The Main Study

During the first interview of the main study (Garcia Family), it was clear that the children opened up more and felt more comfortable when they were with a parent, as Morrison (2013) suggests. The interviews flowed better with mum Monica and her children interacting and engaging with me and with each other; for example, they jogged each other’s memories and shared common

experiences. Family members prompted, reminded and probed each other so that not all questions were coming from me (Kidd & Parshall, 2000).

Interviews became more of a group discussion rather than a one-to-one question and answer session, therefore the atmosphere was more relaxed (Leshem, 2012). Smith-Christmas (2016, p.26) noted that family members interacting with each other was conductive to “natural, vernacular speech” and that by interacting with people they know very well, it minimises the presence of the researcher and the recording device. Group conversations flowed freely and were

interactive giving a sense that I was conducting research ‘with’ them rather than ‘about’ them (Hall, 2014). This interaction between family members was

interesting and valuable, and moreover avoided a scenario of participants asking the researcher what the others had answered, as encountered by Bushin (2007). Although one must acknowledge and accept that participants’ responses may have differed if each family member had been interviewed individually (Valentine, 1999; Morrow, 2012).

It also proved to be more successful due to the more relaxed, familiar

environment and the fact that there were fewer distractions. Six-year-old Rafa left and returned to the dining room table as he pleased rather than having to sit for the whole time, and at one point eight-year-old Maria went off to play with her toys on the living room floor. In my journal I later wrote that this process was “much kinder to the children” and “worked miles better”. Monica had arranged the interview to take place on a Saturday afternoon when she thought

it would be best and most convenient for her family. In addition, it was less repetitive in nature and not as time consuming as conducting separate interviews with each individual family member. The refined method of data collection was more comfortable for participants and more efficient for me which resulted in a more effective interview process with richer data being gathered echoing Smith, Todd and Waldman’s findings (2009).

Thereafter, the rest of the main fieldwork took place from January to April 2018 at various locations across the West of Scotland at dates and times convenient for participants. It was important for me to work around their family

commitments and it also gave them some power in decision making (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2018). I was satisfied with the semi-structured nature of the group interviews, which had clear core questions as well as the flexibility to improvise with follow-up questions and the freedom to adapt questions to suit child participants.

As the 14 interviews progressed, I was able to cross-reference data drawn from earlier interviews, to follow lines of inquiry that had not featured in my original schedule, for example how participants engaged with digital technology. I transcribed and translated interviews as I went along rather than waiting until all data were collected. Eisenhardt (1989) believes that overlapping data analysis with data collection not only gives the researcher a head start in

analysis but, more importantly, allows researchers to take advantage of flexible data collection by having the freedom to make adjustments during the data collection process, such as probing particular themes that emerge. I was able to respond to interesting responses with secondary questions and further

discussion.

In general, the children under the age of eight were more shy and less

forthcoming. Two of the younger participants, at times, sat on their parents’ lap. Whereas the older children, especially the teenagers, participated fully, providing rich data and deep insights into their lives. I made notes immediately

after each interview in my field journal to refer to later and give a more authentic account. By taking notes after each interview took place, it meant that I was fully immersed and part of conversations rather than being distracted by note-taking (Creswell & Poth, 2018).

Looking back on the interviews, I was happy that they resembled discussion rather than interrogation. Thanks to my prior professional experience, I was able to talk to children on their level, and as a parent of bilingual family I shared an identity with the parents. Participants seemed to enjoy talking and sharing their experiences, they were curious about my background too so, likewise, I shared my story with them. I felt that this maintained the balance in power between us. Transcripts of the later interviews demonstrated the growing depth of my understanding and that my interviewing technique was improving through time.

One obstacle that I encountered was the ‘Beast from the East’ winter storm that hit Scotland in early 2018. I had originally arranged to have all, or most, family members present to participate in the group interview but due to the heavy snow, I had to postpone five of the interviews to a later date which meant that not all family members were present. Nevertheless, I was confident that I was able to get a clear enough picture and reliable data from interviewing the other family members.