3 – Survey Interview
Why Should I Care?
You would rather spend more time with respondents to dig into a topic. You prefer to reduce the size of the sample. You don’t mind open-ended questions. You want to get to the bottom of things.
Objects of Measurement
Interviews are about depth. Letting people express themselves, describing phenomena in great detail, and explaining their deepest motivations.
They can also be a challenge, a test. Again, we wish to see how far people can go about discussing something.
- Personal Characteristic
- Socio-Demographic Characteristic
- Opinion
- Motivations
- Ideology
- Biases / Prejudice
- Preferences
- Personal History / Background
- Family Dynamics
- Cultural History
- Perception / Self-Perception
- Aptitude /Ability
- Behaviour
- Level of Knowledge
Sampling
Typically done on tiny samples, for which population size can be large or small.
Samples are usually non-random, such as convenience, snowball, or purposive.
Types of Surveys - Interview
- Cross-sectional: Not common. Needs large samples to have frequency analysis.
- Longitudinal: More common. Especially panel, allows to see evolution over time.
- Trend
- Panel
Scientific Power
Exploratory: can be, and likely. It does not require so much time and money to conduct.
Descriptive: Very likely. Interviews can last a very long time, many days if need be. This allows more description.
Explanatory: No. Samples are too small and non-random.
Steps
- Establish aim / hypothesis
- Population and sample
- Type of survey - instrument
- Write the question list and choose recording method
- Execute interview
- Write the verbatim
- Interpret Results
- Report Results
Types of Interviews
Formal – sit-down, meeting time and place, limited time, recorder, question list
Ex: politician wants to explain policy, needs to be “on the record”, details for memoirs.
Informal – ad hoc, very loose question list, interviewee may not know they are being studied, no recorder
Ex: fishing trip builds trust, subject confides childhood trauma.
Strategies
Open on easy issues
- Ask for basic details. Family history, occupation, interests.
Shows interest, gets the person more comfortable to speak. Breaks the ice.
More detail
- Asking for more detail, more information. Why? Tell me more?
- Focus on an element: "You speak German, which part of Germany are you from?"
Shows deeper interest, gets the person to speak more. Adds detail
Something in common
- Find something you have in common, an opinion, a food preference, an origin, rank in the family.
Builds trust.
The Compassion
- Uh huh. Wow. Uh huh. Ok, Oh no. Oh my. Mmmmhm. Uh huh. No! Ok, yeah. Go on…
You get the person talking by marking your listening. Facial expression should match!
The Most Surprising
- What was the most surprising element (that you learned, or came across) ?
Unearth information that you can't access otherwise. Forces them to respond with a novel information.
The Easiest and the Hardest
- What was the easiest (or most enjoyable) aspect of this event?
- What was the hardest (or least enjoyable) aspect of this event?
Gets the person talking, and focussing on a particularly important element, which is usually surprising and deeply rooted in experiential truth and personal feelings.
The Key
- What’s the KEY question in this issue, in your opinion?
Gets to the heart of the matter, the root cause. Allows person to give you THEIR side of the story, focussing on the most important aspect.
The Quote Reaction
Let someone else play devil’s advocate. Let the person react to a public statement, on the record.
The Hook
- Tell me about your childhood. (….)
- What kind of a father will you be?
You get the person talking, then ask a pointed question.
The Flip
- Tell me about your childhood. (….)
- You used the word “XYZ”, why?
Psychologists do this all the time. You get the person talking, and then focus on one word they used. Forces people who use euphemisms to speak plainly. Forces politicians/experts who use jargon to explain their idea.
The Pushy Interrogation
- Now, I expect a better answer. What really happened?
Getting a little bit upset forces the interviewee on the defensive. May force them to spill the beans.Timing is important. Could backfire. Don’t start off with this…
Time of day
- Is this a bad time? Good!
Interviewing at 3 am gets people off-guard, may be more honest when disgruntled. Spies get caught waking up, speaking in true mother tongue…
Calling at 7 am ensures the secretary cannot screen the call, you might get access.
Survey calls at dinner time are difficult, but its worse at breakfast…
In Person Settings
Sit-down Face to Face: A face to face interview, sitting across a table, is a typical setting. It feels very formal, and professional. This is usually the result of an approved request for an interview. The table is useful for holding documents, a recorder, or even just a pitcher of water and glasses. However, it may be confrontational, as people tend to be on the defensive when directly facing someone. It may feel like at interrogation.
Sit-down Side to Side: An alternative is to place the table against a wall, so that the interviewer is setting besides the interviewee. Psychologically, this is less intimidating, as people don’t have to look at each other when they speak. Promotes better listening, more empathy.
Comfy chairs: Clinical psychologists are notorious for providing their clients with very comfortable furniture to sit and lie on. This can be said also of tv hosts (ex: Ellen) who provide a comfortable seat. The idea is that the interviewee may not be comfortable sharing ideas, feelings, and that the comfort of the chair helps to build trust with the interviewer.
Scrum: This is usually the case in journalism, when a politician, or anyone of public interest such as hockey players or pop stars, is met by a group of journalists in an informal setting. Everyone is standing. Very rare for scientists to scrum (it’s a verb), but this may have to happen if the person of interest refuses formal requests for an interview.
Field interview: This is typical for anthropologists who meet people in their regular, natural, environment. The interview will take place with or without a formal request. If someone feels comfortable enough to talk to you, you start taking notes, wherever that may happen. Also imagine a psychologist interviewing a child, sometimes you need to get on your hands and knees to get them talking…
Recording techniques
Video camera: Allows for both audio and video, camera operator may be intrusive. Hidden camera can help to get a more honest account.
Audio recorder: Less intrusive than video, but it does not record non-verbal communication. It is possible to record telephone interviews. You need a simple adapter from a hardware store, which plugs into the mini-jack of your device (or computer).
Handwritten notes: Notes are scientific and legal documents, including emails and text messages. Can be taken as complement to audio-visual recording, to note impressions, thoughts for next questions… have to make sure the quotes are marked carefully apart from other notes. Don’t forget to date, time, and sign.
Nothing – Good memory: Take notes down as soon as its over, to avoid forgetting details. What are you going to cite from, if you have no notes?
Interviewer Bias
Can the interviewer be biased?
- A biased question – Culture – Religion – Ignorance – Morals
Ex: Is it not time that an Iroquois leader’s name be chosen to replace Sherbrooke Street in Montreal?
In Indigenous culture, it is not a custom to name landmarks in honour of a human. Landmarks are named according to their geographical qualities. This is a way to integrate cartography into the language. It might be inappropriate to ask a Kanienkehaka person (Mohawk) if they would prefer a descriptor, or a famous person’s name on a street or bridge.
- A biased sample (non-random)
Ex: Dear Bostonian, isn’t the Montreal Canadiens, the best hockey team in the world?
Whether or not your interviewee is biased you should know in advance. School of thought, Political stripes, Age, Gender, Race, etc.
Always interview at least one other source, as “counter-balance”
Advantages of Interviews
- Root causes
- Cultural sensitivity – Ex: avoid western biases if the interviewee teaches something to the researcher
- Trust, Comfort, Honesty
- Depth, Holism
Disadvantages of Interviews
- Descriptive: Results are deemed anecdotal. Power is weak.
- Sample is not random = no generalizability.
- Sample is small = no accuracy.
- Cannot correlate on large scale, cannot reduce importance of other factors. Causality is impossible.
Reporting
Spatial Maps
Descriptive Text
Synthesis Tables
Preferred Disciplines
Anthropology, Sociology, Psychology, Geography, Political Science
Other Disciplines
Applications in…
Journalism, Political Attaché, Legal Due Diligence, Crime investigation
Not useful for
Historians, Economists