Developing an Interview Schedule

Erlandson (1993) emphasised that the key to obtaining rich data is asking good questions that have been prepared beforehand to reflect the basic research questions. During the interviews the researcher wanted to explore issues related to the carer’s feelings and experiences around the event of the person they cared for going into a care home placement. To fully understand issues that led up to the event and to understand how life was for the carer following the event the researcher wanted to explore three particular time frames with the carer:

1. What was life like prior to care home placement.

2. What (if any) were the triggers to care home placement.

3. What was life like after care home placement?

124

The researcher was aware that each carer would have their own story to tell around these three areas and wanted the interviews to be flexible enough to allow each interviewee to talk about their own experience in as free flowing a manner as possible. As a result the researcher did not want to ask a set questions but rather have prompts to ensure that if the interviewee did not spontaneously discuss the three areas then prompts could be given to explore this information in an informal and relaxed way. Appendix 6 provides details of the interview schedule that was used.

4.7.4.1 Interview Process – Issues and Challenges

There is recognition that undertaking qualitative research can pose many issues and challenges for researchers (Dickson-Swift et al., 2007), which are often compounded when researching sensitive or difficult topics (McCosker et al., 2001). It is therefore necessary for the researcher to identify any

issues that the interview process may have for the participant or themselves.

4.7.4.2 The Timing of the Interview

There are varying views about timing and the optimum time to collect qualitative data after a traumatic personal experience (Enosh and Buchbinder, 2005, Cowles, 1988, ). The researcher decided to contact informal carers to take part in an interview between 2 – 4 months after the care home placement occurred. This time delay was given as the researcher had wanted to explore how life had been for the carer since care home placement and wanted to avoid ‘chaos narrative’, a term described by Frank (1995) when the participant is still distressed or traumatised by the event and there is difficulty in interpreting or understanding the narrative. Time was needed for carers to be able to recover from the situation and to be able to adjust to their change in circumstances so that they could then reflect upon and discuss at interview. The time to interviews was also balanced with the knowledge that if the interviews were left too long following the event then participants may develop recall bias and potentially forget some

125

of the important issues that led to the care home placement in the first place or be able to provide less vivid details of the event (Porter and Birt, 2001).

4.7.4.3 Developing Rapport

One of the most important elements of data collection during interviewing on a sensitive topic is the ability of the researcher to develop a rapport with participants (Karnieli-Miller et al., 2009). Dickson-Swift et al. (2007)

suggested that developing a rapport with participants in qualitative interviews will enhance the researcher’s access to the interviewee’s lives, thereby providing depth and richness to the data. The researcher had already established relationships with the interviewees during clinical practice, and had often known them for a number of years. Over that period the researcher had built up a rapport, often through the sharing of knowledge, information (of a professional and personal nature) and being a source of support for both the PwP and their carer. Booth and Booth (1994) believed that the way to develop a good rapport involves giving as well as receiving information in a two-way process between participant and researcher. Building a trusting supporting relationship is a key part to managing anyone with a long term condition. The placement of the researcher in understanding the often

distressing symptoms that can occur in PD, and an actual knowledge of what the PwP was like and how they had progressed over the years also led to developing a trusting relationship that improved rapport at interview. One way of judging the success of building rapport is the depth and quality of information and experiences revealed by participants (Karnieli-Miller et al., 2009).

4.7.4.4 Sensitive and Open Questioning

Knowledge about a particular phenomenon may be gained through face-to-face interviews (Elmir et al., 2011). Face-to-face-to-face interviewing involves human interaction and is a way of exchanging information that can be difficult to obtain through other methods of data collection such as questionnaires or surveys (Kvale, 1996). Face-to-face semi-structured in-depth interviews were

126

to be conducted to enable a conversational style of interviewing to allow meaning to emerge between the interviewer and interviewee while ensuring the focus of the event. This involves the researcher having a predetermined list of questions or specific topics to cover, usually referred to as an interview schedule or guide (Bryman et al., 2008). Unlike structured interviews using closed questions, typically used for quantitative studies, which have specific questions in a specific order, semi-structured in-depth interviews are more flexible (Green and Thorogood, 2009). In-depth interviews can have a wider range of possible responses, as the questions that are asked are

predominantly open ended (Smith, 2007). In-depth interviews aim to delve deep beneath the surface of superficial responses to obtain true meanings that individuals assign to events, and the complexities of their attitudes, behaviours and experiences (Bowling, 2014, pg 408). This is exactly what the researcher hoped to achieve from the interviews. Bowling (2014, pg 408) also writes how this method allows respondents to tell their own stories in their own words, with only prompting from the interviewer and that interviews can be event based. Lofland and Lofland (1995) described this method as

‘guided conversations’ with the aim of allowing the respondent to talk in-depth and at length about past events. The interviewer does not need to ask the questions or prompts in the same order and additional questions may be asked that expand on interesting or novel points raised by the interviewee (Smith, 2007).

The advantages of semi-structured in-depth interviews are that more complex issues can be probed and answers can be clarified and a more relaxed research atmosphere may obtain more in-depth as well as sensitive information (Bowling, 2014, pg 407). This was very important to consider as the topic being discussed, i.e. reasons for care home placement, would most certainly be a sensitive and difficult topic for participants to discuss and it was important that they felt as comfortable and relaxed as possible. Bowling (2014, pg 286) described that one of the disadvantages of this type of

interview is that data are time-consuming to collect and this was taken into consideration by the researcher. It was very important to allow participants adequate time to fully respond (Nieswiadomy, 1998), and so the researcher

127

ensured time was given during the interviews to allow the carers to express their feelings, and remain silent as necessary to allow the carer to collect their thoughts and respond in their own time.

Demonstrating care and empathy during research is essential in eliciting information from participants (Dickson-Swift et al., 2007). In the study the researcher engaged with the carers sensitively and respected periods of silence and continued the interview only when the carer was ready. At the beginning of the interview the researcher did reassure the carer that they could stop the interview at any time if they felt uncomfortable continuing. A number of carers did get upset at times during the interviews, but all wanted to continue. Some carers disclosed at the end that they had never had the opportunity to discuss any of these issues with anyone else and they found the process quite cathartic, which was identified as a potential benefit to interviewees by East et al. (2010).

4.7.4.5 A Comfortable Interview Environment

It is important for the participant and the researcher to feel safe (McCosker et al., 2001) and that participant privacy and convenience are paramount

(Speziale et al., 2011). Interviews were conducted at the time most

convenient to the carer and at the place they felt most comfortable in. The more comfortable participants are, the more likely they are to disclose

information and reveal the nature of the lived experience (Elmir et al., 2011).

At the beginning of an interview the researcher had offered breaks and ensured the carer had a drink if they wanted one. During the interview the researcher had a supply of tissues to offer if the carer became emotional or upset. Consent was obtained before the interview started and the

interviewee was made fully aware that the interview would be recorded on a digital recorder to avoid the need for the researcher to take notes during the interview and so allow conversation to flow more naturally. Each participant was again reassured that anything they said would be kept confidential and anonymised and not shared, particularly with the person they had cared for.

This was especially important because the practitioner-researcher would

128

have contact with the person they had cared for and still be directly involved with their care, unlike a researcher who would have no further contact after the data had been collected. After the interview the researcher would record field notes of key words and phrases, as recommended by Bowling (2014, pg 411).