THE DYNAMICS OF INTERVIEWING

This article discusses the dynamics of oral history and the importance of interviewing while
recording it. Question-asking permeates modern society, with interviews being a purposeful
attempt to get information by asking specific questions in a prescribed way. These mini-
interviews are commonplace and can be broadcast, print, or ethnographic.

Interview-based research methods share similarities and practitioners can learn constructive
techniques from each other. Factors affecting interviews and ways of documenting an interview
are discussed.

Other formal, conscious interviews dominate some professionals' lives, such as those in the
Social Security Administration, Army Public Affairs Office, and more. Oral history interviews
have become popular in various settings, including classrooms, community clubs, state fairs,
railroad stations, corporate headquarters, and homeless shelters.

The article emphasizes that oral history interviews have not changed much since the earliest days
of wire recording devices. They remain an intensely interpersonal exchange between a prepared
interviewer and a willing narrator who set out purposely to record the narrator's first-person
information and experiences in a structured interview setting and make that information available
to others. The interview may be part of a large project or a personal effort by a student to
document a loved one's life for a family keepsake.

Understanding the dynamics of an oral history interview is essential to creating one whose depth
and substance contribute to the public record in a meaningful way.

Interview-Based Research

The term "interview" often conjures up images of television journalists engaging in verbal
conversations with politicians, grieving parents, or athletes. Broadcast interviews offer a more
entertaining experience, but the distinctions between interviews conducted for television and
print media are increasingly blurring as newspapers cut costs and send reporters out with video
cameras to post interview excerpts online. This convergence of print and broadcast techniques
often leads to shallower reporting on both sides.

While broadcast interviews provide a poor model for would-be oral historians due to their
premium on snappy answers, some similarities between journalistic approaches to interviewing
and oral history approaches are worth noting. All in-depth interviewers, whether news reporters
or oral historians, do their homework first, rely heavily on open-ended questions, probe for
details, and seek to verify unclear points. Reporters, like oral historians, are likely to record the
interview, but their practices diverge. Journalists usually conduct relatively short interviews,
often with little advance notice to the interviewee, for a narrow, short-term purpose—a news or
feature story that will be published or broadcast within hours or days at the most. Oral historians,
ideally with considerable advance planning, usually conduct longer, in-depth interviews whose
immediate product may be a verbatim transcript deposited in an archival collection and listed in
a finding aid many weeks or even months after the interview.

Ethnographic interviews, another scholarly form of qualitative research, also bear some
resemblance to oral history interviews but also feature important distinctions. Ethnographers may
conduct in-depth, recorded interviews but generally focus less on historical events than cultural
folkways. Ethnographers may take the role of participant-observer, making copious notes after a
day's encounters with people in the community being studied.

While these three interview-based research methods share certain similarities, their differences
are more notable. Lessons likely to be learned by studying techniques of all those other question-
asking professions are likely to be learned by studying techniques of all those other question-
asking professions.

FACTORS THAT AFFECT INTERVIEWS:

Oral history projects can be influenced by various factors, including the purpose of the project,
the end product, the circumstances that led to the project, the physical environment, and the
presence of additional individuals. Some community-based oral history projects, such as those
involving homeless, migrant workers, and other disenfranchised groups, use the process and
content of the interviews to achieve an explicit political or social end. The interviewer and those
being interviewed may be committed to a common goal, such as preserving information about
their concerns for future generations.

The specific end product for which an interview is being conducted can also affect the interview
dynamics. The Oral History Association's Principles and Standards and Evaluation Guidelines
advise respect for interviewees and a commitment never to exploit them. Some projects are
driven by plans to create a video or elaborate website featuring interview excerpts or full-text
transcriptions and audio. Narrators may be tempted to elaborate their roles or not care about how
their words are used, which affects the interview dynamics.

Access to online oral history collections has dramatically improved the ability of scholars to
locate new primary sources related to their research. However, the traffic volume of researchers
requesting oral history transcripts at a library is far smaller than the online finders and users.
Some participants argue that online access is a positive development, but others have expressed
concern that the increased potential for misuse of oral histories online poses a risk of harm for
narrators.

Before the interviewer presses "record," another factor in influencing the interview is the
circumstances that led to the project in the first place. Oral historians have adopted a journalist's
sense of urgency in their efforts to document the aftermath of manmade and natural disasters,
creating a dynamic within the interview setting that cannot be ignored. The physical environment
in which the interview takes place can also affect the exchange, as it may evoke important
memories for the narrator and contribute to the depth of their recollections and responses.

Another environmental factor may be the presence of additional individuals, as oral history
interviews typically involve only two participants. Sometimes, despite the interviewer's best
efforts to limit the interview to one person, a family member or friend may join in, which can
alter the relationship between the interviewer and interviewee.

Multiple players in an interview setting can be unavoidable, such as a visually impaired

volunteer interviewer who needed an assistant to operate a recorder. The equipment helper
gradually evolved into a second interviewer, expanding the content and quality of the interview.
Translators' skills and relationship with the narrator are critical in the interview dynamic.
Recording equipment, both video and audio, can affect the process. The machine itself can
become the center of attention if the interviewer cannot operate it adeptly. Video interviews can
improve interview dynamics by using additional staff to handle equipment, freeing the
interviewer to focus on the narrator's story.

The Well-Prepared Interviewer

Interview dynamics in oral history interviews are influenced by various factors, including the
amount of research conducted. Journalists often focus on breaking news with little time for
preparation, while oral historians take more time to study background information and gather
biographical information. Thorough research is crucial for interviewers to establish rapport with
narrators and identify new lines of inquiry.

A well-informed interviewer can easily fill in gaps if a narrator's memory falters, which can be
embarrassing. Poorly prepared interviewers can end and embarrass the narrator, decreasing the
prospect of another interviewer having a second chance. Interviewers must balance earning
respect by showing their homework and evoking enmity by showing their knowledge.

Appearing to be the know-it-all in an oral history interview can set up a destructive dynamic, as
narrators may feel intimidated or unresponsive. Some oral history project planners try to prevent
this by first interviewing interviewers, allowing them to put their own versions of the past on
record.

The degree of preparation determines how skillfully an interviewer will ask questions. An oral
history interview is unique in that both the narrator and interviewer have equally important roles
to play in the collaboration. An oral history transcript should reflect a few lines from the
interviewer, followed by many lines of response from the narrator, given ample time to respond.

Researchers are aware of the subtle ways that wording of a question can suggest the "right"
answer. A responsible oral historian would avoid asking questions that presume a "liking" by the
narrator, instead asking open-ended questions that allow the narrator to choose how to answer.

Oral historians often advocate for neutrally framed questions to avoid signaling expected
answers, but the choice of questions and narrators can also reflect biases. A clear plan,
knowledgeable questions, and respectful listening skills can put a nervous narrator at ease,
increasing their willingness to be open and forthcoming in responding to questions. Awareness
of body language cues can help the interviewer recognize when the oral history has crossed into
troublesome territory for the narrator, prompting additional follow-up questions or a change of
subject.

Attention to "reading" people is key to an oral historian's ability to guide the interview. Personal
characteristics of each person contribute to how the relationship evolves during the interview,
with narrators may tell the interviewer things they would not normally say. The challenge for
oral historians is to build trust that facilitates openness, regardless of personal traits or
differences.

The biggest challenge related to personal characteristics centers on the race or ethnic background
of the interviewer and narrator. The United States has a long history of blacks and whites being
unable to deal with one another in open, candid ways, which manifested itself in interview
settings. For example, the Federal Writers' Project's 1930s interviews with former slaves
revealed that African Americans were treated as inferior, particularly in the South.

In one midwestern city, a young, white woman involved in an oral history project interviewed an
elderly black woman, who expressed discomfort when racial issues were the focus of questions.
The interviewer emphasized the value of creating a record of an African American woman's
experience growing up at a time of entrenched, institutional racism.

The interview dynamics of oral history projects can be influenced by various personal
characteristics. For example, an oral history project planner may struggle to find the best person
to interview a long-retired faculty member due to her disjointed conversations and shorthand
references. Another project planner may prefer an emeritus faculty member to be interviewed by
a seasoned professional, as it could add energy to the interview dynamic.

Family relationships between narrator and interviewer can be a double-edged sword, as they can
be less candid when interviewing family members close to one another. Gender pairings can also
pose challenges in some oral history settings, especially if family or cultural codes prevent
women from sharing certain information with men. Educational background and social status can
pose additional challenges, as some oral historians may interpret the interviewers' questions as
condescending or patronizing.

Early education backgrounds and social status can align the other way, as some oral history
projects seek to interview highly educated, wealthy professionals who may attempt to intimidate
everyone they meet. Interviewers who may not share such social standing can conduct effective
interviews by being thoroughly prepared and confident in their ability to be equally professional.

Regional identity can also enter the interview dynamic, as dialect, colloquialisms, slang, and
insider lingo can create a wall between participants and complicate transcription efforts. Strongly
held religious or political beliefs can create further complexity if participants do not share the
same beliefs.

Aspects of the players' physical appearance or mannerisms, such as weight, body piercing, gum
chewing, nail biting, smoking, hairstyle, attire, and physical disabilities, can also influence the
interview. The Artists With Disabilities Oral History Project at the University of California,
Berkeley's Regional Oral History Office demonstrated how narrators with pronounced physical
disabilities and a respectful interviewer could develop engaging relationships, yielding important
insights about the narrators' life experiences.

Documenting the Interview Experience

Oral history interviews are unique due to the numerous variables that influence their dynamics.
Interviewers must recognize, document, and consider these factors when conducting and
analyzing the content. Oral historians emphasize that research is not value-free, and personal
experiences are essential for understanding a scholar's work. Journalists often use dramatic
circumstances to obtain information, leading to overplayed news stories. Oral historians have a
personal perspective, and the results of an oral history interview are not always the same. Each
interview is a unique encounter between two individuals who are conscious of reconstructing a
past they did not share. To understand the layers of meaning created through the interview
process, interviewers must acknowledge their individuality and document the circumstances
surrounding the interview.