Interview Process

The interviews in Sohan village took place between August 2014 and February 2015. The participants were informed that each interview would take between two to three hours and will be conducted at a time and place most suitable to them. The interviews were scheduled in advance by the host family. I had several visits with each participant after the initial interviews to allow me to fully understand their perspective. The subsequent meetings (interviews) with the participants were also arranged by the host family. Prior to the interviews, the option of audiotaping the interviews was discussed with the host family. I was advised that the participants would become extremely uncomfortable by having their voices audiotaped. It was suggested that having an audiotaped version of the interviews would make the participants fear for their safety, despite assurances to maintain confidentiality. Consequently, audiotaping was not something that could be considered. However, I sought permission from the participants to take down some notes during the interviews.

During the preliminary conversations with the participants the issue of consent, confidentiality and anonymity was discussed again. The right of the participants to decline involvement in the study at any time was also recognised. Prior to each interview, these

issues were raised once again even if it meant repeating the same information that was presented earlier to the participants (Corbin & Morse, 2003). The interviews were conducted separately with each participant. The meetings with the participants were always closed-door. No individual other than the researcher and the participant was ever present during the time of the interview. The interview meetings were held at the participants' homes, unless otherwise specified. The host family accompanied me to these interviews but sat outside while I conducted the interviews with the participants. Most interviews took place either in the morning or early afternoon.

To echo the earlier point, the interview process was based on the concepts of reciprocity and mutual self-disclosure (Oakley, 1981). I engaged the participants in small talk before posing some general questions. Gradually I moved onto more personal issues. The adoption of reciprocity and self-disclosure as strategies to achieve equality in my relationship with the participants led to interactive conversational interviews such as those described by Brannen (1988). In an interactive conversational interviews the participants are given a great deal of control over the interview process allowing them an increased flexibility in telling their story (Corbin & Morse, 2003). In this study the participants’ answers did not have to fall within the scope of the questions. With the interactive conversational format, the participants had the freedom to share as much detail as they desired and felt comfortable sharing.

3.6.1 Data Collection

The data collection process included open-ended unstructured interviews with the four women described in section 3.4.3.2 (including table 3.1), to obtain their life story accounts. Unstructured interview format was adopted for a number of reasons. The researcher was unfamiliar with the participants’ lifestyles, personal perceptions and beliefs regarding domestic violence (Berg, 2001). The researcher wanted to allow the participants to select their own set of vocabulary to define their experiences, rather than use the terminology associated with domestic violence in the literature. The idea was that the participants be allowed to shape their own stories in ways they deemed appropriate. The unstructured interview format enabled the participants to conceptualise domestic violence in their own terms. The researcher wanted the questions to naturally arise from conversations with the participants during the interview process (Berg, 2001).

The participants provided narratives describing their childhood, adolescence, early adulthood and older adulthood years, including their exposure to domestic violence. The participants openly talked about their fears, challenges, and incidents of domestic violence experienced in their husband's home. The interviews covered question areas related to the major themes that emerged from literature review and informal discussions with the women in the village. The researcher began with more general questions about family life and issues facing rural Pakistani women. The participants were also asked about their relationships in the rural community. They were then asked to talk about their experiences outlining their relationship with the husband and in-laws. An interview schedule for the participants is presented in appendix IA. The interview schedule was used as a guide for

further refined and verified with the help of the participants during multiple meetings with them.

In addition, after the first interview meeting with each participant, the women expressed an eagerness to meet me again to share more details about their experiences of domestic violence. This seemed to conform with the suggestion that sharing one’s story with someone who is genuinely interested in understanding your perspective is a highly rewarding experience for the participants (Corbin & Morse, 2003). In fact, the in-depth interviews served as a catharsis for the participants (Pelzang & Hutchinson, 2017). The in- depth interviews gave participants the opportunity to recall traumatic experiences and express emotions associated with events that had never been expressed or revealed before. At times after an emotional release I would see a smile and relief on the participants’ faces. This indicated to me that perhaps the participants were seeking validation that they had never received from those close to them.

It was recognised that the participants often shared painful and emotionally distressing experiences, which led to a realisation that sometimes I needed to take a break to let the participant recompose herself. During these little breaks I would focus my attention back on relationship building and reciprocity. This involved preparing a meal together, sharing a recipe, learning henna applying techniques or simply sharing an interesting story with the participant. It was ensured that the participant’s wellbeing was never ignored during the interview process. The interviews normally resumed after a short tea break. If the participant did not want to continue the interview after the tea break then we would spend

an hour or so chatting about unrelated things. This also demonstrated to the participant that she was not simply a source of answers for my research questions, she was also valued as an individual. The participants retained the power over how much they wanted to reveal and when. The participants were never required to explain why they did not want to continue.

The interviews were conducted in Urdu, which was the preferred language of the participants. Each participant verified the written narratives of their life story accounts and got an opportunity to confirm and improve the details of their experiences. For one participant who could not read or write in Urdu, the written narrative was read back to her for approval. The narratives were later translated into English for the purpose of this study. Pseudonyms were used as an additional safety measure.