Qualitative Research Basics: A Guide for Engineering Educators

transcribe the recorded interviews, and to read these over carefully afterward against the
voice recording, revising rather than doing the entire transcription yourself.
The quality of the interview data has a significant impact on the overall quality and
trustworthiness of the outcomes of the study. Kvale (1996) lists the following criteria for
determining the quality of an interview:
• The extent of spontaneous, rich, specific, and relevant answers from the
interviewee
• The degree to which the interviewer’s questions are shorter than the subjects’
answers
• The degree to which the interviewer follows up and clarifies the meanings of the
relevant aspects of the answers
• The extent to which the interview is interpreted throughout the interview
• The frequency with which the interviewer attempts to verify his or her
interpretations of the subject’s answers in the course of the interview
• The degree to which the interview is self-containing – it is a story contained in
itself that hardly requires many extra descriptions and explanations.
Recent Perspectives on Interviewing
The classic view of interviewing has tended towards a positivist perspective, seeking to
maintain the interviewer as a neutral party who simply records the information and has no
influence on the resulting data. More recently, however, it has been recognized that the
interviewer plays an important role, even when there is an attempt to maintain this
neutrality. Fontana and Frey (2005) discuss the “empathetic” view of interviewing,
pointing out that, “interviewing is not merely the neutral exchange of asking questions
and getting answers. Two (or more) people are involved in this process, and their
exchanges lead to the creation of a collaborative effort called the interview. The key here
is the ‘active’ nature of this process…that leads to a contextually bound and mutually
created story – the interview” (p. 696, italics in original).
How does this contextualization occur? One way is the how the interview is framed. How
one describes those being interviewed (pathological deviants vs. diverse individuals who
are ostracized) leads to different understandings and uses of the data (Fontana & Frey,
2005). Fontana and Frey also point out that the researcher influences the data by deciding
which aspects to include and which to exclude from the narrative that results from the
data. In considering the role of the researcher, there are a variety of approaches. At one
extreme, the role of the researcher is ignored, even though it is always present. At the
other extreme, steps are taken to enhance the interaction between interviewer and
interviewee, making them equal partners in creating the narrative. “Researchers are
attempting to minimize status differences and are doing away with the traditional
hierarchical situation in interviewing. Interviewers can show their human side and can
answer questions and express feelings” (Fontana & Frey, 2005, p. 711). By becoming a
partner in the interview, researchers can more explicitly recognize the role that the
interviewer plays in the interview and encourage those being interviewed to be more
open about their personal responses and emotions regarding the topic. Feminist scholars
28