In addition to the data collection and analysis conducted in Chapter 3 to 5, interviews were also conducted with candidates or members of their campaign staff, and these are the focus of Chapter 6. Elite interviews most commonly refer to subjects that have specific knowledge or occupy a specific position within an organisation, such as a business or political party. It is expected that those in elite positions have the ability to describe their own position/behaviour and give a unique insight into events or practices (Hochschild, 2009). Elite interviews, unlike standardised interviews, are a method to check, rather than develop, a hypothesis and will be employed in this way to confirm the findings of the data collected from candidates’ new media output (Yin, 2009). The primary purposes of conducting these interviews are twofold. Firstly, interviews will establish how much input the central party has in candidates’ new media output. Is the party controlling what candidates say? Considering the financial and organisational challenges faced by most major political parties today signs of greater independence may actually be strategic choices by the party. Without asking candidates directly how big the role of the party is in their new media use and how they themselves view new media, as a potentially valuable campaign tool or as merely something they are using because all of their competitors are, the primary research question cannot fully be answered. Secondly interviews are used to confirm the findings made in Chapters 3-5. The meanings behind candidates’ new media output, especially and how this relates to the personal vote, have been constructed by the researcher with a solid theoretical underpinning. As such it is useful to confirm with candidates that the framework on how to classify and interpret new media output are correct e.g. the inclusion of campaign activity posts as part of personal vote seeking strategy. However, the specific interpretation of such posts is original to this researcher and as such benefits through confirmation by candidates themselves.
While candidates, especially those whom became legislators, are amongst the busiest and most difficult actors to gain access to, they are not always responsible for their own campaign content and strategy, be it with traditional or online forms of campaigning. As such, support staff and electoral agents are also significant actors and valid interview participants. A semi-structured approach to interviews is necessary for such subjects. Elite actors are likely to resist what Aberbach & Rockman (2002 pg.674) describe as “straight- jacketing” and may resist attempts by the researcher to confine them to a narrow line of questioning. As such it was important during the course of interviews to adapt to any tangential topics which may potentially lead to subjects raising new issues previously unconsidered, while making sure that information is both relevant and challenged in an acceptable way by the researcher so as not to upset any relationship between the two parties (Moyser, 2006). Preparation is also key to any interview and with potential time constraints the interviews must have clear aims and a set of core questions to be answered. As Berry (2002, pg. 679) states: “excellent interviewers are excellent conversationalists”. Through a combination of personal flexibility, building a good rapport and preparation on the subject, it is hoped that these interviews have gone a long way to complementing the data set in answering the research questions.
Interviewing poses several challenges. For many social researchers the biggest challenge of interviewing lies in gaining access to the relevant subjects. Politicians themselves are very busy and may not have the time or interest to take part in an interview. Researchers in the social sciences inevitably find themselves constrained by time, location or interruption of interviews which are commonplace in elite interviewing and force the researcher to adjust their carefully planned set of questions (Harvey, 2011). Moreover, politicians are likely to have received media training and may be more interested in how they come across in the interview rather cooperating with the researcher to answer the relevant question. While being part of a scientific collaboration may appeal to some elite subjects, others may treat the exercise as a chance to promote a personal/political agenda. While subjects cannot be relied upon to view themselves or their actions objectively it is important that they feel comfortable enough to talk openly. How they themselves interpret their thoughts and actions gives a valuable insight into their world and other actors in a similar position i.e. other politicians. Finally, researchers must consider how to code and analyse the data
collected. An advantage of elite interviews is that, ideally, the respondents give clear and rational, at least from their point of view, responses for which a coding structure can be built around (Aberbach & Rockman, 2002). The role of the researcher is not just to register what is said but also what is left unsaid (Berry, 2002). A subject may consciously or unconsciously steer the conversation away from topics they do not want to discuss or to talk about an issue interesting for them but perhaps not relevant to the study. The researcher may not always have the ability to successfully challenge them on these points. Consistent coding schemes are vital to ensure scientific rigour and it is vital to make sure that each respondent answers the same key questions while also allowing for flexibility when interesting side topic or new concepts may arise. Once data is collected it is important to be able to identify key themes and points of consistency and differences which either tie in to stated hypotheses or that point to new trends which the researcher has yet to consider. In sum elite interviews require researchers to have a unique skill set – involving more of a personal element to conducting interviews while ensuring they remain scientifically valid. Chapter 6 will discuss how these challenges are to be met in this study along with further details about interview preparation and formulation of interviews questions based on conclusions drawn earlier in the thesis. In total 17 interviews were conducted, 9 in the UK and 8 in Japan. Further details about candidate interviews, including their framework which is derived from the results reported in Chapters 3-5, and discussion of results, is set out in Chapter 6.
Chapter 7: The impact of new media on vote share (H6)