CONDUCTING FIELD RESEARCH IN POLITICAL SCIENCE: INTERVIEWING AND MIXED METHODS

APPROACHES

Melani Cammett, Harvard University (mcammett@g.harvard.edu)

DATES

This course runs January 20-24, 2020.

TEACHING FELLOW

Natalia Suzuki, PhD candidate, Dept. of Political Science, University of São Paulo
(nataliasuzuki@gmail.com)

COURSE DESCRIPTION

This course focuses on the process of conducting interviews from start to finish, with an
emphasis on the role of interviewing within a larger mixed methods research design. The goal is
to help guide researchers in preparing for, carrying out and analyzing data derived from
interviews. Key topics covered include the pros and cons of multi-methods research involving
interviews, varieties of interviews, the construction of different kinds of interview protocols,
varied sampling strategies for interviewing, designing and conducting interviews on sensitive
topics, organizing and analyzing interview-based data and aligning it with other forms of data
collection, and ethical considerations.

PREREQUISITES

There are no prerequisites for this course. However, some experience with field research is a
plus. Participants should be prepared either to develop a new or improve an existing research
proposal or to discuss a current research project that involves interview-based research and to
describe the role of interviews in an actual or hypothetical multi-methods research design. Each
day, participants should be prepared to assess and report progress on their own projects with
respect to the particular topic of the session. To ensure progress, participants will be required
to present written and oral developments of their research design each day.

1
TOPIC & READINGS

Note: Students should complete all readings and as much of the exercises as possible prior to
each class meeting in order to come prepared to finish and discuss their work in class.

Day 1: How Can Interviews Fit in Mixed Methods Research Designs?

Kapiszewski, Diana, Lauren M. MacLean and Benjamin L. Read (KMR). Field Research in Political
Science. New York and Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015, ch. 6 (“How interviewing
builds theory,” pp. 205-210).

Vijayendra Rao and Michael Woolcock. “Integrating Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches in
Program Evaluation.” In The Impact of Economic Policies on Poverty and Income Distribution:
Evaluation Techniques and Tools, edited by François Bourguignon and Luiz A. Pereira da Silva.
New York: Oxford University Press, 2003, ch. 8 (pp. 165-190).

Lynch, Julia. “Aligning Sampling Strategies with Analytic Goals,” Interview Research in Political
Science, Layna Mosley, ed. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2013, ch. 1 (pp. 31-38).

Martin, Cathie Jo. “Crafting Interviews to Capture Cause and Effect.” In Interview Research in
Political Science, Layna Mosley, ed. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2013, ch. 5 (pp. 109-
124).

Cammett, Melani. Compassionate Communalism: Welfare and Sectarianism in Lebanon. Ithaca,

NY: Cornell University Press, 2017, ch. 1 (“Cases, Data, and Research Methods,” pp. 31-37).

Optional:

Rathbun, Brian C. “Interviewing and qualitative field methods: Pragmatism and

practicalities.” In The Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology, Janet M. Box-
Steffensmeier, Henry E. Brady, and David Collier, eds. New York and Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2008, pp. 3-13.

Seawright, Jason. “Better Multimethod Design: The Promise of Integrative Multimethod

Research.” Security Studies 24, no. 1(2016): pp. 42-49.

Exercise: Write a short (1-2 pp.) summary of an actual or hypothetical research project that
includes the following elements: Description of research question, tentative hypothesis, range
of possible alternative hypotheses or explanations, case selection, and methods needed to
answer the question and adjudicate among potential explanations. In your discussion of the
methods, discuss how interviews might fit into and enhance your research design.

2
Day 2: Designing Interview Protocols and Sampling Interviewees

Designing Interview Protocols

KMR, ch. 6 (pp. 214-218, “Constructing interview protocols”).

Rubin, Herbert J. and Irene S. Rubin. Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data, 2nd ed.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2005, ch. 7 (“Structuring the Interview,” pp. 7-18) and ch. 8
(“Designing Main Questions and Probes,” pp. 1-20).

Adcock, Robert and David Collier. “Measurement Validity: A Shared Standard for Qualitative
and Quantitative Research.” American Political Science Review 95, no. 3 (2001): 529-546.

Mary Gallagher. “Capturing Meaning and Confronting Measurement.” In Interview Research in

Political Science, Layna Mosley, ed. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2013, ch. 9 (pp. 181-
195).

Sampling Strategies in Interview-Based Research

KMR, ch. 6 (pp. 211-214, “When and whom to interview”; pp. 218-221, “Gaining access to
interview respondents”).

Goldstein, Kenneth. “Getting in the Door: Sampling and Completing Elite Interviews.” PS:
Political Science & Politics 35, no. 4(December 2002): 669-672.

Tansey, Oisin. “Process Tracing and Elite Interviewing: A Case for Non-Probability Sampling.” PS:
ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. P. 42-48.

Rivera, Sharon Werning, Polina M. Kozyreva and Eduard G. Sarovskii. “Interviewing Political
Elites: Lessons from Russia.” PS: Political Science and Politics 35, no. 4 (2002): 683-684.

Lynch, Julia. “Aligning Sampling Strategies with Analytic Goals,” Interview Research in Political
Science, Layna Mosley, ed. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2013, ch. 1 (pp. 38-44).

Exercise: Design a questionnaire for a structured or semi-structured interview. Identify what

concepts and variables the questions are designed to measure and for which type of
respondent the questionnaire is designed. Anticipate ways in which your questions might not
work as planned (i.e., elicit the type of information you want). Then, write a short summary of
your plan for sampling interviewees.

3
Day 3: Conducting an Interview

KMR, ch. 6 (pp. 221-229, “Conducting interviews”).

Leech, Beth. “Asking Questions: Techniques for Semistructured Interviews.” PS: Political Science
& Politics 35, no. 4(December 2002): 665-668.

Rubin, Herbert J. and Irene S. Rubin. Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data, 2nd ed.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2005, ch. 5 (“The Responsive Interview as an Extended
Conversation,” pp. 7-14), ch. 7 (“Structuring the Interview,” pp. 18-22) ch. 9 “Preparing Follow-
Up Questions,” pp. 2-25).

Rivera, Sharon Werning, Polina M. Kozyreva and Eduard G. Sarovskii. “Interviewing Political
Elites: Lessons from Russia.” PS: Political Science and Politics 35, no. 4 (2002): 684-686.

Berry, Jeffrey M. “Validity and Reliability Issues in Elite Interviewing.” PS: Political Science &
Politics 35, no. 4 (2002): 679-682.

Adler, Patricia and Peter Adler. “The Reluctant Respondent." In Handbook of Interview
Research, Jaber F. Gubrium and James A. Holstein, eds. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2011, pp. 12-
23.

Cammett, Melani. “Positionality and Sensitive Topics: Matched Proxy Interviewing as a

Research Strategy,” In Layna Mosley, ed., Interview Research in Political Science. Cornell
University Press, 2013, ch. 6 (pp. 125-143).

Exercise: Find a few examples of the types of people you would need to interview for your
actual or hypothetical research project (or, if that is not possible, then some friends or
colleagues willing to pose as such people). Don’t worry about representative sampling. Using
the interview protocol or questionnaire that you designed, carry out the interview with the
selected respondents. After carrying out the interviews, write a short memo that addresses the
following questions: Which questions elicited the most useful information? Why? How did you
feel while you were asking the questions? Did you use any techniques to motivate the
respondents to provide you with the information you needed? Did you adjust your interview
style to each respondent? How did your respondents seem to feel when they were answering
them?

4
Day 4: Analyzing Interview Data

General Strategies

KMR, ch. 6 (pp. 229-233, “Assessing and documenting the evidentiary value of interview data”).

Aberbach, Joel D. and Bert A. Rockman. “Conducting and Coding Elite Interviews.” PS: Political
Science and Politics 35, no. 4 (2002): 675.

Kurasaki, Karen S. “Intercoder Reliability for Validating Conclusions Drawn from Open‐Ended
Interview Data.” Field Methods 12 (August 2000): 179‐194.

Fujii, Lee Ann. “Shades of Truth and Lies: Interpreting Testimonies of War and Violence.”
Journal of Peace Research 47, no. 2 (2010): 231-241.

Bleich, Erik and Robert Pekkanen. “How to Report Interview Data.” In Interview Research in
Political Science, Layna Mosley, ed. Ithaca, NY Cornell University Press, 2013, ch. 4 (pp. 84-108).

Content Analysis Using Nvivo

QSR International. NVivo 11 Pro: Getting Started Guide.

For Windows, read pp. 24-42. Available here.
For MAC, read pp. 22-36. Available here.

Optional: The mechanics of content analysis

Krippendorff, Karl. Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology. Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage, 2013, ch. 14 (“A Practical Guide,” pp. 339-357), ch. 5 (“Unitizing,” pp. 97-110), ch.
7 (“Recording/Coding,” pp. 129-131).

Optional: Examples of write-ups of interview-based research

Walsh, Katherine Cramer. “Putting Inequality in Its Place: Rural Consciousness and the
Power of Perspective.” American Political Science Review 106, no. 3(2012): 517-532.

Hochschild, Jennifer. What’s Fair? American Beliefs about Distributive Justice. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press, 1981, chs. 1-2.

Cammett, Melani. Compassionate Communalism: Welfare and Sectarianism in Lebanon.

Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, ch. 6.

5
Exercise: Design a coding scheme to analyze data using Nvivo. Use data from a selection of in-
depth interviews utilizing open-ended questions to answer a question with some relevance for
political science. (NB: You may use interview transcripts that you already have or obtained
yourself or those that are provided for this course.) Then, write a short memo summarizing the
following: a brief presentation of the question you set out to answer, description and
justification of your sampling procedures, explanation of your coding scheme and data analysis,
presentation of your results, and discussion of any potential limitations of your study.

6
Day 5: Research Ethics in Interviewing

Sarah Brooks. “The Ethical Treatment of Human Subjects and the Institutional Review Board
Process.” In Interview Research in Political Science, Layna Mosley, ed. Ithaca, NY: Cornell
University Press, 2013, ch. 2 (pp. 45-66).

MacLean, Lauren. “The Power of the Interviewer.” In Interview Research in Political Science,
Layna Mosley, ed. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2013, ch. 3 (pp. 67-83).

Wood, Elisabeth. “The Ethical Challenges of Field Research in Conflict Zones.” Qualitative
Sociology 29, no. 3 (2006): 307-41.

Nayel, Moe Ali. “Palestinian refugees are not at your service.” The Electronic Intifada. Beirut, 17
May 2013. Available at https://electronicintifada.net/content/palestinian-refugees-are-not-
your-service/12464 [accessed December 5, 2017].

Optional:

The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and
Behavioral Research. “Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human
Subjects of Research” [The Belmont Report]. 1979. Available at
https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/belmont-report/index.html [accessed
December 5, 2017].

National Science Foundation. “Interpreting the Common Rule for the Protection of Human
Subjects for Behavioral and Social Science Research.” n.d. Available at
www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/hsfaqs.jsp [accessed December 5, 2017].

McMurtrie, Beth. “Secrets from Belfast: How Boston College’s oral history of the Troubles
fell victim to an international murder investigation.” Chronicle of Higher Education. 26
January 2014. Available at http://chronicle.com/article/Secrets-from-Belfast/144059/
[accessed December 6, 2017].

Fujii, Lee Ann. “Research Ethics 101: Dilemmas and Responsibilities.” PS: Political Science
and Politics 45, no. 4 (2012): 717-723.

Exercise: Write a memo that addresses the following questions: What aspects of your work
might be ethically problematic and why? For which of these would IRB review be required?
How could you modify the IRB review process to ensure that the proposed work would be
conducted ethically, or not at all?