1
Liberty University
Week 6 Survey Research and Qualitative Interviewing
Discussion Thread: Qualitative Interviewing
What if you interviewed a focus group? Would you choose conversation or interview guiding?
Why or why not? What if you were searching for study subjects? Are there any groups you
would be interested in studying that would claim you as an insider?
2
Interviews
Data collection is a critically essential element in research as it is the basis for analysis to
establish the findings related to a given phenomenon. Interviews are formidable ways to collect
data as they engage with respondents up close, especially if the approach used is semi-structured.
In a semi-structured model, the interviewer can collect more data than planned, improving the
chances of obtaining accurate results. There is no limit to what the interviewee can express. The
interviewer can use focus groups for respondents with homogeneous demographic traits such as
age and education levels when using interviewees in data collection. As an interviewer, I would
engage the focus group using interview guides in such a case.
Interview guides are, in essence, a list of questions the interviewer intends to ask the
subjects regarding the subject at hand to collect the required data. A systematic flow allows one
to ask one question after the other as they engage the subjects for the answers needed. While the
approach is beneficial in all interviews, it is more suited in cases where the interviewer uses
focus groups drawn from a given population. Its efficacy is built on the numerous benefits it
offers. First, the preparation stage gives the interviewer time to reflect on the topic by analyzing
the variables required, the current state of affairs, and the volume of data needed to generate
results (Brayda & Boyce, 2014). It is possible in this case to construct expansive questions that
extensively cover broader areas of the topic. In light of this, highly accurate results with
pronounced generalization are high.
The second benefit of using the interview guide lies in the organization of the answers
given. As noted in the preparation stage, the interviewer will arrange the questions based on their
relatedness to each other and therefore influence how answers stream in and how they would be
3
used. There would be organization with such a structure to avoid confusion (Bird, 2016). The
orderly arrangement of the questions means that their inaccuracies related to the mixing of
information are avoided, leading to the expedition of the analysis and other steps in the research.
Additionally, the list serves as a constant reminder to the interviewer about the questions needed
to be asked. Therefore, chances of forgetting, which could be deleterious as vital information
may be skipped, are effectively eliminated. The interview guide provides the basis for
strengthening the quality and quantity of data meant for the research.
Besides organization and preparation, the study guide provides a way to eliminate bias.
Using a study guide, the questions asked are standard and uniform across the focus group, unlike
in conversations where questions may pop up randomly. Non-biased interviews mean that the
answers given represent the views of the group (Dejonckeere & Vaughn, 2019). This, in general,
affects instrumentally affect generalization, which is influential in the credibility, acceptability,
and applicability of the findings. Since applicability holds the key to the essence of any research
and its findings, I would use the interview guide while interviewing focus groups.
The benefits linked to interview guides, including organization, are built on a biblical
construct that reveres organization. The book of Habakkuk 2:2 is reflective of this model. It says
that “And the Lord answered me: “Write the vision; make it plain on tablets, so he may run who
reads it.” The vision stated, in this case, is the aim that the interviewer intends to achieve in the
data collection process. It may be to collect as much data as possible to increase their accuracy
and generalization. The vision could also be as decent and accurate as needed in the process to
yield relevant results. It is difficult to deviate with such a vision in place, as noted in the second
benefit, where organization and lack of omissions are remarkably achieved.
4
While the interviewer and the interviewees may not know each or share the same traits
and knowledge about a given subject, it is not uncommon for this to happen. In such cases, the
interviewer is an insider with a special relationship with the interviewees and, therefore, can
improve participation and data collection. One such group I would be considered an insider is
one form, my class. If I were to collect data on the view of students about the hybrid system of
education in which there is a blend between in-class teachings and online interactions, I would be
an insider. My interview guide approach would remain unchanged even if I were to search for
study subjects.
Respectfully,
Al
Reference
Bird, C. (2016). Interviews. In T., Menzies, L., Williams, & T., Zimmerman (Eds) Perspectives
on data science for software engineering (pp. 125-131). Morgan Kaufmann
Brayda, W. & Boyce, T. (2014). So you Really Want to Interview Me?: Navigating “Sensitive”
Qualitative Research Interviewing. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 13(1),
318-334. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691401300115
Dejonckeere, M. & Vaughn, L. (2019). Semistructured interviewing in primary care research: a
balance of relationship and rigor. Family Medicine and Community Health, 7(2).
https://fmch.bmj.com/content/7/2/e000057
5
