Unit 8: Overview of Qualitative Research Interviews in Social Science ✓ Solved

Unit 8: Overview of Qualitative Research Interviews in Social Science

This unit marks the start of 'qualitative' methods in social science research in this course. The first unit of this second part of the program covers the most common method in qualitative research: 'interviews'. This method has been largely used in social sciences but also features a number of critics. The expectation in this unit is to introduce some of the arguments that are in favor and against the use of 'interviews' in social science. As a definitive response is nearly impossible to make, it will be up to you to decide how you see and position yourself in this debate.

For that, you will take a position and defend your argument based on what you find and the level of your engagement with the literature. You will see that I have listed few of these peer-reviewed articles. However, this list is only a starting point and you are expected to do your own research to support the claims you make in your essay. Please cite accordingly based on SHSU essay guidelines.

Two of the readings are books that can be easily found at SHSU library. This list, however, is not meant to be exhaustive. The debates around the use of 'interviews' as a research method in Social Sciences are abundant, so it is very likely that you will need to do your own research and find peer-reviewed articles in order to develop your argument.

Paper For Above Instructions

Qualitative research interviews are an invaluable tool within social science. This paper argues that, despite criticisms surrounding their validity and potential biases, qualitative interviews remain one of the most effective methods for gathering in-depth insight into human experiences, emotions, and social phenomena. The aim is to explore the strengths and weaknesses of qualitative interviews, referencing various peer-reviewed articles that highlight the complexities of this research method.

Understanding Qualitative Interviews

Qualitative interviews allow researchers to collect detailed narratives that provide context to the data. According to Turner (2010), qualitative interviews offer a platform for participants to articulate their thoughts and feelings in their own words, leading to a deeper understanding of the subject matter. They can be structured, semi-structured, or unstructured, allowing flexibility in data collection methods (Opdenakker, 2006). This flexibility enables the interviewer to delve into unforeseen topics, making interviews a dynamic tool for exploration.

Arguments in Favor of Using Interviews

One significant advantage of qualitative interviews is the depth of understanding they can yield. Knapik (2006) asserts that qualitative interviews foster a collaborative environment where knowledge is constructed through dialogue. This level of interaction allows for nuanced insights into social behavior and subjective experiences that quantitative methods may overlook. For instance, Bendassolli (2013) emphasizes that qualitative interviews are crucial for theory building, as they provide rich, contextualized data that can inform and shape theoretical frameworks.

Moreover, qualitative interviews can adapt to the participant's pace and allow researchers to probe deeper based on the participant’s responses (Crouch & McKenzie, 2006). This adaptability can yield unique and rich data sets, particularly in complex social settings where standardized questionnaires may fail to capture intricate dynamics (Gioia et al., 2013).

Critiques of Qualitative Interviews

Despite their advantages, qualitative interviews face notable criticisms. Critics argue that they can introduce researcher bias and interpretation challenges (Chenail, 2011). Interviewers may influence participants inadvertently, leading to skewed or biased data. Additionally, Novick (2008) points out that telephone interviews may be perceived as less valid than in-person interviews, which could affect response quality.

Ethical considerations further complicate the use of qualitative interviews. Researchers must navigate issues of trust, confidentiality, and informed consent while ensuring that the research does not inadvertently harm participants (Orb et al., 2001). Addressing these ethical concerns is paramount in ensuring the integrity of qualitative research.

Personal Positioning in the Argument

In light of the arguments presented, I contend that the benefits of qualitative interviews outweigh the criticisms, particularly when researchers implement rigorous protocols to mitigate bias. The richness of qualitative data can prompt further inquiry and uncover complex layers of understanding that traditional methodologies may overlook.

Sample Definition and Mode of Interview

For my exploration of qualitative interviews, I propose using semi-structured interviews with a sample of college students from diverse backgrounds, primarily focusing on their experiences with mental health services. This sample will consist of approximately 20 participants recruited through university counseling centers. A semi-structured format will allow me to ask pre-determined questions while remaining open to explore topics that arise organically during the conversation.

Conclusion

In conclusion, qualitative research interviews provide a robust mechanism for exploring human experience, as long as researchers remain vigilant in addressing biases and ethical considerations. By leveraging the strengths of interviews and adapting them to meet the needs of research participants, we can garner insights that contribute meaningfully to social science. Further research is necessary to explore innovative approaches to qualitative interviewing that can enhance data integrity and mitigate existing limitations.

References

  • Anyan, F. (2013). The Influence of Power Shifts in Data Collection and Analysis Stages: A Focus on Qualitative Research Interview. Qualitative Report, 18, 36.

  • Bendassolli, P. F. (2013, January). Theory building in qualitative research: Reconsidering the problem of induction. In Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 14(1).

  • Chenail, R. J. (2011). Interviewing the investigator: Strategies for addressing instrumentation and researcher bias concerns in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 16(1).

  • Crouch, M., & McKenzie, H. (2006). The logic of small samples in interview-based qualitative research. Social Science Information, 45(4).

  • Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G., & Hamilton, A. L. (2013). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16(1), 15-31.

  • Knapik, M. (2006). The qualitative research interview: Participants' responsive participation in knowledge making. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(3), 77-93.

  • Lunnay, B., Borlagdan, J., McNaughton, D., & Ward, P. (2015). Ethical use of social media to facilitate qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 25(1), 99-109.

  • Novick, G. (2008). Is there a bias against telephone interviews in qualitative research? Research in Nursing & Health, 31(4).

  • Opdenakker, R. (2006, September). Advantages and disadvantages of four interview techniques in qualitative research. In Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 7(4).

  • Orb, A., Eisenhauer, L., & Wynaden, D. (2001). Ethics in qualitative research. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 33(1), 93-96.

  • Turner III, D. W. (2010). Qualitative interview design: A practical guide for novice investigators. The Qualitative Report, 15(3).