A brief overview of the in-depth interview method followed by key considerations when applying the Total Quality Framework that allows researchers to maximize quality outcomes & the usefulness of an IDI study.
Call Girls Jalahalli Just Call đ 7737669865 đ Top Class Call Girl Service Ban...
Â
Applying a Quality Framework to the In-depth Intrerview Method
1. Applying a Quality Framework to the In-depth Interview Method â 2016
Margaret R. Roller, MA
rmr@rollerresearch.com
www.rollerresearch.com
www.researchdesignreview.com
Applying a Quality Framework to
the In-depth Interview Method
5. Applying a Quality Framework to the In-depth Interview Method â 2016
Adapted from: Applied Qualitative Research Design: A
Total Quality Framework Approach (Roller & Lavrakas, 2015)
6. Applying a Quality Framework to the In-depth Interview Method â 2016
5
Total Quality Framework
25. Applying a Quality Framework to the In-depth Interview Method â 2016
24
Credibility Analyzability
Strengths
Face-to-face Most similar to natural conversation, facilitates
building rapport, better able to prevent
interviewer inconsistency (v. mobile, email),
share stimuli, more complete & in-depth IDI.
Can audio &/or video record, visual cues
add meaning, verification (triangulation) is
more straightforward (v. mobile, email).
Phone Scope (wide coverage, more IDIs), gaining
cooperation (convenience in scheduling,
participation), absence of visual cues that may
bias, better able to prevent interviewer
inconsistency (v. mobile, email).
Can usually audio record, verification
(triangulation) is more straightforward (v.
mobile, email).
Mobile
(using smartphone
technology)
Gaining cooperation, esp., millennials
(convenience in scheduling, participation),
multiple ways to respond.
Multiple forms of data (audio, video,
images) to analyze giving greater context &
meaning.
Email Scope (coverage), gaining cooperation
(convenience of scheduling, participation),
detailed responses.
Built-in transcripts, detailed content to
analyze.
Credibility: Number of interviews, gaining cooperation, interviewer bias (appearance, attitude), interviewer
inconsistency (follow-up questions, concepts), participant effects (rapport, indirect questions).
Analyzability: Transcriptions/transcriptionists, verification (peer debriefing, deviant case analysis).
Discussion â In-depth Interviews
26. Applying a Quality Framework to the In-depth Interview Method â 2016
25
Credibility Analyzability
Limitations
Face-to-face Scope (coverage, fewer IDIs), gaining
cooperation (convenience in scheduling,
participation), interviewer bias & participant
effects (physical presence may bias results).
Not all participants may agree to audio
&/or video recording.
Phone Weakened ability to establish rapport, absence
of visual cues that aid in interpretation, shorter
IDI length/less in-depth.
Not all participants may agree to audio
recording, lack of visual cues to aid in
interpretation.
Mobile
(using smartphone
technology)
Scope (coverage bias, e.g., certain demographic
segments, people with limited literacy,
smartphone savvy), weakened ability to
establish rapport, interviewer inconsistency
(limited follow-up), participant effects
(participant controls content).
Not all participants may have the
capability or know-how to capture data in
various forms, potentially biased data
(participants control what they share).
Email Scope (coverage bias, e.g., certain demographic
segments, people with limited literacy, email
access), weakened ability to establish rapport &
keep IDI on track, text is primary form of
communication.
âThe impressions that participants give
through their text can negatively impact
the quality of the analysis and
interpretation of the dataâ (p. 67)
Credibility: Number of interviews, gaining cooperation, interviewer bias (appearance, attitude), interviewer
inconsistency (follow-up questions, concepts), participant effects (rapport, indirect questions).
Analyzability: Transcriptions/transcriptionists, verification (peer debriefing, deviant case analysis).
Discussion â In-depth Interviews
27. Applying a Quality Framework to the In-depth Interview Method â 2016
Roller, M. R., & Lavrakas, P. J. (2015). Applied Qualitative Research Design: A Total Quality Framework
Approach. New York: Guilford Publications.
Roller, M. R. Research Design Review www.researchdesignreview.com
Interview Guide Development: A 4-Stage âFunnelâ Approach (June 28, 2015)
https://researchdesignreview.com/2015/06/28/interview-guide-development-a-4-stage-funnel-
approach/
Designing a Quality In-depth Interview Study: How Many Interviews Are Enough? (September 12, 2012)
http://researchdesignreview.com/2012/09/12/designing-a-quality-in-depth-interview-study/
Interviewer Bias & Reflexivity in Qualitative Research (November 14, 2012)
http://researchdesignreview.com/2012/11/14/interviewer-bias-reflexivity-in-qualitative-research/
West, R. (2012). Lather, rinse, repeat: Getting into the shower & other private places with mobile
qualitative. In MRMW North America Conference. Cincinnati, OH. URL: http://vimeo.com/49323073
This is an 18-minute presentation by Rebecca West concerning Civicomâs mobile market
research study for a beauty products manufacturer. This research studied the purchase and use of a
body wash product among female âenthusiastsâ by way of in-store visits and actual use in the shower.
The presentation goes through the design considerations, the various ways participants communicated
with the Civicom researchers at the store (i.e., voice, image, text, and video) and in the shower (i.e.,
voice), and research findings. 26
References & Further Resources
In-depth Interviews