reference to individuals. If you agree to
this interview and the tape recording, please sign this consent form."
"I'd like to start by having you briefly describe your responsibilities and involvement thus far
with the Undergraduate Faculty Enhancement Project." (Note to interviewer: You may need
to probe to gather the information you need).
"I'm now going to ask you some questions that I would like you to answer to the best of your
ability. If you do not know the answer, please say so."

"Are you aware of any problems with the scheduling and location(s)?" (Note to interviewer:
If so, probe - "What have the problems been?", "Do you know why these problems are
occurring?", "Do you have any suggestions on how to minimize these problems?")
"How were decisions made with respect to content and staffing of the first three workshops?"
(Note to interviewer: You may need to probe to gather the information about input from staff,
participant reactions, availability of instructors, etc.)
"What is taking place in the workshops?" (Note to interviewer: After giving individual time to
respond, probe specific planned activities/strategies he/she may not have addressed - "What
have the presentations been like?", "Have there been demonstrations of model teaching? If
so, please describe", Has active participation been encouraged? Please describe for me
how")
"What do you think the strongest points of the workshops have been up to this point? Why do
you say this?" (Note to interviewer: You may need to probe why specific strong elements are
mentioned - e.g., if interviewee replies "They work", respond "How can you tell that they
work?")
"What types of concerns have you had or heard regarding the availability of materials and
equipment?" (Note to interviewer: You may need to probe to gather the information you
need)
"What other problems are you aware of?" (Note to interviewer: You may need to probe to
gather the information you need)
"What do you think about the project/workshops at this point?" (Note to interviewer: You
may need to probe to gather the information you need - e.g., "I'd like to know more about
what your thinking is on that issue")
"Is there any other information about the workshops or other aspects of the project that you
think would be useful for me to know?" (Note to interviewer: If so, you may need to probe to
gather the information you need)

Analysing Qualitative Research

Qualitative research is best analysed together by the researchers involved with the project,
based on the transcripts from the audio tapes, the notes made during and after the interviews
and/or focus groups, and the results from any of the exercises conducted, e.g. photosorts,
collages, projections, obituaries etc.
This process is best conducted in a semi-ordered fashion, to allow for researcher brainstorming whilst also ensuring all hypotheses or ideas are investigated. Useful techniques
often employed by Synovate researchers include mind-mapping and the application of
conceptual models such as the Emotive Needs Model. However it is important to note that
such models have near infinite variations, and the strict application of just one model for all
qualitative research is not recommended.
Good qualitative researchers will also have an appreciation of the wider social contexts
influencing the subjects they are studying, so as not to treat the research subject as an
artificially isolated event.
A report based on qualitative research is generally a discussion document, which addresses
the issues covered in the discussion, and uses verbatim quotations taken from the transcripts
to illustrate the key points, as well as copies or examples of the projective techniques used.

Online Chatroom Participation

A technique we have used successfully before is the participation in internet chatrooms, as a form of online
focus group. Our approach is to post an innocuous question about the subject at hand, and letting the
conversation flow from there submitting comments just as a focus group moderator would, i.e. prompting
response yet not leading it.
Care has to be taken to ensure that the choice of chatroom does not result in extreme viewpoints. Online
chatrooms are an ideal, cost-effective way to test the waters on a given subject but cannot be said to be highly
representative.
Participant Observation / Accompanied Shopping

This approach involves a researcher immersing him or herself into a given situation or group, participating in it
yet simultaneously noting how it works and interacts. The immersion may be 'covert', in which the people being
observed are not aware of the research, or it may be overt, in which the respondents are told of the research and
asked for their permission to be involved. It must be noted that certain ethical considerations must be considered
when conducting this kind of research in particular.
In New Zealand the technicque is most commonly used for accompanied shops, in which consumers are joined
by a researcher during a specific shopping trip, during which they discuss the decisions and thoughts they go
through during the shopping process. Other options are to use the method in order to assess people's reactions
to a given stimuli, for example a tourist attraction, car, or activity.
Focus Group Discussions

What are focus groups?

Focus group discussions one of the most commonly used qualitative research techniques. They allow a small
group of people to come together and share their views, under the guidance of the researcher. The sharing acts
as a brainstorming session, generating a wide range of views and reactions.
How are focus groups conducted?
Typically, a focus group comprises 7 - 8 people, who have been specifically screened to match set criteria - eg.
Heavy users of a particular product, loyal customers of a specific brand. They may have similar demographic
characteristics - for example, we would not generally mix upper and lower socioeconomic people in the same
group. Discussions generally last around 2 hours, and are audiotaped, and sometimes videotaped for later
analysis. The participants are rewarded for their participation - generally with a monetary gift.
Focus group variations
Focus groups can vary by the objectives of the group, and the composition of the group. The examples below
show how these can vary:
Harmony groups, where participants share a particular behaviour or attitude. These groups are ideal
for investigating specific subjects in great detail.
Conflict groups, where the participants may be divided into two extreme groups, e.g. Holden and Ford
lovers, or classical music and punk rock fans. These groups are ideal for investigating brand or product
commitment, motivations behind consumer choice and related emotive aspects.
Mini-groups, where only three-four participants may be included. The more intimate nature of these
groups makes them useful for highly personal subjects.
Community groups, where participants are most likely known to each other or share a common
interest in the discussions outcomes. Examples include council ratepayer or employee consultation.
Internet groups, where group participants also have a PC connected to the internet, and complement
their focus group discussions with related website evaluation