Conducting Research Interviews

Summary

Jennifer Rowley offers pragmatic guidance for novice researchers conducting research interviews, especially for thesis or small-scale projects. The article covers designing and planning interviews, conducting interviews, and analyzing interview data through 11 common questions. It recommends semi-structured interviews as a practical starting point, stresses purposive sampling and careful question design, and advises researchers to manage interviews as professional conversations. Analysis is presented as an iterative process involving familiarization, transcription, coding, interpretation, and thematic writing-up, with attention to subjectivity and alternative conceptions of interviews.

Important Keywords

Research interviews: professional conversations designed to generate data for a research question.
Qualitative research: research aimed at interpreting meanings, experiences, and themes rather than counting predefined responses only.
Semi-structured interviews: interviews guided by prepared topics while allowing flexible follow-up and probing.
Interview schedule: the planned set of topics or questions used to guide an interview.
Purposive sampling: selecting interviewees because they can provide relevant insight into the research question.
Pilot interview: a trial interview used to test and refine questions, timing, and interview procedure.
Interviewee engagement: keeping participants interested, comfortable, and willing to give rich answers.
Thematic analysis: identifying and interpreting patterns or themes across interview data.
Coding: labeling segments of data so they can be grouped, compared, and interpreted.
Interview transcription: converting recorded interview talk into written data for analysis.
Qualitative data analysis: iterative familiarization, coding, interpretation, and thematic writing-up.
Active listening: listening with minimal preconceptions and willingness to revise assumptions.
Probe question: follow-up question used to clarify or deepen an answer.
Critical incident: specific remembered event that reveals breakdowns, values, or successful experiences.
Semi-structured interview: guided interview with room for adaptation and follow-up.

Important Concepts

Interviews are suited to research focused on understanding opinions, experiences, attitudes, values, behaviours, processes, or predictions rather than producing broad statistical generalizations.
Semi-structured interviews are recommended for novice researchers because they balance consistency with flexibility, often using six to 12 main questions plus prompts.
Interview questions should be grounded in research questions but adapted to participants, avoiding jargon, leading assumptions, double questions, yes/no formats, vagueness, and invasive wording.
The number and length of interviews should balance theoretical fit, participant availability, sample variation, and the researcher's capacity to analyze the resulting data.
Interviewee selection should be purposive, based on who has the knowledge or authority to address the research topic, with access and willingness treated as practical constraints.
Conducting interviews requires rapport, clear introductions, confidentiality assurances, permission to record, time management, prompts, and responsiveness to the interviewee.
Analysis begins immediately after interviews through listening, note-taking, transcription, familiarization, organizing data, developing themes, coding, and interpreting meaning.
Findings should be written around themes aligned with research questions, supported by sparing and relevant quotations, and should report disagreement as meaningful rather than as failure.
The article mainly reflects a neo-positivist approach but notes romantic and constructionist views in which interview data may be shaped or co-constructed through interaction.
Interviews support empathic design when they are based on active listening, openness, and careful follow-up rather than forcing users into predefined problems and needs.
Semi-structured interviews balance prepared questions with flexibility for probing unexpected details.
Critical Incident Technique asks participants for concrete memorable positive or negative episodes, which helps avoid vague generalities.
In evaluation studies, interviews often follow tasks or diary/probe activities so captured material can be used as prompts.
Academic reporting of interviews should be transparent about sampling, procedure, analysis, assumptions, and limitations.

Examples

Interviews with social network site members can explore reasons for membership, perceived benefits, experiences, usage frequency, and predictions about social networking sites.
A mobile phone service provider study illustrates the tradeoff between questionnaires, which may support broader generalization from many respondents, and interviews, which may produce deeper insight from fewer participants.
A study of corporate social responsibility policy implementation may use interviews with managers in key positions because they are better placed to provide detailed insights than questionnaire respondents.
Card-based interview tasks can ask participants to sequence innovation-process stages or prioritize factors affecting willingness to share information with colleagues, prompting reflection and discussion.
Findings from an e-government impact evaluation might report the extent of agreement among interviewees, such as whether citizen engagement in evaluation is necessary.