INTERVIEW

METHOD

Dr. Meenakshi Shukla

Assistant Professor
Department of Psycholog
Magadh University
Bodh Gaya
What is an interview?
1. Interview _______. साक्षात्कार ______________।

A. is a conversation. एक वार्ाा लाप है

B. is conversation with a purpose. ककसी उद्दे श्य की पू कर्ा हे र्ु वार्ाा लाप करना है

C. Both A & B A और B दोनोों

D. None of these इनमें से कोई नहीों

 Types of interview
1. Non-directive

• Some psychology practitioners use interviews in which the interviewee can talk about
anything they like and in which the psychologist gives no directing influence to the
topics but provides reflective support throughout the session. The main aim would be
to help the ‘client’ increase self-awareness and deal with personal problems.

• This method would be used by psychotherapists and counsellors, and the main aim
would not be academic research data gathering. However, clients do, in a sense,
research their own perhaps troubled experiences and the psychologist may need the
information in order to proceed with helping the client.

• The approach may be used in collecting data that form part of a case study. The
insights derived from such studies often get drawn together into an overall
psychological theory, model or approach that adds, in time, to the pool of knowledge
and ideas. These may become a stimulus for further research by other means.
2. Informal

• An informal interview has an overall research data-gathering aim. It is directive only to the extent of
keeping the interviewee on the topic and perhaps adding prompts when they ‘dry up’. At the non-
structured extreme the session is similar to the non-directive approach just described.
• The ‘indirect approach’ involves non-judgemental, neutral interviewers listening patiently, making
intelligent comments, displaying no authority, giving no advice or argument, and only asking questions
when necessary, e.g., to prompt further talking, to relieve anxiety, to praise, to cover an omitted topic and
to discuss implicit assumptions if thought helpful.
• The approach has been used in social science research for some time and has more recently become
popular in areas of applied research, particularly by the proponents of qualitative approaches who would
argue that the attempt at objectivity, through being a cool, distant and impersonal interviewer, is only likely
to instil anxiety. Interviewees grasp at clues to what is really expected from them and how their information
will promote or hinder ‘success’.
3. The semi-structured interview (informal but guided)
• This extremely popular form of interviewing retains the main advantages of the
previous approach by keeping the procedure informal, by not asking pre-set questions
in exactly the same order each time. However, interviewers are provided with a
guiding outline of topics to be covered and information required.
• The guide usually leaves the interviewer to decide, on the day, how to work in and
phrase questions on the various topics. Questions need not be put if respondents
spontaneously produce the required answers in response to earlier interview
enquiries, but, if they do not, these questions will be returned to until they have been
answered as fully as possible.
• The semi-structured interview is the interview style of choice in much qualitative work.
Advantages are a relatively natural flow of talk, freedom for the respondent to explore
unpredicted avenues of thought, and flexibility of the interviewer in selecting aspects
of the discourse to follow up. These are finely balanced against the disadvantages of
weak reliability or comparison across respondents.
4. Structured but open-ended

• To avoid the looseness and inconsistency that

accompany informally gathered interview data, the
interview session can use a standardised procedure.
The interviewer gives pre-set questions in a
predetermined order to every interviewee. This
keeps the multiplicity of interpersonal variables
involved in a two-way conversation to a minimum
and ensures greater consistency in the data
gathered. The respondent is still free to answer,
however, in any way chosen. Questions are open-
ended and, as in most of the other interview types,
leading questions are avoided. For instance, ‘Tell me
what you think about physically punishing children’
might be asked, rather than ‘Do you approve of
physically punishing children?’
5. Fully structured
• In this type of interview, as with the last, questions are pre-set and ordered, but here they are also fixed-
answer items. In fact, this approach is hardly an interview worth the name at all. It is a face-to-face data-
gathering technique, but could be conducted by telephone, post or computer (which might reduce bias
from interpersonal variables still further).
• The fully structured method is usually in use when you’re stopped on the street as part of a survey by
someone with a clipboard. Responses can be counted and analysed numerically but can often be
difficult to make because the respondent wants to say ‘yes’ (for this reason) but ‘no’ (for that reason) or
‘I think so’ or ‘sometimes’. A sensitive structured system has a list for choosing responses including
alternatives such as ‘sometimes’, ‘hardly ever’ or ‘certain’, ‘fairly confident’ and so on.
• In contemporary psychological investigation, the last two methods have been rejected by many
researchers because they lack the fundamental aspects of normal human conversation that are likely to
produce the most natural, complete and realistic discourse from the interviewee. In normal
conversation we constantly check that the other has understood what we mean, is on the same
wavelength and is comfortable in telling us all that they would wish on a particular topic. Semi-
structured and looser approaches permit a process of doubling back and altering one’s wording in order
to permit the respondent the fullest opportunity to express what they might have to say. As Smith
(1995) reminds us: ‘You may need to ask yourself how engaged the respondent is. Are you really
entering the personal/social life world of the participant or are you forcing him or her, perhaps
reluctantly, to enter yours?’.
6. The clinical method (or ‘clinical interview’)
• The CLINICAL METHOD is used where there is a clear data-
gathering or hypothesis-testing goal, where quite specific answers
to specific questions are sought, yet where there is felt to be a
need to rephrase questions and probe further where the
interviewee is suspected of not fully understanding the point or
has no further knowledge to display.
• The clinical method has standardised aims but uses a non-
standardised procedure in order to avoid the artificiality that can
occur even for adults when given a rigid set of questions. Children
are probably more vulnerable to rigid questioning and may well
appear to ‘fail’ when they don’t understand the questions
properly, whereas a simple but natural alteration in question form
might reveal that the child does, after all, have the concept.
 Principles of the open interview
➢ Giving information
• Interviewees are at their most curious and probably their most nervous levels at the very start of the
session. The interviewer can ease the atmosphere by giving full information at this point about the
purpose of the research, for whom it is conducted, what sorts of topics will be covered and, in particular,
how confidentiality or anonymity will be maintained.

➢ Anonymity and confidentiality

• Interviewees will feel a lot easier, and will probably divulge more, if it is guaranteed that there is not the
slightest possible chance that their comments, if published, will be attributable to them. This is
particularly so in an applied setting with relatively small numbers – for instance, where a researcher
conducts action research inside a company. This kind of research is intended to produce positive change
as well as to provide research information. Since interviewees are usually quoted verbatim in the
research article – a central principle of most qualitative research – then confidentiality cannot be offered
in most qualitative studies. However, what therefore must be offered and rigorously enforced is the
principle of anonymity. If there is only one female Asian middle manager on the staff and her comments
make reference to her gender and ethnicity, then clearly the researcher must effectively disguise this in
any published report or exclude the comments from it.
➢ Achieving and maintaining rapport
In an unstructured interview, the quality and characteristics of the interviewer’s behaviour are of the
utmost importance and not just the interesting ‘extraneous variables’ they are often considered to be
in the structured interview or survey study. People reveal a lot more about themselves when they are
feeling comfortable and ‘chatty’ than in a strained, formal atmosphere where suspicions are not
allayed. An awkward, ‘stiff’ or aggressive interviewer may produce little co-operation, and even
hostility from the interviewee. How then may rapport be established?

➢ Language
It is valuable to spend some time discovering terminology used by the group under study. They may
have nicknames and use their own jargon. Interviewees will be most comfortable and fluent using
their normal language mode (dialect, accent, normal conversational style) and must be made to feel
that its use is not only legitimate but welcome and valued. Without patronising, the interviewer can
attempt to explain things in the most appropriate register and to give plenty of concrete examples
where appropriate.
➢ Neutrality
Accepting the language style and any non-verbal behaviour of the interviewee will help to assure
her/him that the interview is entirely non-judgemental. Interviewees must feel that no moral
assessment of what they say is, or will be, involved otherwise the researcher is simply not going to
obtain the fullest possible genuine account. To this end, especially when the topic is sensitive, the
interviewer needs to develop a repertoire of responses such as ‘I see’ and ‘uhuh’ in order not to
sound judgemental when an interviewee says something like, ‘Yeah, well, I’m a pretty jealous guy. I
hate people looking at my wife and I have been known to go over and smack them one.’

➢ Listening skills
The interviewer needs to learn when not to speak, how to show attention and interest and
generally to get the most out of the interviewee by careful listening. There are various listening skills,
too numerous to detail here, which include:
• not trivialising statements by saying ‘How interesting, but we must get on’;
• hearing that a ‘yes’ is qualified and asking whether the interviewee wants to add anything –
what follows may well amount to a ‘no’;
• not being too quick or dominant in offering an interpretation of what the interviewee was
trying to say.
➢ Interest
It is essential that the interviewer remains interested and believes that their respondents’
information and sacrificed time are valuable. Patton (2002) urges that the concept of the bad
interviewee should be ignored, arguing that it is easy to summon up stereotypes – of the hostile or
withdrawn interviewee, for instance. He suggests that it is the sensitive interviewer’s task to unlock
the internal perspective of each interviewee by being adaptable in finding the style and format that
will work in each case.

➢ Non-verbal communication
The interviewer needs to be sensitive to non-verbal cues, though not to the point of awkwardness. A
literature review by Vrij (1991) suggested that, in Western majority cultures at least, a more
favourable perception is given to a conversational partner by looking at them, giving supportive head
nods and gestures, limiting one’s body movements (e.g., few trunk movements or changes of
position), responding directly and having a fluent conversational style. Interviewers should avoid
assuming what could be interpreted as a dominating position or tone of voice and should also be
sensitive to the interviewee’s non-verbal behaviour which might signal discomfort, embarrassment
and so on. This would mean of course paying attention to the seating arrangements for the interview.
➢ Natural questioning
• This is a central factor and involves the interviewer in
trying to make the conversational flow feel as natural as is
possible, and therefore more likely to produce authentic
answers, while getting through a set of major questions.
The context is one in which the interviewee will do most
of the talking and the interviewer will mainly be asking
questions. Hence in this unnatural ‘conversation’ the
interviewer will be revealing little about their life or
attitudes. However, if the interviewer has only four or five
target questions, then it is possible to make at least some
of the interview session feel more like a ‘chat’.
• An advantage in the semi-structured interview is that,
unlike the case with formal questionnaires, the
interviewer can explain the purpose of any particular
question. A natural questioning environment should
encourage the interviewee to ask what the interviewer
has in mind and offering this information is courteous and
keeps the participant involved.
➢ Helpful feedback
• An interview will run more smoothly if the interviewee is aware of the position reached and the
future direction of questioning. In particular, it might be useful to let the interviewee know . . .when
the interviewer is about to change topic; for instance, ‘Now let’s talk about the students on the
course’; that the next question is particularly important, complex, controversial or sensitive; for
instance, ‘You’ve been telling me what you like about the course. Now, in particular, I’d like to find
out about what you don’t like. Can you tell me . . .’; about what the interviewer thinks the
interviewee has just said, or said earlier, without, of course, reinterpretations that depart far from
the actual words used.
• This feedback and summary of what the interviewee is understood to have said is central to semi-
structured interviewing and most qualitative approaches. It permits the interviewee to realise they
are making sense and being productive; also, that they are not being misrepresented. They can
alter or qualify what they have said. The process also keeps the interviewee actively involved and
confident. However, it is important, of course, not to summarise interviewees’ statements in a
manner that might seem patronising.
 Merits of the interview method
(i) More information and that too in greater depth can be obtained.
(ii) Interviewer by his own skill can overcome the resistance, if any, of the respondents; the
interview method can be made to yield an almost perfect sample of the general population.
(iii) There is greater flexibility under this method as the opportunity to restructure questions is
always there, specially in case of unstructured interviews.
(iv) Observation method can as well be applied to recording verbal answers to various questions.
(v) Personal information can as well be obtained easily under this method.
(vi) Samples can be controlled more effectively as there arises no difficulty of the missing returns;
non-response generally remains very low.
(vii) The interviewer can usually control which person(s) will answer the questions. This is not
possible in mailed questionnaire approach. If so desired, group discussions may also be held.
(viii) The interviewer may catch the informant off-guard and thus may secure the most spontaneous
reactions than would be the case if mailed questionnaire is used.
(ix) The language of the interview can be adopted to the ability or educational level of the person
interviewed and as such misinterpretations concerning questions can be avoided.
(x) The interviewer can collect supplementary information about the respondent’s personal
characteristics and environment which is often of great value in interpreting results.
 Weaknesses of the interview method
(i) It is a very expensive method, specially when large and widely spread geographical sample is taken.
(ii) There remains the possibility of the bias of interviewer as well as that of the respondent; there also remains the
headache of supervision and control of interviewers.
(iii) Certain types of respondents such as important officials or executives or people in high income groups may
not be easily approachable under this method and to that extent the data may prove inadequate.
(iv) This method is relatively more-time-consuming, especially when the sample is large and recalls upon the
respondents are necessary.
(v) The presence of the interviewer on the spot may over-stimulate the respondent, sometimes even to the extent
that he may give imaginary information just to make the interview interesting.
(vi) Under the interview method the organisation required for selecting, training and supervising the field-staff is
more complex with formidable problems.
(vii) Effective interview presupposes proper rapport with respondents that would facilitate free and frank
responses. This is often a very difficult requirement.
Thank you…