The appropriate use of interviewing

The. ric h e r data which one can get from in te rv ie w in g a person., as opposed to th e ir f i l l i n g in . a . q u estio n n aire, is thought to be necessary where one wants to *put fle s h on the s t a t is t ic a l bones'; in o ther words they are to be used as - an adjunct to 'more o b je c tiv e * q u a n tita tiv e ' methods. O ften they are only recommended fo r p ilo t work (e .g . in the. constructio n of an a ttitu d e in v e n to ry ), or to am p lify and check up on q u estio n n aires.. Sem i-structured in te rv ie w s are recommended fo r use when one wishes the respondents, to express themselves a t some len g th , bearing in mind th a t they must be c a re fu lly worded and have enough shape, to prevent aim less ram bling. In general th e researcher is warned o ff using unstructured in te rv ie w s , as these re q u ire considerable s k i l l , due to the b u ilt in hazards of redundant in fo rm a tio n ,. questioner bias and questionable relevance of co n ten t.

A ll of th is seems to re le g a te in te rv ie w data to a p o s itio n of secondary -importance a t the o u ts e t, u s u a lly almost merely ju s t if ie d by a need to make a research re p o rt a l i t t l e more in te re s tin g . Not everyone, would agree th a t they are of such lim ite d usefulness. Where one wants to . discover a person's view of a s itu a tio n th e in te rv ie w i t s e l f .can provide the areas of relevan ce, to be su b ject to s t a t is t ic a l treatm ent i f th is is considered necessary. If.o n e . has a lread y decided on the areas of relevance and o n ly re q u ire s instances of them then th e re seems l i t t l e p o in t in in te rv ie w in g . In th is resp ect, th ere seems to be l i t t l e d iffe re n c e between

in te rv ie w s and questionnaires* n e ith e r being p a r tic u la r ly su ited to

tapping th e.view s o f respondents them selves. When in te rv ie w in g i s

considered-, from th e .n a tu ra l science, view point as an .o b je c tiv e e lic it in g , device', i t becomes s trip p ed of a l l usefulness as a means of accessing, im portant and genuine in fo rm atio n from respondents- I t is . then.Judged-according to the c r it e r ia by which o th e r - s c ie n t if ic techniques are assessed in the n a tu ra l sciences. As a re s u lt th e d^ta. must he regarded as le s s than s a tis fa c to ry , of only secondary

im portance* s o ft ( i . e . s u b je ttiv e ) and consequently u n re lia b le -

The re o rie n ta tio n in vo lved .in adopting a phenomenological p ersp ective resto res, in te rvie w s to a p o s itio n of cen tral, importance in research , not .a mere adjunct to other methods; they are considered a .main means of access to .th e respondent's l i f e w orld. The aim is. to ob tain ric h and d e ta ile d d e sc rip tio n s of the respondent's own concerns, opinions and actio n s in her own words, ra th e r than e lic it in g , b its of behavioural responses to precategorised s tim u li. One is more in te re s te d in how m atters appear to the respondent than in how to f i t answers in to p re fig u red categ o ries - the f i r s t step being uncensored concrete d e sc rip tio n s which come p rio r to any e ffo r ts to c o n tro l, -m anipulate or q u a n tity what is s aid . Such d escrip tio n s are not tre a te d lik e physical, v a ria b le s ; th e .fo c u s is not on co n tro l but on understanding the meanings intended.

The respondent is given the freedom to. choose her own area s of importance and to put emphases where she fe e ls they should be, so th a t anything which she fe e ls is worthy of mention is re g is te re d as d ata. .It is .im p o rta n t then th a t she be allowed to s tru c tu re her d e s c rip tio n s

S ubjective, b ias does n o t a r i s e in the way i t does, on a p o s itiv is t -understanding :of . in te rv ie w in g as the s u b je c tiv ity of th e:research er is th e very means of access: t o thie meanings .and themes which make up th e

..q u a lita tiv e . d e s c rip tio n . A ll of th e d e sc rip tio n is s erio u s ly

considered p re c is e ly , as th e respondent described i t , . b e f o r e the p a r tic u la r concerns o f the .research focus are applied and allowed to

o rg an ise-th e m a te ria l. The s u b je c tiv ity or concerns of the. researcher

..are made e x p lic it in th is regard ra th e r than assumed to be c o n tro lle d fa c to rs . The dialogue.betw een the researcher and respondent p assib le in an in te rv ie w allow s- fo r th e exp lo ra tio n of the respondents

concerns... '