Introduction
An interview is a method of gathering data in which one person asks questions about a specific topic while the other responds or expresses their opinion. The person who asks the question, known as the interviewer, must select an audience with relevant content to the research topic for an effective interview. Furthermore, the interviewer should be friendly and introduce themselves in a way that allows for a two-way conversation with the interviewee. As a result, the interviewer should avoid distractions and keep eye contact with the interviewee throughout the process. Therefore, this report focuses on the factors influencing whether an interview is effective or ineffective.
Interview
The key mistakes made by the interviewer during the interview
The interviewer in the Demo Qualitative Interview with Mistakes video needs to do more things correctly (Chrzanowska, 2014a). She begins by stating the interview’s purpose but does not finish her statement (Chrzanowska, 2014a). Instead, she ends with the words “and all that,” implying that she must fully introduce the research topic (Chrzanowska, 2014a). Another blunder in the interview is the interviewer’s rapid-fire questioning. Her pace is breakneck, asking closed questions one after the other without giving the interviewee enough time to consider the answers (Chrzanowska, 2014a). The interviewer in this video overdoes gestures and speaks condescending, which sometimes confuses the interviewee.
The interviewer needs to use her body language more effectively as the interview process is concerned. This is seen because she does not keep eye contact with the interviewee. Moreover, she leans backward instead of sitting upright while asking questions. Behaviorally, the interviewer seems not prepared and interested while conducting the interview. She uses her phone while the interviewee responds to the posed questions. Another behavior noted is that the interviewer continuously kept watching herself and thus made the interviewee not have long responses. This is seen when she asks a question and then hints at how the interviewee should respond to that question. This does not seem right because the interviewee knows what they did and should be allowed to describe her experiences without interference.
The interviewer also, at some point, criticized the interviewee. For instance, she said that the interviewee only reported what she had learned but was interested in what she would have done differently. She told the interviewee that she was contradicting herself and changing her mind about her earlier stated answer. In this video, the interviewer did ask leading questions; for example, she asked the interviewee if she liked the training program. However, the interviewer had predetermined questions and answers and wanted the process to go her way. The interview was ended inappropriately, as required. The interviewer needed to have thanked the interviewee for her valuable time and genuine responses rather than just saying thank you.
The goods points on how the interview was conducted
In the video Demonstration Qualitative Interview – How It Should Be Done, the interviewer casually introduces herself and clearly defines the research topic of the interview in a way that the interviewee best understands (Chrzanowska, 2014b). When asking questions, the interviewer moves at a moderate pace, giving the interviewee enough time to consider the questions before responding. The interviewer is very supportive of the interviewee and asks direct and to-the-point questions. She listens to her story and encourages her about the good things she has learned. In the video, the interviewer asks one question and then waits for the interviewee to respond (Chrzanowska, 2014b). The interviewee is given enough time to react before the next question is posed.
Moreover, the interviewer avoids using excessive gestures and stays focused on listening as the interviewee responds. Her body language is appropriate because she stays upright and listens carefully to the interviewee’s responses. The interview questions are very objective and are at collecting specific data. For example, the interviewer asks the interviewee to recall the topics and point out which was especially interesting. Notably, the interviewer does not interrupt the interviewee as she gives her response. As a result, the interviewee adequately responded to all questions about what she did during her nursing training program. Besides, the interviewer does not constantly check her watch nor use her phone but gives her attention to the interviewee.
Furthermore, the interviewer maintained eye contact, indicating that she was respectful and interested. Throughout the interview, the interviewer asked leading questions to guide the interviewee in tackling each question. For example, the interviewer asks the interviewee’s most favorite and least favorite training programs that they were put through. There was no criticism because most questions were open-ended, allowing the interviewee to give her opinion about the matter. The interviewer’s conclusion was perfectly appropriate and standard. She thanked the interviewee for her time and responses and asked if she had any additional feedback before wrapping up the interview.
Participant Observations
Definition of Participant Observations
Participant observation is a qualitative research technique in which the researcher actively participates in the activities of the research participants while simply observing them. Most researchers conduct participant observations in the role they are most interested in investigating (Skinner and The, 2020; Lecture Notes). The goal of the participant observation technique is to examine a wide range of behaviors in an organic, natural setting to improve data collection during an interview (Lois, 2015). As presented in the lecture materials, participant observation research is critical in human behavior disciplines such as sociology, cultural anthropology, psychology, and ethnography.
Because the researchers are fully immersed in the study location, they can observe people’s daily interactions, formal and informal dialogues, and behaviors. It enables researchers to obtain authentic and private information about people (Griffee, 2005; Lecture Notes). However, this knowledge is filtered through the eyes of the researchers, who risk losing objectivity and changing the behavior of the people they study simply by being present (Barrett and Twycross, 2018, p. 64). Participant observation is a technique that allows you to observe, comprehend, and contrast what people are doing with what they are saying, which you can then record for analysis (Watson, 2017). Furthermore, it allows the researcher to obtain quantitative data from surveys, various quantitative observation techniques, and qualitative data from various types of interviews.
Over and Cover Participant Observations
Overt observation is a participant observation done with the subjects’ permission. This comprehension can be verbal or written. When the sociologist determines that social science studies are being conducted, the respondents are individually encouraged to express their explicit consent for the study to continue (Barett & Twycross, 2018). A researcher also indicates his or her status as an outsider in the first, but the study’s goals are less explicitly stated. The partnership between the scholar and the subjects may impact the quality of the information obtained. Researchers frequently enjoy discussing their backgrounds and how they got started in their field. As a result, most published reports of overt participant observation cover the presumed function of the observer in the group or society under study in some detail.
Covert observation is participant observation conducted without the express knowledge or consent of the investigated social unit. To conceal the researcher’s true goal entails discovering some self-explanatory function within the research environment. It could be used because the social unit typically prohibits research access (Sekaran & Bougie, 2016). Examples include Leon Festinger and his colleagues secretly monitoring a religious cult while appearing to adopt its ideas and Laud Humphries’ covert observation of homosexual relationships (Busetto, Wick, and Gumbinger, 2020, p. 7). Covert participant observation, as opposed to overt participant observation, is a more practical method of conducting participant participation. The former ensures that the researcher blends in with the target community and maintains their way of life. On the other hand, covert participant observation is considered unethical because it involves lying to the target group (Ozbilgin & Vassilopoulou 2018). Overt participant observation is a more ethical and acceptable method of gathering information.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Over and Cover Participation
Advantages of Over Participation
Flexibility and grounded theory are instrumental when investigating unfamiliar situations, groups, and societies about which one knows little before beginning the research because they allow scholars to change others’ minds as the research progresses (Hamilton and Finley, 2019). Overt participation enables researchers to observe actors’ meanings while conducting research. Overt participation is advantageous because the researcher can conduct normal operations, making note-taking simple (Phommachanh et al., 2019). No specialized knowledge is required for an outside researcher.
Disadvantages of Over Participation
Because the procedure is practical, it takes time and can take years to complete. Because there is so much data, the researcher must be sociologically trained. Overt participation can be difficult and stressful (Myers, 2019). More representativeness is required in the technique, which may result in inaccurate data collection. The investigated groups are typically small, and the sample is frequently drawn randomly (Milano, Novelli, and Cheer, 2019, p. 3). It is unlikely that a single study will produce accurate data because its success heavily depends on the researcher’s personal qualities and abilities.
Advantages of Cover Participation
The researcher does not need to seek permission, making access more accessible, particularly to closed groups (Phommachanh et al., 2019). Participants are less likely to act differently if they are unaware that the research is being conducted, so reactivity is not a significant concern.
Disadvantages of Cover Participation
The issue with this approach is taking notes while on the field. Taking notes while acting covertly is practically impossible. Although Pearson admits that much of the information was likely forgotten, he had to jot down notes quickly after the games to research football hooligans. When acting covertly, researchers must avoid drawing attention to themselves (Harley, 2022). Researchers cannot conduct probing interviews or create a social survey during covert participation because these actions are out of character. There is also concern about privacy invasion and the possibility that some investigators may have to commit crimes to conceal their identities. The clandestine researcher is constantly stressed because they must “keep a front” while recording data behind the scenes; it is like working two jobs (Milano, Novelli, and Cheer, 2019, p. 10). There is also the stress of fearing that a scholar’s cover will be blown, causing the entire study to fail.
Examples of Participant Observations
Pearson conducted covert participant observation of Blackpool Football Club supporters between 1995 and 1998. Other fans knew him as a law student but were unaware he was also an academic researcher. His strategy was to meet them in the bar before a game or as they entered the stadium and then join them for drinks afterward. He claims to have attended 78 games but could not examine the fans outside of a football setting because he did not live in the area (Rosenbaum, Ramirez & Kim, 2020). He chose Blackpool F.C. because of its proximity to Lancaster. He attended college in an area with a long history of football hooliganism. Khan’s work provides a rare ethnographic examination of an elite organization, whereas most work appears to have been done with the marginalized and poor (Rosenbaum, Ramirez & Kim 2020). It meant accepting a position at St. Paul’s School and relocating to an apartment nearby. He witnessed the regular operations of the school (Strudwick, 2019, p. 185). Following his time at St. Paul’s, he always sought former students to speak with and learn from.
Conclusions
There are several steps that the interviewer must take in order to obtain the best possible answers from the interview. First, the interviewer must introduce the topic briefly to ensure that he has selected the appropriate person for the interview. Furthermore, depending on the interview, taking notes during the interview is essential. According to this report, maintaining eye contact and avoiding distractions is critical for an effective interview process.
Reference List
Barrett, D & Twycross, A 2018, ‘Data collection in qualitative research’, Evidence Based Nursing, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 63–64.
Busetto, L, Wick, W & Gumbinger, C 2020, ‘How to use and assess qualitative research methods’, Neurological Research and Practice, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 1–10.
Chrzanowska, J 2014a, Demo qualitative interview with mistakes, YouTube.
Chrzanowska, J 2014b, Demonstration Qualitative Interview – How It Should Be Done, www.youtube.com.
Griffee, DT 2005, ‘Research Tips: Interview Data Collection,’ Journal of Developmental Education, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 36–37.
Hamilton, AB & Finley, EP 2019, ‘Qualitative methods in implementation research: An introduction’, Psychiatry Research, vol. 280, p. 112516.
Harley, E 2022, Business Research Methods 6E., Oxford Univ Press, S.L. Lecture Notes (n.d.), Research Methodological Approaches Colecting Primary Data Using Qualitative Technique.
Lois, L 2015, Participant Observations, www.youtube.com.
Milano, C, Novelli, M & Cheer, JM 2019, ‘Overtourism and degrowth: a social movements perspective’, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, vol. 27, no. 12, pp. 1–19.
Myers, MD 2019, Qualitative research in business and management, SAGE, Los Angeles.
Ozbilgin, MF & Vassilopoulou, J 2018, Qualitative Methodologies in Organization Studies, M Ciesielska & D Jemielniak (eds), Springer International Publishing, Cham.
Phommachanh, S, Essink, DR, Wright, EP, Broerse, JEW & Mayxay, M 2019, ‘Overt versus covert observations on health care providers’ care and communication during antenatal care visits in Lao PDR’, Journal of Global Health Science, vol. 1.
Rosenbaum, MS, Ramirez, GC & Kim, K (Kawon) 2020, ‘From overt to covert: Exploring discrimination against homosexual consumers in retail stores’, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, p. 102426.
Sekaran, U, & Bougie, R 2016, Research methods for business: a skill building approach. John Wiley & Sons.
Skinner, J & The, O 2020, The interview : an ethnographic approach, Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, Abingdon, Oxon ; New York, Ny.
Strudwick, R 2019, ‘Tensions in ethnographic observation: overt or covert?’, Journal of Organizational Ethnography, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 185–195.
Watson, D 2017, Methods Participant Observation, www.youtube.com.