social research interview questions

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• Types of Interviews in Research | Guide & Examples

Types of Interviews in Research | Guide & Examples

Published on March 10, 2022 by Tegan George . Revised on June 22, 2023.

An interview is a qualitative research method that relies on asking questions in order to collect data . Interviews involve two or more people, one of whom is the interviewer asking the questions.

There are several types of interviews, often differentiated by their level of structure.

• Structured interviews have predetermined questions asked in a predetermined order.
• Unstructured interviews are more free-flowing.
• Semi-structured interviews fall in between.

Interviews are commonly used in market research, social science, and ethnographic research .

Table of contents

What is a structured interview, what is a semi-structured interview, what is an unstructured interview, what is a focus group, examples of interview questions, advantages and disadvantages of interviews, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about types of interviews.

Structured interviews have predetermined questions in a set order. They are often closed-ended, featuring dichotomous (yes/no) or multiple-choice questions. While open-ended structured interviews exist, they are much less common. The types of questions asked make structured interviews a predominantly quantitative tool.

Asking set questions in a set order can help you see patterns among responses, and it allows you to easily compare responses between participants while keeping other factors constant. This can mitigate   research biases and lead to higher reliability and validity. However, structured interviews can be overly formal, as well as limited in scope and flexibility.

• You feel very comfortable with your topic. This will help you formulate your questions most effectively.
• You have limited time or resources. Structured interviews are a bit more straightforward to analyze because of their closed-ended nature, and can be a doable undertaking for an individual.
• Your research question depends on holding environmental conditions between participants constant.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Semi-structured interviews are a blend of structured and unstructured interviews. While the interviewer has a general plan for what they want to ask, the questions do not have to follow a particular phrasing or order.

Semi-structured interviews are often open-ended, allowing for flexibility, but follow a predetermined thematic framework, giving a sense of order. For this reason, they are often considered “the best of both worlds.”

However, if the questions differ substantially between participants, it can be challenging to look for patterns, lessening the generalizability and validity of your results.

• You have prior interview experience. It’s easier than you think to accidentally ask a leading question when coming up with questions on the fly. Overall, spontaneous questions are much more difficult than they may seem.
• Your research question is exploratory in nature. The answers you receive can help guide your future research.

An unstructured interview is the most flexible type of interview. The questions and the order in which they are asked are not set. Instead, the interview can proceed more spontaneously, based on the participant’s previous answers.

Unstructured interviews are by definition open-ended. This flexibility can help you gather detailed information on your topic, while still allowing you to observe patterns between participants.

However, so much flexibility means that they can be very challenging to conduct properly. You must be very careful not to ask leading questions, as biased responses can lead to lower reliability or even invalidate your research.

• You have a solid background in your research topic and have conducted interviews before.
• Your research question is exploratory in nature, and you are seeking descriptive data that will deepen and contextualize your initial hypotheses.
• Your research necessitates forming a deeper connection with your participants, encouraging them to feel comfortable revealing their true opinions and emotions.

A focus group brings together a group of participants to answer questions on a topic of interest in a moderated setting. Focus groups are qualitative in nature and often study the group’s dynamic and body language in addition to their answers. Responses can guide future research on consumer products and services, human behavior, or controversial topics.

Focus groups can provide more nuanced and unfiltered feedback than individual interviews and are easier to organize than experiments or large surveys . However, their small size leads to low external validity and the temptation as a researcher to “cherry-pick” responses that fit your hypotheses.

• Your research focuses on the dynamics of group discussion or real-time responses to your topic.
• Your questions are complex and rooted in feelings, opinions, and perceptions that cannot be answered with a “yes” or “no.”
• Your topic is exploratory in nature, and you are seeking information that will help you uncover new questions or future research ideas.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

Depending on the type of interview you are conducting, your questions will differ in style, phrasing, and intention. Structured interview questions are set and precise, while the other types of interviews allow for more open-endedness and flexibility.

Here are some examples.

• Semi-structured
• Unstructured
• Focus group
• Do you like dogs? Yes/No
• Do you associate dogs with feeling: happy; somewhat happy; neutral; somewhat unhappy; unhappy
• If yes, name one attribute of dogs that you like.
• If no, name one attribute of dogs that you don’t like.
• What feelings do dogs bring out in you?
• When you think more deeply about this, what experiences would you say your feelings are rooted in?

Interviews are a great research tool. They allow you to gather rich information and draw more detailed conclusions than other research methods, taking into consideration nonverbal cues, off-the-cuff reactions, and emotional responses.

However, they can also be time-consuming and deceptively challenging to conduct properly. Smaller sample sizes can cause their validity and reliability to suffer, and there is an inherent risk of interviewer effect arising from accidentally leading questions.

Here are some advantages and disadvantages of each type of interview that can help you decide if you’d like to utilize this research method.

If you want to know more about statistics , methodology , or research bias , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• Student’s  t -distribution
• Normal distribution
• Null and Alternative Hypotheses
• Chi square tests
• Confidence interval
• Quartiles & Quantiles
• Cluster sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Data cleansing
• Reproducibility vs Replicability
• Peer review
• Prospective cohort study

Research bias

• Implicit bias
• Cognitive bias
• Placebo effect
• Hawthorne effect
• Hindsight bias
• Affect heuristic
• Social desirability bias

The four most common types of interviews are:

• Structured interviews : The questions are predetermined in both topic and order. 
• Semi-structured interviews : A few questions are predetermined, but other questions aren’t planned.
• Unstructured interviews : None of the questions are predetermined.
• Focus group interviews : The questions are presented to a group instead of one individual.

The interviewer effect is a type of bias that emerges when a characteristic of an interviewer (race, age, gender identity, etc.) influences the responses given by the interviewee.

There is a risk of an interviewer effect in all types of interviews , but it can be mitigated by writing really high-quality interview questions.

Social desirability bias is the tendency for interview participants to give responses that will be viewed favorably by the interviewer or other participants. It occurs in all types of interviews and surveys , but is most common in semi-structured interviews , unstructured interviews , and focus groups .

Social desirability bias can be mitigated by ensuring participants feel at ease and comfortable sharing their views. Make sure to pay attention to your own body language and any physical or verbal cues, such as nodding or widening your eyes.

This type of bias can also occur in observations if the participants know they’re being observed. They might alter their behavior accordingly.

A focus group is a research method that brings together a small group of people to answer questions in a moderated setting. The group is chosen due to predefined demographic traits, and the questions are designed to shed light on a topic of interest. It is one of 4 types of interviews .

Quantitative research deals with numbers and statistics, while qualitative research deals with words and meanings.

Quantitative methods allow you to systematically measure variables and test hypotheses . Qualitative methods allow you to explore concepts and experiences in more detail.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

George, T. (2023, June 22). Types of Interviews in Research | Guide & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved April 8, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/interviews-research/

Is this article helpful?

Tegan George

Other students also liked, unstructured interview | definition, guide & examples, structured interview | definition, guide & examples, semi-structured interview | definition, guide & examples, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

9.2 Qualitative interviews

Learning objectives.

• Define interviews from the social scientific perspective
• Identify when it is appropriate to employ interviews as a data-collection strategy
• Identify the primary aim of in-depth interviews
• Describe what makes qualitative interview techniques unique
• Define the term interview guide and describe how to construct an interview guide
• Outline the guidelines for constructing good qualitative interview questions
• Describe how writing field notes and journaling function in qualitative research
• Identify the strengths and weaknesses of interviews

Knowing how to create and conduct a good interview is an essential skill. Interviews are used by market researchers to learn how to sell their products, and journalists use interviews to get information from a whole host of people from VIPs to random people on the street. Police use interviews to investigate crimes.

In social science,  interviews are a method of data collection that involves two or more people exchanging information through a series of questions and answers. The questions are designed by the researcher to elicit information from interview participants on a specific topic or set of topics. These topics are informed by the research questions. Typically, interviews involve an in-person meeting between two people—an interviewer and an interviewee — but interviews need not be limited to two people, nor must they occur in-person.

The question of when to conduct an interview might be on your mind. Interviews are an excellent way to gather detailed information. They also have an advantage over surveys—they can change as you learn more information. In a survey, you cannot change what questions you ask if a participant’s response sparks some follow-up question in your mind. All participants must get the same questions. The questions you decided to put on your survey during the design stage determine what data you get. In an interview, however, you can follow up on new and unexpected topics that emerge during the conversation. Trusting in emergence and learning from participants are hallmarks of qualitative research. In this way, interviews are a useful method to use when you want to know the story behind the responses you might receive in a written survey.

Interviews are also useful when the topic you are studying is rather complex, requires lengthy explanation, or needs a dialogue between two people to thoroughly investigate. Also, if people will describe the process by which a phenomenon occurs, like how a person makes a decision, then interviews may be the best method for you. For example, you could use interviews to gather data about how people reach the decision not to have children and how others in their lives have responded to that decision. To understand these “how’s” you would need to have some back-and-forth dialogue with respondents. When they begin to tell you their story, inevitably new questions that hadn’t occurred to you from prior interviews would come up because each person’s story is unique. Also, because the process of choosing not to have children is complex for many people, describing that process by responding to closed-ended questions on a survey wouldn’t work particularly well.

Interview research is especially useful when:

• You wish to gather very detailed information
• You anticipate wanting to ask respondents follow-up questions based on their responses
• You plan to ask questions that require lengthy explanation
• You are studying a complex or potentially confusing topic to respondents
• You are studying processes, such as how people make decisions

Qualitative interviews are sometimes called intensive or in-depth interviews. These interviews are semi-structured ; the researcher has a particular topic about which she would like to hear from the respondent, but questions are open-ended and may not be asked in exactly the same way or in exactly the same order to each and every respondent. For in-depth interviews , the primary aim is to hear from respondents about what they think is important about the topic at hand and to hear it in their own words. In this section, we’ll take a look at how to conduct qualitative interviews, analyze interview data, and identify some of the strengths and weaknesses of this method.

Constructing an interview guide

Qualitative interviews might feel more like a conversation than an interview to respondents, but the researcher is in fact usually guiding the conversation with the goal in mind of gathering specific information from a respondent. Qualitative interviews use open-ended questions, which are questions that a researcher poses but does not provide answer options for. Open-ended questions are more demanding of participants than closed-ended questions because they require participants to come up with their own words, phrases, or sentences to respond.

In a qualitative interview, the researcher usually develops an interview guide in advance to refer to during the interview (or memorizes in advance of the interview). An interview guide is a list of questions or topics that the interviewer hopes to cover during the course of an interview. It is called a guide because it is simply that—it is used to guide the interviewer, but it is not set in stone. Think of an interview guide like an agenda for the day or a to-do list—both probably contain all the items you hope to check off or accomplish, though it probably won’t be the end of the world if you don’t accomplish everything on the list or if you don’t accomplish it in the exact order that you have it written down. Perhaps new events will come up that cause you to rearrange your schedule just a bit, or perhaps you simply won’t get to everything on the list.

Interview guides should outline issues that a researcher feels are likely to be important. Because participants are asked to provide answers in their own words and to raise points they believe are important, each interview is likely to flow a little differently. While the opening question in an in-depth interview may be the same across all interviews, from that point on, what the participant says will shape how the interview proceeds. Sometimes participants answer a question on the interview guide before it is asked. When the interviewer comes to that question later on in the interview, it’s a good idea to acknowledge that they already addressed part of this question and ask them if they have anything to add to their response.  All of this uncertainty can make in-depth interviewing exciting and rather challenging. It takes a skilled interviewer to be able to ask questions; listen to respondents; and pick up on cues about when to follow up, when to move on, and when to simply let the participant speak without guidance or interruption.

As we’ve discussed, interview guides can list topics or questions. The specific format of an interview guide might depend on your style, experience, and comfort level as an interviewer or with your topic. Figure 9.1 provides an example of an interview guide for a study of how young people experience workplace sexual harassment. The guide is topic-based, rather than a list of specific questions. The ordering of the topics is important, though how each comes up during the interview may vary.

For interview guides that use questions, there can also be specific words or phrases for follow-up in case the participant does not mention those topics in their responses. These probes , as well as the questions are written out in the interview guide, but may not always be used. Figure 9.2 provides an example of an interview guide that uses questions rather than topics.

As you might have guessed, interview guides do not appear out of thin air. They are the result of thoughtful and careful work on the part of a researcher. As you can see in both of the preceding guides, the topics and questions have been organized thematically and in the order in which they are likely to proceed (though keep in mind that the flow of a qualitative interview is in part determined by what a respondent has to say). Sometimes qualitative interviewers may create two versions of the interview guide: one version contains a very brief outline of the interview, perhaps with just topic headings, and another version contains detailed questions underneath each topic heading. In this case, the researcher might use the very detailed guide to prepare and practice in advance of actually conducting interviews and then just bring the brief outline to the interview. Bringing an outline, as opposed to a very long list of detailed questions, to an interview encourages the researcher to actually listen to what a participant is saying. An overly detailed interview guide can be difficult to navigate during an interview and could give respondents the mis-impression the interviewer is more interested in the questions than in the participant’s answers.

Constructing an interview guide often begins with brainstorming. There are no rules at the brainstorming stage—simply list all the topics and questions that come to mind when you think about your research question. Once you’ve got a pretty good list, you can begin to pare it down by cutting questions and topics that seem redundant and group similar questions and topics together. If you haven’t done so yet, you may also want to come up with question and topic headings for your grouped categories. You should also consult the scholarly literature to find out what kinds of questions other interviewers have asked in studies of similar topics and what theory indicates might be important. As with quantitative survey research, it is best not to place very sensitive or potentially controversial questions at the very beginning of your qualitative interview guide. You need to give participants the opportunity to warm up to the interview and to feel comfortable talking with you. Finally, get some feedback on your interview guide. Ask your friends, other researchers, and your professors for some guidance and suggestions once you’ve come up with what you think is a strong guide. Chances are they’ll catch a few things you hadn’t noticed. Once you begin your interviews, your participants may also suggest revisions or improvements.

In terms of the specific questions you include in your guide, there are a few guidelines worth noting. First, avoid questions that can be answered with a simple yes or no. Try to rephrase your questions in a way that invites longer responses from your interviewees. If you choose to include yes or no questions, be sure to include follow-up questions. Remember, one of the benefits of qualitative interviews is that you can ask participants for more information—be sure to do so. While it is a good idea to ask follow-up questions, try to avoid asking “why” as your follow-up question, as this particular question can come off as confrontational, even if that is not your intent. Often people won’t know how to respond to “why,” perhaps because they don’t even know why themselves. Instead of asking “why,” you say something like, “Could you tell me a little more about that?” This allows participants to explain themselves further without feeling that they’re being doubted or questioned in a hostile way.

Also, try to avoid phrasing your questions in a leading way. For example, rather than asking, “Don’t you think most people who don’t want to have children are selfish?” you could ask, “What comes to mind for you when you hear someone doesn’t want to have children?” Finally, remember to keep most, if not all, of your questions open-ended. The key to a successful qualitative interview is giving participants the opportunity to share information in their own words and in their own way. Documenting the decisions made along the way regarding which questions are used, thrown out, or revised can help a researcher remember the thought process behind the interview guide when she is analyzing the data. Additionally, it promotes the rigor of the qualitative project as a whole, ensuring the researcher is proceeding in a reflective and deliberate manner that can be checked by others reviewing her study.

Recording qualitative data

Even after the interview guide is constructed, the interviewer is not yet ready to begin conducting interviews. The researcher has to decide how to collect and maintain the information that is provided by participants. Researchers keep field notes or written recordings produced by the researcher during the data collection process.  Field notes can be taken before, during, or after interviews. Field notes help researchers document what they observe, and in so doing, they form the first step of data analysis. Field notes may contain many things—observations of body language or environment, reflections on whether interview questions are working well, and connections between ideas that participants share.

Unfortunately, even the most diligent researcher cannot write down everything that is seen or heard during an interview. In particular, it is difficult for a researcher to be truly present and observant if she is also writing down everything the participant is saying. For this reason, it is quite common for interviewers to create audio recordings of the interviews they conduct. Recording interviews allows the researcher to focus on the interaction with the interview participant.

Of course, not all participants will feel comfortable being recorded and sometimes even the interviewer may feel that the subject is so sensitive that recording would be inappropriate. If this is the case, it is up to the researcher to balance excellent note-taking with exceptional question-asking and even better listening.

Whether you will be recording your interviews or not (and especially if not), practicing the interview in advance is crucial. Ideally, you’ll find a friend or two willing to participate in a couple of trial runs with you. Even better, find a friend or two who are similar in at least some ways to your sample. They can give you the best feedback on your questions and your interview demeanor.

Another issue interviewers face is documenting the decisions made during the data collection process. Qualitative research is open to new ideas that emerge through the data collection process. For example, a participant might suggest a new concept you hadn’t thought of before or define a concept in a new way. This may lead you to create new questions or ask questions in a different way to future participants. These processes should be documented in a process called journaling or memoing. Journal entries are notes to yourself about reflections or methodological decisions that emerge during the data collection process. Documenting these are important, as you’d be surprised how quickly you can forget what happened. Journaling makes sure that when it comes time to analyze your data, you remember how, when, and why certain changes were made. The discipline of journaling in qualitative research helps to ensure the rigor of the research process—that is its trustworthiness and authenticity which we will discuss later in this chapter.

Strengths and weaknesses of qualitative interviews

As we’ve mentioned in this section, qualitative interviews are an excellent way to gather detailed information. Any topic can be explored in much more depth with interviews than with almost any other method. Not only are participants given the opportunity to elaborate in a way that is not possible with other methods such as survey research, but they also are able share information with researchers in their own words and from their own perspectives. Whereas, quantitative research asks participants to fit their perspectives into the limited response options provided by the researcher. And because qualitative interviews are designed to elicit detailed information, they are especially useful when a researcher’s aim is to study social processes or the “how” of various phenomena. Yet another, and sometimes overlooked, benefit of in-person qualitative interviews is that researchers can make observations beyond those that a respondent is orally reporting. A respondent’s body language, and even their choice of time and location for the interview, might provide a researcher with useful data.

Of course, all these benefits come with some drawbacks. As with quantitative survey research, qualitative interviews rely on respondents’ ability to accurately and honestly recall specific details about their lives, circumstances, thoughts, opinions, or behaviors. Further, as you may have already guessed, qualitative interviewing is time-intensive and can be quite expensive. Creating an interview guide, identifying a sample, and conducting interviews are just the beginning. Writing out what was said in interviews and analyzing the qualitative interview data are time consuming processes. Keep in mind you are also asking for more of participants’ time than if you’d simply mailed them a questionnaire containing closed-ended questions. Conducting qualitative interviews is not only labor-intensive but can also be emotionally taxing. Seeing and hearing the impact that social problems have on respondents is difficult. Researchers embarking on a qualitative interview project should keep in mind their own abilities to receive stories that may be difficult to hear.

Key Takeaways

• Understanding how to design and conduct interview research is a useful skill to have.
• In a social scientific interview, two or more people exchange information through a series of questions and answers.
• Interview research is often used when detailed information is required and when a researcher wishes to examine processes.
• In-depth interviews are semi-structured interviews where the researcher has topics and questions in mind to ask, but questions are open-ended and flow according to how the participant responds to each.
• Interview guides can vary in format but should contain some outline of the topics you hope to cover during the course of an interview.
• Qualitative interviews allow respondents to share information in their own words and are useful for gathering detailed information and understanding social processes.
• Field notes and journaling are ways to document thoughts and decisions about the research process
• Drawbacks of qualitative interviews include reliance on respondents’ accuracy and their intensity in terms of time, expense, and possible emotional strain.
• Field notes- written notes produced by the researcher during the data collection process
• In-depth interviews- interviews in which researchers hear from respondents about what they think is important about the topic at hand in the respondent’s own words
• Interviews- a method of data collection that involves two or more people exchanging information through a series of questions and answers
• Interview guide- a list of questions or topics that the interviewer hopes to cover during the course of an interview
• Journaling- making notes of emerging issues and changes during the research process
• Semi-structured interviews- questions are open ended and may not be asked in exactly the same way or in exactly the same order to each and every respondent

Image attributions

interview restaurant a pair by alda2 CC-0

questions by geralt CC-0

Figure 9.1 is copied from Blackstone, A. (2012) Principles of sociological inquiry: Qualitative and quantitative methods. Saylor Foundation. Retrieved from: https://saylordotorg.github.io/text_principles-of-sociological-inquiry-qualitative-and-quantitative-methods/ Shared under CC-BY-NC-SA 3.0 License

writing by StockSnap CC-0

Foundations of Social Work Research Copyright © 2020 by Rebecca L. Mauldin is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons
• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

9.2: Qualitative Interview Techniques and Considerations

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 12595

Learning Objectives

• Identify the primary aim of in-depth interviews.
• Describe what makes qualitative interview techniques unique.
• Define the term interview guide and describe how to construct an interview guide.
• Outline the guidelines for constructing good qualitative interview questions.
• Define the term focus group and identify one benefit of focus groups.
• Identify and describe the various stages of qualitative interview data analysis.
• Identify the strengths and weaknesses of qualitative interviews.

Qualitative interviews are sometimes called intensive or in-depth interviews . These interviews are semistructured; the researcher has a particular topic about which he or she would like to hear from the respondent, but questions are open ended and may not be asked in exactly the same way or in exactly the same order to each and every respondent. In in-depth interviews, the primary aim is to hear from respondents about what they think is important about the topic at hand and to hear it in their own words. In this section, we’ll take a look at how to conduct interviews that are specifically qualitative in nature, analyze qualitative interview data, and use some of the strengths and weaknesses of this method. In Section 9.4 , we return to several considerations that are relevant to both qualitative and quantitative interviewing.

Conducting Qualitative Interviews

Qualitative interviews might feel more like a conversation than an interview to respondents, but the researcher is in fact usually guiding the conversation with the goal in mind of gathering information from a respondent. A key difference between qualitative and quantitative interviewing is that qualitative interviews contain open-ended questions . The meaning of this term is of course implied by its name, but just so that we’re sure to be on the same page, I’ll tell you that open-ended questions are questions that a researcher poses but does not provide answer options for. Open-ended questions are more demanding of participants than closed-ended questions, for they require participants to come up with their own words, phrases, or sentences to respond.

In a qualitative interview, the researcher usually develops a guide in advance that he or she then refers to during the interview (or memorizes in advance of the interview). An interview guide is a list of topics or questions that the interviewer hopes to cover during the course of an interview. It is called a guide because it is simply that—it is used to guide the interviewer, but it is not set in stone. Think of an interview guide like your agenda for the day or your to-do list—both probably contain all the items you hope to check off or accomplish, though it probably won’t be the end of the world if you don’t accomplish everything on the list or if you don’t accomplish it in the exact order that you have it written down. Perhaps new events will come up that cause you to rearrange your schedule just a bit, or perhaps you simply won’t get to everything on the list.

Interview guides should outline issues that a researcher feels are likely to be important, but because participants are asked to provide answers in their own words, and to raise points that they believe are important, each interview is likely to flow a little differently. While the opening question in an in-depth interview may be the same across all interviews, from that point on what the participant says will shape how the interview proceeds. This, I believe, is what makes in-depth interviewing so exciting. It is also what makes in-depth interviewing rather challenging to conduct. It takes a skilled interviewer to be able to ask questions; actually listen to respondents; and pick up on cues about when to follow up, when to move on, and when to simply let the participant speak without guidance or interruption.

I’ve said that interview guides can list topics or questions. The specific format of an interview guide might depend on your style, experience, and comfort level as an interviewer or with your topic. I have conducted interviews using different kinds of guides. In my interviews of young people about their experiences with workplace sexual harassment, the guide I used was topic based. There were few specific questions contained in the guide. Instead, I had an outline of topics that I hoped to cover, listed in an order that I thought it might make sense to cover them, noted on a sheet of paper. That guide can be seen in Figure 9.4.

Figure 9.4 Interview Guide Displaying Topics Rather Than Questions

In my interviews with child-free adults, the interview guide contained questions rather than brief topics. One reason I took this approach is that this was a topic with which I had less familiarity than workplace sexual harassment. I’d been studying harassment for some time before I began those interviews, and I had already analyzed much quantitative survey data on the topic. When I began the child-free interviews, I was embarking on a research topic that was entirely new for me. I was also studying a topic about which I have strong personal feelings, and I wanted to be sure that I phrased my questions in a way that didn’t appear biased to respondents. To help ward off that possibility, I wrote down specific question wording in my interview guide. As I conducted more and more interviews, and read more and more of the literature on child-free adults, I became more confident about my ability to ask open-ended, nonbiased questions about the topic without the guide, but having some specific questions written down at the start of the data collection process certainly helped. The interview guide I used for the child-free project is displayed in Figure 9.5.

Figure 9.5 Interview Guide Displaying Questions Rather Than Topics

As you might have guessed, interview guides do not appear out of thin air. They are the result of thoughtful and careful work on the part of a researcher. As you can see in both of the preceding guides, the topics and questions have been organized thematically and in the order in which they are likely to proceed (though keep in mind that the flow of a qualitative interview is in part determined by what a respondent has to say). Sometimes qualitative interviewers may create two versions of the interview guide: one version contains a very brief outline of the interview, perhaps with just topic headings, and another version contains detailed questions underneath each topic heading. In this case, the researcher might use the very detailed guide to prepare and practice in advance of actually conducting interviews and then just bring the brief outline to the interview. Bringing an outline, as opposed to a very long list of detailed questions, to an interview encourages the researcher to actually listen to what a participant is telling her. An overly detailed interview guide will be difficult to navigate through during an interview and could give respondents the misimpression that the interviewer is more interested in her questions than in the participant’s answers.

When beginning to construct an interview guide, brainstorming is usually the first step. There are no rules at the brainstorming stage—simply list all the topics and questions that come to mind when you think about your research question. Once you’ve got a pretty good list, you can begin to pare it down by cutting questions and topics that seem redundant and group like questions and topics together. If you haven’t done so yet, you may also want to come up with question and topic headings for your grouped categories. You should also consult the scholarly literature to find out what kinds of questions other interviewers have asked in studies of similar topics. As with quantitative survey research, it is best not to place very sensitive or potentially controversial questions at the very beginning of your qualitative interview guide. You need to give participants the opportunity to warm up to the interview and to feel comfortable talking with you. Finally, get some feedback on your interview guide. Ask your friends, family members, and your professors for some guidance and suggestions once you’ve come up with what you think is a pretty strong guide. Chances are they’ll catch a few things you hadn’t noticed.

In terms of the specific questions you include on your guide, there are a few guidelines worth noting. First, try to avoid questions that can be answered with a simple yes or no, or if you do choose to include such questions, be sure to include follow-up questions. Remember, one of the benefits of qualitative interviews is that you can ask participants for more information—be sure to do so. While it is a good idea to ask follow-up questions, try to avoid asking “why” as your follow-up question, as this particular question can come off as confrontational, even if that is not how you intend it. Often people won’t know how to respond to “why,” perhaps because they don’t even know why themselves. Instead of “why,” I recommend that you say something like, “Could you tell me a little more about that?” This allows participants to explain themselves further without feeling that they’re being doubted or questioned in a hostile way.

Also, try to avoid phrasing your questions in a leading way. For example, rather than asking, “Don’t you think that most people who don’t want kids are selfish?” you could ask, “What comes to mind for you when you hear that someone doesn’t want kids?” Or rather than asking, “What do you think about juvenile delinquents who drink and drive?” you could ask, “How do you feel about underage drinking?” or “What do you think about drinking and driving?” Finally, as noted earlier in this section, remember to keep most, if not all, of your questions open ended. The key to a successful qualitative interview is giving participants the opportunity to share information in their own words and in their own way.

Even after the interview guide is constructed, the interviewer is not yet ready to begin conducting interviews. The researcher next has to decide how to collect and maintain the information that is provided by participants. It is probably most common for qualitative interviewers to take audio recordings of the interviews they conduct.

Recording interviews allows the researcher to focus on her or his interaction with the interview participant rather than being distracted by trying to take notes. Of course, not all participants will feel comfortable being recorded and sometimes even the interviewer may feel that the subject is so sensitive that recording would be inappropriate. If this is the case, it is up to the researcher to balance excellent note-taking with exceptional question asking and even better listening. I don’t think I can understate the difficulty of managing all these feats simultaneously. Whether you will be recording your interviews or not (and especially if not), practicing the interview in advance is crucial. Ideally, you’ll find a friend or two willing to participate in a couple of trial runs with you. Even better, you’ll find a friend or two who are similar in at least some ways to your sample. They can give you the best feedback on your questions and your interview demeanor.

All interviewers should be aware of, give some thought to, and plan for several additional factors, such as where to conduct an interview and how to make participants as comfortable as possible during an interview. Because these factors should be considered by both qualitative and quantitative interviewers, we will return to them in Section 9.4 after we’ve had a chance to look at some of the unique features of each approach to interviewing.

Although our focus here has been on interviews for which there is one interviewer and one respondent, this is certainly not the only way to conduct a qualitative interview. Sometimes there may be multiple respondents present, and occasionally more than one interviewer may be present as well. When multiple respondents participate in an interview at the same time, this is referred to as a focus group . Focus groups can be an excellent way to gather information because topics or questions that hadn’t occurred to the researcher may be brought up by other participants in the group. Having respondents talk with and ask questions of one another can be an excellent way of learning about a topic; not only might respondents ask questions that hadn’t occurred to the researcher, but the researcher can also learn from respondents’ body language around and interactions with one another. Of course, there are some unique ethical concerns associated with collecting data in a group setting. We’ll take a closer look at how focus groups work and describe some potential ethical concerns associated with them in Chapter 12.

Analysis of Qualitative Interview Data

Analysis of qualitative interview data typically begins with a set of transcripts of the interviews conducted. Obtaining said transcripts requires having either taken exceptionally good notes during an interview or, preferably, recorded the interview and then transcribed it. Transcribing interviews is usually the first step toward analyzing qualitative interview data. To transcribe an interview means that you create, or someone whom you’ve hired creates, a complete, written copy of the recorded interview by playing the recording back and typing in each word that is spoken on the recording, noting who spoke which words. In general, it is best to aim for a verbatim transcription, one that reports word for word exactly what was said in the recorded interview. If possible, it is also best to include nonverbals in an interview’s written transcription. Gestures made by respondents should be noted, as should the tone of voice and notes about when, where, and how spoken words may have been emphasized by respondents.

If you have the time (or if you lack the resources to hire others), I think it is best to transcribe your interviews yourself. I never cease to be amazed by the things I recall from an interview when I transcribe it myself. If the researcher who conducted the interview transcribes it himself or herself, that person will also be able to make a note of nonverbal behaviors and interactions that may be relevant to analysis but that could not be picked up by audio recording. I’ve seen interviewees roll their eyes, wipe tears from their face, and even make obscene gestures that spoke volumes about their feelings but that could not have been recorded had I not remembered to include these details in their transcribed interviews.

The goal of analysis is to reach some inferences, lessons, or conclusions by condensing large amounts of data into relatively smaller, more manageable bits of understandable information. Analysis of qualitative interview data often works inductively (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Charmaz, 2006).For an additional reminder about what an inductive approach to analysis means, see Chapter 2. If you would like to learn more about inductive qualitative data analysis, I recommend two titles: Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research . Chicago, IL: Aldine; Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. To move from the specific observations an interviewer collects to identifying patterns across those observations, qualitative interviewers will often begin by reading through transcripts of their interviews and trying to identify codes. A code is a shorthand representation of some more complex set of issues or ideas. In this usage, the word code is a noun. But it can also be a verb. The process of identifying codes in one’s qualitative data is often referred to as coding . Coding involves identifying themes across interview data by reading and rereading (and rereading again) interview transcripts until the researcher has a clear idea about what sorts of themes come up across the interviews.

Qualitative researcher and textbook author Kristin Esterberg (2002)Esterberg, K. G. (2002). Qualitative methods in social research . Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill. describes coding as a multistage process. Esterberg suggests that there are two types of coding: open coding and focused coding. To analyze qualitative interview data, one can begin by open coding transcripts. This means that you read through each transcript, line by line, and make a note of whatever categories or themes seem to jump out to you. At this stage, it is important that you not let your original research question or expectations about what you think you might find cloud your ability to see categories or themes. It’s called open coding for a reason—keep an open mind. Open coding will probably require multiple go-rounds. As you read through your transcripts, it is likely that you’ll begin to see some commonalities across the categories or themes that you’ve jotted down. Once you do, you might begin focused coding.

Focused coding involves collapsing or narrowing themes and categories identified in open coding by reading through the notes you made while conducting open coding. Identify themes or categories that seem to be related, perhaps merging some. Then give each collapsed/merged theme or category a name (or code), and identify passages of data that fit each named category or theme. To identify passages of data that represent your emerging codes, you’ll need to read through your transcripts yet again (and probably again). You might also write up brief definitions or descriptions of each code. Defining codes is a way of making meaning of your data and of developing a way to talk about your findings and what your data mean. Guess what? You are officially analyzing data!

As tedious and laborious as it might seem to read through hundreds of pages of transcripts multiple times, sometimes getting started with the coding process is actually the hardest part. If you find yourself struggling to identify themes at the open coding stage, ask yourself some questions about your data. The answers should give you a clue about what sorts of themes or categories you are reading. In their text on analyzing qualitative data, Lofland and Lofland (1995)Lofland, J., & Lofland, L. H. (1995). Analyzing social settings: A guide to qualitative observation and analysis (3rd ed.) Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. identify a set of questions that I find very useful when coding qualitative data. They suggest asking the following:

• Of what topic, unit, or aspect is this an instance?
• What question about a topic does this item of data suggest?
• What sort of answer to a question about a topic does this item of data suggest (i.e., what proposition is suggested)?

Asking yourself these questions about the passages of data that you’re reading can help you begin to identify and name potential themes and categories.

Still feeling uncertain about how this process works? Sometimes it helps to see how interview passages translate into codes. In Table 9.1, I present two codes that emerged from the inductive analysis of transcripts from my interviews with child-free adults. I also include a brief description of each code and a few (of many) interview excerpts from which each code was developed.

As you might imagine, wading through all these data is quite a process. Just as quantitative researchers rely on the assistance of special computer programs designed to help with sorting through and analyzing their data, so, too, do qualitative researchers. Where quantitative researchers have SPSS and MicroCase (and many others), qualitative researchers have programs such as NVivo ( http://www.qsrinternational.com ) and Atlasti ( http://www.atlasti.com ). These are programs specifically designed to assist qualitative researchers with organizing, managing, sorting, and analyzing large amounts of qualitative data. The programs work by allowing researchers to import interview transcripts contained in an electronic file and then label or code passages, cut and paste passages, search for various words or phrases, and organize complex interrelationships among passages and codes.

In sum, the following excerpt, from a paper analyzing the workplace sexual harassment interview data I have mentioned previously, summarizes how the process of analyzing qualitative interview data often works:

All interviews were tape recorded and then transcribed and imported into the computer program NVivo. NVivo is designed to assist researchers with organizing, managing, interpreting, and analyzing non-numerical, qualitative data. Once the transcripts, ranging from 20 to 60 pages each, were imported into NVivo, we first coded the data according to the themes outlined in our interview guide. We then closely reviewed each transcript again, looking for common themes across interviews and coding like categories of data together. These passages, referred to as codes or “meaning units” (Weiss, 2004),Weiss, R. S. (2004). In their own words: Making the most of qualitative interviews. Contexts, 3 , 44–51. were then labeled and given a name intended to succinctly portray the themes present in the code. For this paper, we coded every quote that had something to do with the labeling of harassment. After reviewing passages within the “labeling” code, we placed quotes that seemed related together, creating several sub-codes. These sub-codes were named and are represented by the three subtitles within the findings section of this paper.Our three subcodes were the following: (a) “It’s different because you’re in high school”: Sociability and socialization at work; (b) Looking back: “It was sexual harassment; I just didn’t know it at the time”; and (c) Looking ahead: New images of self as worker and of workplace interactions. Once our sub-codes were labeled, we re-examined the interview transcripts, coding additional quotes that fit the theme of each sub-code. (Blackstone, Houle, & Uggen, 2006)Blackstone, A., Houle, J., & Uggen, C. “At the time, I thought it was great”: Age, experience, and workers’ perceptions of sexual harassment. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association, Montreal, QC, August 2006. Currently under review.

Strengths and Weaknesses of Qualitative Interviews

As the preceding sections have suggested, qualitative interviews are an excellent way to gather detailed information. Whatever topic is of interest to the researcher employing this method can be explored in much more depth than with almost any other method. Not only are participants given the opportunity to elaborate in a way that is not possible with other methods such as survey research, but they also are able share information with researchers in their own words and from their own perspectives rather than being asked to fit those perspectives into the perhaps limited response options provided by the researcher. And because qualitative interviews are designed to elicit detailed information, they are especially useful when a researcher’s aim is to study social processes, or the “how” of various phenomena. Yet another, and sometimes overlooked, benefit of qualitative interviews that occurs in person is that researchers can make observations beyond those that a respondent is orally reporting. A respondent’s body language, and even her or his choice of time and location for the interview, might provide a researcher with useful data.

Of course, all these benefits do not come without some drawbacks. As with quantitative survey research, qualitative interviews rely on respondents’ ability to accurately and honestly recall whatever details about their lives, circumstances, thoughts, opinions, or behaviors are being asked about. As Esterberg (2002) puts it, “If you want to know about what people actually do, rather than what they say they do, you should probably use observation [instead of interviews].”Esterberg, K. G. (2002). Qualitative methods in social research . Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill. Further, as you may have already guessed, qualitative interviewing is time intensive and can be quite expensive. Creating an interview guide, identifying a sample, and conducting interviews are just the beginning. Transcribing interviews is labor intensive—and that’s before coding even begins. It is also not uncommon to offer respondents some monetary incentive or thank-you for participating. Keep in mind that you are asking for more of participants’ time than if you’d simply mailed them a questionnaire containing closed-ended questions. Conducting qualitative interviews is not only labor intensive but also emotionally taxing. When I interviewed young workers about their sexual harassment experiences, I heard stories that were shocking, infuriating, and sad. Seeing and hearing the impact that harassment had had on respondents was difficult. Researchers embarking on a qualitative interview project should keep in mind their own abilities to hear stories that may be difficult to hear.

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• In-depth interviews are semistructured interviews where the researcher has topics and questions in mind to ask, but questions are open ended and flow according to how the participant responds to each.
• Interview guides can vary in format but should contain some outline of the topics you hope to cover during the course of an interview.
• NVivo and Atlas.ti are computer programs that qualitative researchers use to help them with organizing, sorting, and analyzing their data.
• Qualitative interviews allow respondents to share information in their own words and are useful for gathering detailed information and understanding social processes.
• Drawbacks of qualitative interviews include reliance on respondents’ accuracy and their intensity in terms of time, expense, and possible emotional strain.
• Based on a research question you have identified through earlier exercises in this text, write a few open-ended questions you could ask were you to conduct in-depth interviews on the topic. Now critique your questions. Are any of them yes/no questions? Are any of them leading?
• Read the open-ended questions you just created, and answer them as though you were an interview participant. Were your questions easy to answer or fairly difficult? How did you feel talking about the topics you asked yourself to discuss? How might respondents feel talking about them?

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Published: 15 September 2022

Interviews in the social sciences

• Eleanor Knott   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9131-3939 1 ,
• Aliya Hamid Rao   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0674-4206 1 ,
• Kate Summers   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9964-0259 1 &
• Chana Teeger   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5046-8280 1  

Nature Reviews Methods Primers volume  2 , Article number:  73 ( 2022 ) Cite this article

699k Accesses

43 Citations

42 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Interdisciplinary studies

In-depth interviews are a versatile form of qualitative data collection used by researchers across the social sciences. They allow individuals to explain, in their own words, how they understand and interpret the world around them. Interviews represent a deceptively familiar social encounter in which people interact by asking and answering questions. They are, however, a very particular type of conversation, guided by the researcher and used for specific ends. This dynamic introduces a range of methodological, analytical and ethical challenges, for novice researchers in particular. In this Primer, we focus on the stages and challenges of designing and conducting an interview project and analysing data from it, as well as strategies to overcome such challenges.

Similar content being viewed by others

Persistent interaction patterns across social media platforms and over time

Michele Avalle, Niccolò Di Marco, … Walter Quattrociocchi

Artificial intelligence and illusions of understanding in scientific research

Lisa Messeri & M. J. Crockett

The role of artificial intelligence in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals

Ricardo Vinuesa, Hossein Azizpour, … Francesco Fuso Nerini

Introduction

In-depth interviews are a qualitative research method that follow a deceptively familiar logic of human interaction: they are conversations where people talk with each other, interact and pose and answer questions 1 . An interview is a specific type of interaction in which — usually and predominantly — a researcher asks questions about someone’s life experience, opinions, dreams, fears and hopes and the interview participant answers the questions 1 .

Interviews will often be used as a standalone method or combined with other qualitative methods, such as focus groups or ethnography, or quantitative methods, such as surveys or experiments. Although interviewing is a frequently used method, it should not be viewed as an easy default for qualitative researchers 2 . Interviews are also not suited to answering all qualitative research questions, but instead have specific strengths that should guide whether or not they are deployed in a research project. Whereas ethnography might be better suited to trying to observe what people do, interviews provide a space for extended conversations that allow the researcher insights into how people think and what they believe. Quantitative surveys also give these kinds of insights, but they use pre-determined questions and scales, privileging breadth over depth and often overlooking harder-to-reach participants.

In-depth interviews can take many different shapes and forms, often with more than one participant or researcher. For example, interviews might be highly structured (using an almost survey-like interview guide), entirely unstructured (taking a narrative and free-flowing approach) or semi-structured (using a topic guide ). Researchers might combine these approaches within a single project depending on the purpose of the interview and the characteristics of the participant. Whatever form the interview takes, researchers should be mindful of the dynamics between interviewer and participant and factor these in at all stages of the project.

In this Primer, we focus on the most common type of interview: one researcher taking a semi-structured approach to interviewing one participant using a topic guide. Focusing on how to plan research using interviews, we discuss the necessary stages of data collection. We also discuss the stages and thought-process behind analysing interview material to ensure that the richness and interpretability of interview material is maintained and communicated to readers. The Primer also tracks innovations in interview methods and discusses the developments we expect over the next 5–10 years.

We wrote this Primer as researchers from sociology, social policy and political science. We note our disciplinary background because we acknowledge that there are disciplinary differences in how interviews are approached and understood as a method.

Experimentation

Here we address research design considerations and data collection issues focusing on topic guide construction and other pragmatics of the interview. We also explore issues of ethics and reflexivity that are crucial throughout the research project.

Research design

Participant selection.

Participants can be selected and recruited in various ways for in-depth interview studies. The researcher must first decide what defines the people or social groups being studied. Often, this means moving from an abstract theoretical research question to a more precise empirical one. For example, the researcher might be interested in how people talk about race in contexts of diversity. Empirical settings in which this issue could be studied could include schools, workplaces or adoption agencies. The best research designs should clearly explain why the particular setting was chosen. Often there are both intrinsic and extrinsic reasons for choosing to study a particular group of people at a specific time and place 3 . Intrinsic motivations relate to the fact that the research is focused on an important specific social phenomenon that has been understudied. Extrinsic motivations speak to the broader theoretical research questions and explain why the case at hand is a good one through which to address them empirically.

Next, the researcher needs to decide which types of people they would like to interview. This decision amounts to delineating the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the study. The criteria might be based on demographic variables, like race or gender, but they may also be context-specific, for example, years of experience in an organization. These should be decided based on the research goals. Researchers should be clear about what characteristics would make an individual a candidate for inclusion in the study (and what would exclude them).

The next step is to identify and recruit the study’s sample . Usually, many more people fit the inclusion criteria than can be interviewed. In cases where lists of potential participants are available, the researcher might want to employ stratified sampling , dividing the list by characteristics of interest before sampling.

When there are no lists, researchers will often employ purposive sampling . Many researchers consider purposive sampling the most useful mode for interview-based research since the number of interviews to be conducted is too small to aim to be statistically representative 4 . Instead, the aim is not breadth, via representativeness, but depth via rich insights about a set of participants. In addition to purposive sampling, researchers often use snowball sampling . Both purposive and snowball sampling can be combined with quota sampling . All three types of sampling aim to ensure a variety of perspectives within the confines of a research project. A goal for in-depth interview studies can be to sample for range, being mindful of recruiting a diversity of participants fitting the inclusion criteria.

Study design

The total number of interviews depends on many factors, including the population studied, whether comparisons are to be made and the duration of interviews. Studies that rely on quota sampling where explicit comparisons are made between groups will require a larger number of interviews than studies focused on one group only. Studies where participants are interviewed over several hours, days or even repeatedly across years will tend to have fewer participants than those that entail a one-off engagement.

Researchers often stop interviewing when new interviews confirm findings from earlier interviews with no new or surprising insights (saturation) 4 , 5 , 6 . As a criterion for research design, saturation assumes that data collection and analysis are happening in tandem and that researchers will stop collecting new data once there is no new information emerging from the interviews. This is not always possible. Researchers rarely have time for systematic data analysis during data collection and they often need to specify their sample in funding proposals prior to data collection. As a result, researchers often draw on existing reports of saturation to estimate a sample size prior to data collection. These suggest between 12 and 20 interviews per category of participant (although researchers have reported saturation with samples that are both smaller and larger than this) 7 , 8 , 9 . The idea of saturation has been critiqued by many qualitative researchers because it assumes that meaning inheres in the data, waiting to be discovered — and confirmed — once saturation has been reached 7 . In-depth interview data are often multivalent and can give rise to different interpretations. The important consideration is, therefore, not merely how many participants are interviewed, but whether one’s research design allows for collecting rich and textured data that provide insight into participants’ understandings, accounts, perceptions and interpretations.

Sometimes, researchers will conduct interviews with more than one participant at a time. Researchers should consider the benefits and shortcomings of such an approach. Joint interviews may, for example, give researchers insight into how caregivers agree or debate childrearing decisions. At the same time, they may be less adaptive to exploring aspects of caregiving that participants may not wish to disclose to each other. In other cases, there may be more than one person interviewing each participant, such as when an interpreter is used, and so it is important to consider during the research design phase how this might shape the dynamics of the interview.

Data collection

Semi-structured interviews are typically organized around a topic guide comprised of an ordered set of broad topics (usually 3–5). Each topic includes a set of questions that form the basis of the discussion between the researcher and participant (Fig.  1 ). These topics are organized around key concepts that the researcher has identified (for example, through a close study of prior research, or perhaps through piloting a small, exploratory study) 5 .

a | Elaborated topics the researcher wants to cover in the interview and example questions. b | An example topic arc. Using such an arc, one can think flexibly about the order of topics. Considering the main question for each topic will help to determine the best order for the topics. After conducting some interviews, the researcher can move topics around if a different order seems to make sense.

Topic guide

One common way to structure a topic guide is to start with relatively easy, open-ended questions (Table  1 ). Opening questions should be related to the research topic but broad and easy to answer, so that they help to ease the participant into conversation.

After these broad, opening questions, the topic guide may move into topics that speak more directly to the overarching research question. The interview questions will be accompanied by probes designed to elicit concrete details and examples from the participant (see Table  1 ).

Abstract questions are often easier for participants to answer once they have been asked more concrete questions. In our experience, for example, questions about feelings can be difficult for some participants to answer, but when following probes concerning factual experiences these questions can become less challenging. After the main themes of the topic guide have been covered, the topic guide can move onto closing questions. At this stage, participants often repeat something they have said before, although they may sometimes introduce a new topic.

Interviews are especially well suited to gaining a deeper insight into people’s experiences. Getting these insights largely depends on the participants’ willingness to talk to the researcher. We recommend designing open-ended questions that are more likely to elicit an elaborated response and extended reflection from participants rather than questions that can be answered with yes or no.

Questions should avoid foreclosing the possibility that the participant might disagree with the premise of the question. Take for example the question: “Do you support the new family-friendly policies?” This question minimizes the possibility of the participant disagreeing with the premise of this question, which assumes that the policies are ‘family-friendly’ and asks for a yes or no answer. Instead, asking more broadly how a participant feels about the specific policy being described as ‘family-friendly’ (for example, a work-from-home policy) allows them to express agreement, disagreement or impartiality and, crucially, to explain their reasoning 10 .

For an uninterrupted interview that will last between 90 and 120 minutes, the topic guide should be one to two single-spaced pages with questions and probes. Ideally, the researcher will memorize the topic guide before embarking on the first interview. It is fine to carry a printed-out copy of the topic guide but memorizing the topic guide ahead of the interviews can often make the interviewer feel well prepared in guiding the participant through the interview process.

Although the topic guide helps the researcher stay on track with the broad areas they want to cover, there is no need for the researcher to feel tied down by the topic guide. For instance, if a participant brings up a theme that the researcher intended to discuss later or a point the researcher had not anticipated, the researcher may well decide to follow the lead of the participant. The researcher’s role extends beyond simply stating the questions; it entails listening and responding, making split-second decisions about what line of inquiry to pursue and allowing the interview to proceed in unexpected directions.

Optimizing the interview

The ideal place for an interview will depend on the study and what is feasible for participants. Generally, a place where the participant and researcher can both feel relaxed, where the interview can be uninterrupted and where noise or other distractions are limited is ideal. But this may not always be possible and so the researcher needs to be prepared to adapt their plans within what is feasible (and desirable for participants).

Another key tool for the interview is a recording device (assuming that permission for recording has been given). Recording can be important to capture what the participant says verbatim. Additionally, it can allow the researcher to focus on determining what probes and follow-up questions they want to pursue rather than focusing on taking notes. Sometimes, however, a participant may not allow the researcher to record, or the recording may fail. If the interview is not recorded we suggest that the researcher takes brief notes during the interview, if feasible, and then thoroughly make notes immediately after the interview and try to remember the participant’s facial expressions, gestures and tone of voice. Not having a recording of an interview need not limit the researcher from getting analytical value from it.

As soon as possible after each interview, we recommend that the researcher write a one-page interview memo comprising three key sections. The first section should identify two to three important moments from the interview. What constitutes important is up to the researcher’s discretion 9 . The researcher should note down what happened in these moments, including the participant’s facial expressions, gestures, tone of voice and maybe even the sensory details of their surroundings. This exercise is about capturing ethnographic detail from the interview. The second part of the interview memo is the analytical section with notes on how the interview fits in with previous interviews, for example, where the participant’s responses concur or diverge from other responses. The third part consists of a methodological section where the researcher notes their perception of their relationship with the participant. The interview memo allows the researcher to think critically about their positionality and practice reflexivity — key concepts for an ethical and transparent research practice in qualitative methodology 11 , 12 .

Ethics and reflexivity

All elements of an in-depth interview can raise ethical challenges and concerns. Good ethical practice in interview studies often means going beyond the ethical procedures mandated by institutions 13 . While discussions and requirements of ethics can differ across disciplines, here we focus on the most pertinent considerations for interviews across the research process for an interdisciplinary audience.

Ethical considerations prior to interview

Before conducting interviews, researchers should consider harm minimization, informed consent, anonymity and confidentiality, and reflexivity and positionality. It is important for the researcher to develop their own ethical sensitivities and sensibilities by gaining training in interview and qualitative methods, reading methodological and field-specific texts on interviews and ethics and discussing their research plans with colleagues.

Researchers should map the potential harm to consider how this can be minimized. Primarily, researchers should consider harm from the participants’ perspective (Box  1 ). But, it is also important to consider and plan for potential harm to the researcher, research assistants, gatekeepers, future researchers and members of the wider community 14 . Even the most banal of research topics can potentially pose some form of harm to the participant, researcher and others — and the level of harm is often highly context-dependent. For example, a research project on religion in society might have very different ethical considerations in a democratic versus authoritarian research context because of how openly or not such topics can be discussed and debated 15 .

The researcher should consider how they will obtain and record informed consent (for example, written or oral), based on what makes the most sense for their research project and context 16 . Some institutions might specify how informed consent should be gained. Regardless of how consent is obtained, the participant must be made aware of the form of consent, the intentions and procedures of the interview and potential forms of harm and benefit to the participant or community before the interview commences. Moreover, the participant must agree to be interviewed before the interview commences. If, in addition to interviews, the study contains an ethnographic component, it is worth reading around this topic (see, for example, Murphy and Dingwall 17 ). Informed consent must also be gained for how the interview will be recorded before the interview commences. These practices are important to ensure the participant is contributing on a voluntary basis. It is also important to remind participants that they can withdraw their consent at any time during the interview and for a specified period after the interview (to be decided with the participant). The researcher should indicate that participants can ask for anything shared to be off the record and/or not disseminated.

In terms of anonymity and confidentiality, it is standard practice when conducting interviews to agree not to use (or even collect) participants’ names and personal details that are not pertinent to the study. Anonymizing can often be the safer option for minimizing harm to participants as it is hard to foresee all the consequences of de-anonymizing, even if participants agree. Regardless of what a researcher decides, decisions around anonymity must be agreed with participants during the process of gaining informed consent and respected following the interview.

Although not all ethical challenges can be foreseen or planned for 18 , researchers should think carefully — before the interview — about power dynamics, participant vulnerability, emotional state and interactional dynamics between interviewer and participant, even when discussing low-risk topics. Researchers may then wish to plan for potential ethical issues, for example by preparing a list of relevant organizations to which participants can be signposted. A researcher interviewing a participant about debt, for instance, might prepare in advance a list of debt advice charities, organizations and helplines that could provide further support and advice. It is important to remember that the role of an interviewer is as a researcher rather than as a social worker or counsellor because researchers may not have relevant and requisite training in these other domains.

Box 1 Mapping potential forms of harm

Social: researchers should avoid causing any relational detriment to anyone in the course of interviews, for example, by sharing information with other participants or causing interview participants to be shunned or mistreated by their community as a result of participating.

Economic: researchers should avoid causing financial detriment to anyone, for example, by expecting them to pay for transport to be interviewed or to potentially lose their job as a result of participating.

Physical: researchers should minimize the risk of anyone being exposed to violence as a result of the research both from other individuals or from authorities, including police.

Psychological: researchers should minimize the risk of causing anyone trauma (or re-traumatization) or psychological anguish as a result of the research; this includes not only the participant but importantly the researcher themselves and anyone that might read or analyse the transcripts, should they contain triggering information.

Political: researchers should minimize the risk of anyone being exposed to political detriment as a result of the research, such as retribution.

Professional/reputational: researchers should minimize the potential for reputational damage to anyone connected to the research (this includes ensuring good research practices so that any researchers involved are not harmed reputationally by being involved with the research project).

The task here is not to map exhaustively the potential forms of harm that might pertain to a particular research project (that is the researcher’s job and they should have the expertise most suited to mapping such potential harms relative to the specific project) but to demonstrate the breadth of potential forms of harm.

Ethical considerations post-interview

Researchers should consider how interview data are stored, analysed and disseminated. If participants have been offered anonymity and confidentiality, data should be stored in a way that does not compromise this. For example, researchers should consider removing names and any other unnecessary personal details from interview transcripts, password-protecting and encrypting files and using pseudonyms to label and store all interview data. It is also important to address where interview data are taken (for example, across borders in particular where interview data might be of interest to local authorities) and how this might affect the storage of interview data.

Examining how the researcher will represent participants is a paramount ethical consideration both in the planning stages of the interview study and after it has been conducted. Dissemination strategies also need to consider questions of anonymity and representation. In small communities, even if participants are given pseudonyms, it might be obvious who is being described. Anonymizing not only the names of those participating but also the research context is therefore a standard practice 19 . With particularly sensitive data or insights about the participant, it is worth considering describing participants in a more abstract way rather than as specific individuals. These practices are important both for protecting participants’ anonymity but can also affect the ability of the researcher and others to return ethically to the research context and similar contexts 20 .

Reflexivity and positionality

Reflexivity and positionality mean considering the researcher’s role and assumptions in knowledge production 13 . A key part of reflexivity is considering the power relations between the researcher and participant within the interview setting, as well as how researchers might be perceived by participants. Further, researchers need to consider how their own identities shape the kind of knowledge and assumptions they bring to the interview, including how they approach and ask questions and their analysis of interviews (Box  2 ). Reflexivity is a necessary part of developing ethical sensibility as a researcher by adapting and reflecting on how one engages with participants. Participants should not feel judged, for example, when they share information that researchers might disagree with or find objectionable. How researchers deal with uncomfortable moments or information shared by participants is at their discretion, but they should consider how they will react both ahead of time and in the moment.

Researchers can develop their reflexivity by considering how they themselves would feel being asked these interview questions or represented in this way, and then adapting their practice accordingly. There might be situations where these questions are not appropriate in that they unduly centre the researchers’ experiences and worldview. Nevertheless, these prompts can provide a useful starting point for those beginning their reflexive journey and developing an ethical sensibility.

Reflexivity and ethical sensitivities require active reflection throughout the research process. For example, researchers should take care in interview memos and their notes to consider their assumptions, potential preconceptions, worldviews and own identities prior to and after interviews (Box  2 ). Checking in with assumptions can be a way of making sure that researchers are paying close attention to their own theoretical and analytical biases and revising them in accordance with what they learn through the interviews. Researchers should return to these notes (especially when analysing interview material), to try to unpack their own effects on the research process as well as how participants positioned and engaged with them.

Box 2 Aspects to reflect on reflexively

For reflexive engagement, and understanding the power relations being co-constructed and (re)produced in interviews, it is necessary to reflect, at a minimum, on the following.

Ethnicity, race and nationality, such as how does privilege stemming from race or nationality operate between the researcher, the participant and research context (for example, a researcher from a majority community may be interviewing a member of a minority community)

Gender and sexuality, see above on ethnicity, race and nationality

Social class, and in particular the issue of middle-class bias among researchers when formulating research and interview questions

Economic security/precarity, see above on social class and thinking about the researcher’s relative privilege and the source of biases that stem from this

Educational experiences and privileges, see above

Disciplinary biases, such as how the researcher’s discipline/subfield usually approaches these questions, possibly normalizing certain assumptions that might be contested by participants and in the research context

Political and social values

Lived experiences and other dimensions of ourselves that affect and construct our identity as researchers

In this section, we discuss the next stage of an interview study, namely, analysing the interview data. Data analysis may begin while more data are being collected. Doing so allows early findings to inform the focus of further data collection, as part of an iterative process across the research project. Here, the researcher is ultimately working towards achieving coherence between the data collected and the findings produced to answer successfully the research question(s) they have set.

The two most common methods used to analyse interview material across the social sciences are thematic analysis 21 and discourse analysis 22 . Thematic analysis is a particularly useful and accessible method for those starting out in analysis of qualitative data and interview material as a method of coding data to develop and interpret themes in the data 21 . Discourse analysis is more specialized and focuses on the role of discourse in society by paying close attention to the explicit, implicit and taken-for-granted dimensions of language and power 22 , 23 . Although thematic and discourse analysis are often discussed as separate techniques, in practice researchers might flexibly combine these approaches depending on the object of analysis. For example, those intending to use discourse analysis might first conduct thematic analysis as a way to organize and systematize the data. The object and intention of analysis might differ (for example, developing themes or interrogating language), but the questions facing the researcher (such as whether to take an inductive or deductive approach to analysis) are similar.

Preparing data

Data preparation is an important step in the data analysis process. The researcher should first determine what comprises the corpus of material and in what form it will it be analysed. The former refers to whether, for example, alongside the interviews themselves, analytic memos or observational notes that may have been taken during data collection will also be directly analysed. The latter refers to decisions about how the verbal/audio interview data will be transformed into a written form, making it suitable for processes of data analysis. Typically, interview audio recordings are transcribed to produce a written transcript. It is important to note that the process of transcription is one of transformation. The verbal interview data are transformed into a written transcript through a series of decisions that the researcher must make. The researcher should consider the effect of mishearing what has been said or how choosing to punctuate a sentence in a particular way will affect the final analysis.

Box  3 shows an example transcript excerpt from an interview with a teacher conducted by Teeger as part of her study of history education in post-apartheid South Africa 24 (Box  3 ). Seeing both the questions and the responses means that the reader can contextualize what the participant (Ms Mokoena) has said. Throughout the transcript the researcher has used square brackets, for example to indicate a pause in speech, when Ms Mokoena says “it’s [pause] it’s a difficult topic”. The transcription choice made here means that we see that Ms Mokoena has taken time to pause, perhaps to search for the right words, or perhaps because she has a slight apprehension. Square brackets are also included as an overt act of communication to the reader. When Ms Mokoena says “ja”, the English translation (“yes”) of the word in Afrikaans is placed in square brackets to ensure that the reader can follow the meaning of the speech.

Decisions about what to include when transcribing will be hugely important for the direction and possibilities of analysis. Researchers should decide what they want to capture in the transcript, based on their analytic focus. From a (post)positivist perspective 25 , the researcher may be interested in the manifest content of the interview (such as what is said, not how it is said). In that case, they may choose to transcribe intelligent verbatim . From a constructivist perspective 25 , researchers may choose to record more aspects of speech (including, for example, pauses, repetitions, false starts, talking over one another) so that these features can be analysed. Those working from this perspective argue that to recognize the interactional nature of the interview setting adequately and to avoid misinterpretations, features of interaction (pauses, overlaps between speakers and so on) should be preserved in transcription and therefore in the analysis 10 . Readers interested in learning more should consult Potter and Hepburn’s summary of how to present interaction through transcription of interview data 26 .

The process of analysing semi-structured interviews might be thought of as a generative rather than an extractive enterprise. Findings do not already exist within the interview data to be discovered. Rather, researchers create something new when analysing the data by applying their analytic lens or approach to the transcripts. At a high level, there are options as to what researchers might want to glean from their interview data. They might be interested in themes, whereby they identify patterns of meaning across the dataset 21 . Alternatively, they may focus on discourse(s), looking to identify how language is used to construct meanings and therefore how language reinforces or produces aspects of the social world 27 . Alternatively, they might look at the data to understand narrative or biographical elements 28 .

A further overarching decision to make is the extent to which researchers bring predetermined framings or understandings to bear on their data, or instead begin from the data themselves to generate an analysis. One way of articulating this is the extent to which researchers take a deductive approach or an inductive approach to analysis. One example of a truly inductive approach is grounded theory, whereby the aim of the analysis is to build new theory, beginning with one’s data 6 , 29 . In practice, researchers using thematic and discourse analysis often combine deductive and inductive logics and describe their process instead as iterative (referred to also as an abductive approach ) 30 , 31 . For example, researchers may decide that they will apply a given theoretical framing, or begin with an initial analytic framework, but then refine or develop these once they begin the process of analysis.

Box 3 Excerpt of interview transcript (from Teeger 24 )

Interviewer : Maybe you could just start by talking about what it’s like to teach apartheid history.

Ms Mokoena : It’s a bit challenging. You’ve got to accommodate all the kids in the class. You’ve got to be sensitive to all the racial differences. You want to emphasize the wrongs that were done in the past but you also want to, you know, not to make kids feel like it’s their fault. So you want to use the wrongs of the past to try and unite the kids …

Interviewer : So what kind of things do you do?

Ms Mokoena : Well I normally highlight the fact that people that were struggling were not just the blacks, it was all the races. And I give examples of the people … from all walks of life, all races, and highlight how they suffered as well as a result of apartheid, particularly the whites… . What I noticed, particularly my first year of teaching apartheid, I noticed that the black kids made the others feel responsible for what happened… . I had a lot of fights…. A lot of kids started hating each other because, you know, the others are white and the others were black. And they started saying, “My mother is a domestic worker because she was never allowed an opportunity to get good education.” …

Interviewer : I didn’t see any of that now when I was observing.

Ms Mokoena : … Like I was saying I think that because of the re-emphasis of the fact that, look, everybody did suffer one way or the other, they sort of got to see that it was everybody’s struggle … . They should now get to understand that that’s why we’re called a Rainbow Nation. Not everybody agreed with apartheid and not everybody suffered. Even all the blacks, not all blacks got to feel what the others felt . So ja [yes], it’s [pause] it’s a difficult topic, ja . But I think if you get the kids to understand why we’re teaching apartheid in the first place and you show the involvement of all races in all the different sides , then I think you have managed to teach it properly. So I think because of my inexperience then — that was my first year of teaching history — so I think I — maybe I over-emphasized the suffering of the blacks versus the whites [emphasis added].

Reprinted with permission from ref. 24 , Sage Publications.

From data to codes

Coding data is a key building block shared across many approaches to data analysis. Coding is a way of organizing and describing data, but is also ultimately a way of transforming data to produce analytic insights. The basic practice of coding involves highlighting a segment of text (this may be a sentence, a clause or a longer excerpt) and assigning a label to it. The aim of the label is to communicate some sort of summary of what is in the highlighted piece of text. Coding is an iterative process, whereby researchers read and reread their transcripts, applying and refining their codes, until they have a coding frame (a set of codes) that is applied coherently across the dataset and that captures and communicates the key features of what is contained in the data as it relates to the researchers’ analytic focus.

What one codes for is entirely contingent on the focus of the research project and the choices the researcher makes about the approach to analysis. At first, one might apply descriptive codes, summarizing what is contained in the interviews. It is rarely desirable to stop at this point, however, because coding is a tool to move from describing the data to interpreting the data. Suppose the researcher is pursuing some version of thematic analysis. In that case, it might be that the objects of coding are aspects of reported action, emotions, opinions, norms, relationships, routines, agreement/disagreement and change over time. A discourse analysis might instead code for different types of speech acts, tropes, linguistic or rhetorical devices. Multiple types of code might be generated within the same research project. What is important is that researchers are aware of the choices they are making in terms of what they are coding for. Moreover, through the process of refinement, the aim is to produce a set of discrete codes — in which codes are conceptually distinct, as opposed to overlapping. By using the same codes across the dataset, the researcher can capture commonalities across the interviews. This process of refinement involves relabelling codes and reorganizing how and where they are applied in the dataset.

From coding to analysis and writing

Data analysis is also an iterative process in which researchers move closer to and further away from the data. As they move away from the data, they synthesize their findings, thus honing and articulating their analytic insights. As they move closer to the data, they ground these insights in what is contained in the interviews. The link should not be broken between the data themselves and higher-order conceptual insights or claims being made. Researchers must be able to show evidence for their claims in the data. Figure  2 summarizes this iterative process and suggests the sorts of activities involved at each stage more concretely.

As well as going through steps 1 to 6 in order, the researcher will also go backwards and forwards between stages. Some stages will themselves be a forwards and backwards processing of coding and refining when working across different interview transcripts.

At the stage of synthesizing, there are some common quandaries. When dealing with a dataset consisting of multiple interviews, there will be salient and minority statements across different participants, or consensus or dissent on topics of interest to the researcher. A strength of qualitative interviews is that we can build in these nuances and variations across our data as opposed to aggregating them away. When exploring and reporting data, researchers should be asking how different findings are patterned and which interviews contain which codes, themes or tropes. Researchers should think about how these variations fit within the longer flow of individual interviews and what these variations tell them about the nature of their substantive research interests.

A further consideration is how to approach analysis within and across interview data. Researchers may look at one individual code, to examine the forms it takes across different participants and what they might be able to summarize about this code in the round. Alternatively, they might look at how a code or set of codes pattern across the account of one participant, to understand the code(s) in a more contextualized way. Further analysis might be done according to different sampling characteristics, where researchers group together interviews based on certain demographic characteristics and explore these together.

When it comes to writing up and presenting interview data, key considerations tend to rest on what is often termed transparency. When presenting the findings of an interview-based study, the reader should be able to understand and trace what the stated findings are based upon. This process typically involves describing the analytic process, how key decisions were made and presenting direct excerpts from the data. It is important to account for how the interview was set up and to consider the active part that the researcher has played in generating the data 32 . Quotes from interviews should not be thought of as merely embellishing or adding interest to a final research output. Rather, quotes serve the important function of connecting the reader directly to the underlying data. Quotes, therefore, should be chosen because they provide the reader with the most apt insight into what is being discussed. It is good practice to report not just on what participants said, but also on the questions that were asked to elicit the responses.

Researchers have increasingly used specialist qualitative data analysis software to organize and analyse their interview data, such as NVivo or ATLAS.ti. It is important to remember that such software is a tool for, rather than an approach or technique of, analysis. That said, software also creates a wide range of possibilities in terms of what can be done with the data. As researchers, we should reflect on how the range of possibilities of a given software package might be shaping our analytical choices and whether these are choices that we do indeed want to make.

Applications

This section reviews how and why in-depth interviews have been used by researchers studying gender, education and inequality, nationalism and ethnicity and the welfare state. Although interviews can be employed as a method of data collection in just about any social science topic, the applications below speak directly to the authors’ expertise and cutting-edge areas of research.

When it comes to the broad study of gender, in-depth interviews have been invaluable in shaping our understanding of how gender functions in everyday life. In a study of the US hedge fund industry (an industry dominated by white men), Tobias Neely was interested in understanding the factors that enable white men to prosper in the industry 33 . The study comprised interviews with 45 hedge fund workers and oversampled women of all races and men of colour to capture a range of experiences and beliefs. Tobias Neely found that practices of hiring, grooming and seeding are key to maintaining white men’s dominance in the industry. In terms of hiring, the interviews clarified that white men in charge typically preferred to hire people like themselves, usually from their extended networks. When women were hired, they were usually hired to less lucrative positions. In terms of grooming, Tobias Neely identifies how older and more senior men in the industry who have power and status will select one or several younger men as their protégés, to include in their own elite networks. Finally, in terms of her concept of seeding, Tobias Neely describes how older men who are hedge fund managers provide the seed money (often in the hundreds of millions of dollars) for a hedge fund to men, often their own sons (but not their daughters). These interviews provided an in-depth look into gendered and racialized mechanisms that allow white men to flourish in this industry.

Research by Rao draws on dozens of interviews with men and women who had lost their jobs, some of the participants’ spouses and follow-up interviews with about half the sample approximately 6 months after the initial interview 34 . Rao used interviews to understand the gendered experience and understanding of unemployment. Through these interviews, she found that the very process of losing their jobs meant different things for men and women. Women often saw job loss as being a personal indictment of their professional capabilities. The women interviewed often referenced how years of devaluation in the workplace coloured their interpretation of their job loss. Men, by contrast, were also saddened by their job loss, but they saw it as part and parcel of a weak economy rather than a personal failing. How these varied interpretations occurred was tied to men’s and women’s very different experiences in the workplace. Further, through her analysis of these interviews, Rao also showed how these gendered interpretations had implications for the kinds of jobs men and women sought to pursue after job loss. Whereas men remained tied to participating in full-time paid work, job loss appeared to be a catalyst pushing some of the women to re-evaluate their ties to the labour force.

In a study of workers in the tech industry, Hart used interviews to explain how individuals respond to unwanted and ambiguously sexual interactions 35 . Here, the researcher used interviews to allow participants to describe how these interactions made them feel and act and the logics of how they interpreted, classified and made sense of them 35 . Through her analysis of these interviews, Hart showed that participants engaged in a process she termed “trajectory guarding”, whereby they sought to monitor unwanted and ambiguously sexual interactions to avoid them from escalating. Yet, as Hart’s analysis proficiently demonstrates, these very strategies — which protect these workers sexually — also undermined their workplace advancement.

Drawing on interviews, these studies have helped us to understand better how gendered mechanisms, gendered interpretations and gendered interactions foster gender inequality when it comes to paid work. Methodologically, these studies illuminate the power of interviews to reveal important aspects of social life.

Nationalism and ethnicity

Traditionally, nationalism has been studied from a top-down perspective, through the lens of the state or using historical methods; in other words, in-depth interviews have not been a common way of collecting data to study nationalism. The methodological turn towards everyday nationalism has encouraged more scholars to go to the field and use interviews (and ethnography) to understand nationalism from the bottom up: how people talk about, give meaning, understand, navigate and contest their relation to nation, national identification and nationalism 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 . This turn has also addressed the gap left by those studying national and ethnic identification via quantitative methods, such as surveys.

Surveys can enumerate how individuals ascribe to categorical forms of identification 40 . However, interviews can question the usefulness of such categories and ask whether these categories are reflected, or resisted, by participants in terms of the meanings they give to identification 41 , 42 . Categories often pitch identification as a mutually exclusive choice; but identification might be more complex than such categories allow. For example, some might hybridize these categories or see themselves as moving between and across categories 43 . Hearing how people talk about themselves and their relation to nations, states and ethnicities, therefore, contributes substantially to the study of nationalism and national and ethnic forms of identification.

One particular approach to studying these topics, whether via everyday nationalism or alternatives, is that of using interviews to capture both articulations and narratives of identification, relations to nationalism and the boundaries people construct. For example, interviews can be used to gather self–other narratives by studying how individuals construct I–we–them boundaries 44 , including how participants talk about themselves, who participants include in their various ‘we’ groupings and which and how participants create ‘them’ groupings of others, inserting boundaries between ‘I/we’ and ‘them’. Overall, interviews hold great potential for listening to participants and understanding the nuances of identification and the construction of boundaries from their point of view.

Education and inequality

Scholars of social stratification have long noted that the school system often reproduces existing social inequalities. Carter explains that all schools have both material and sociocultural resources 45 . When children from different backgrounds attend schools with different material resources, their educational and occupational outcomes are likely to vary. Such material resources are relatively easy to measure. They are operationalized as teacher-to-student ratios, access to computers and textbooks and the physical infrastructure of classrooms and playgrounds.

Drawing on Bourdieusian theory 46 , Carter conceptualizes the sociocultural context as the norms, values and dispositions privileged within a social space 45 . Scholars have drawn on interviews with students and teachers (as well as ethnographic observations) to show how schools confer advantages on students from middle-class families, for example, by rewarding their help-seeking behaviours 47 . Focusing on race, researchers have revealed how schools can remain socioculturally white even as they enrol a racially diverse student population. In such contexts, for example, teachers often misrecognize the aesthetic choices made by students of colour, wrongly inferring that these students’ tastes in clothing and music reflect negative orientations to schooling 48 , 49 , 50 . These assessments can result in disparate forms of discipline and may ultimately shape educators’ assessments of students’ academic potential 51 .

Further, teachers and administrators tend to view the appropriate relationship between home and school in ways that resonate with white middle-class parents 52 . These parents are then able to advocate effectively for their children in ways that non-white parents are not 53 . In-depth interviews are particularly good at tapping into these understandings, revealing the mechanisms that confer privilege on certain groups of students and thereby reproduce inequality.

In addition, interviews can shed light on the unequal experiences that young people have within educational institutions, as the views of dominant groups are affirmed while those from disadvantaged backgrounds are delegitimized. For example, Teeger’s interviews with South African high schoolers showed how — because racially charged incidents are often framed as jokes in the broader school culture — Black students often feel compelled to ignore and keep silent about the racism they experience 54 . Interviews revealed that Black students who objected to these supposed jokes were coded by other students as serious or angry. In trying to avoid such labels, these students found themselves unable to challenge the racism they experienced. Interviews give us insight into these dynamics and help us see how young people understand and interpret the messages transmitted in schools — including those that speak to issues of inequality in their local school contexts as well as in society more broadly 24 , 55 .

The welfare state

In-depth interviews have also proved to be an important method for studying various aspects of the welfare state. By welfare state, we mean the social institutions relating to the economic and social wellbeing of a state’s citizens. Notably, using interviews has been useful to look at how policy design features are experienced and play out on the ground. Interviews have often been paired with large-scale surveys to produce mixed-methods study designs, therefore achieving both breadth and depth of insights.

In-depth interviews provide the opportunity to look behind policy assumptions or how policies are designed from the top down, to examine how these play out in the lives of those affected by the policies and whose experiences might otherwise be obscured or ignored. For example, the Welfare Conditionality project used interviews to critique the assumptions that conditionality (such as, the withdrawal of social security benefits if recipients did not perform or meet certain criteria) improved employment outcomes and instead showed that conditionality was harmful to mental health, living standards and had many other negative consequences 56 . Meanwhile, combining datasets from two small-scale interview studies with recipients allowed Summers and Young to critique assumptions around the simplicity that underpinned the design of Universal Credit in 2020, for example, showing that the apparently simple monthly payment design instead burdened recipients with additional money management decisions and responsibilities 57 .

Similarly, the Welfare at a (Social) Distance project used a mixed-methods approach in a large-scale study that combined national surveys with case studies and in-depth interviews to investigate the experience of claiming social security benefits during the COVID-19 pandemic. The interviews allowed researchers to understand in detail any issues experienced by recipients of benefits, such as delays in the process of claiming, managing on a very tight budget and navigating stigma and claiming 58 .

These applications demonstrate the multi-faceted topics and questions for which interviews can be a relevant method for data collection. These applications highlight not only the relevance of interviews, but also emphasize the key added value of interviews, which might be missed by other methods (surveys, in particular). Interviews can expose and question what is taken for granted and directly engage with communities and participants that might otherwise be ignored, obscured or marginalized.

Reproducibility and data deposition

There is a robust, ongoing debate about reproducibility in qualitative research, including interview studies. In some research paradigms, reproducibility can be a way of interrogating the rigour and robustness of research claims, by seeing whether these hold up when the research process is repeated. Some scholars have suggested that although reproducibility may be challenging, researchers can facilitate it by naming the place where the research was conducted, naming participants, sharing interview and fieldwork transcripts (anonymized and de-identified in cases where researchers are not naming people or places) and employing fact-checkers for accuracy 11 , 59 , 60 .

In addition to the ethical concerns of whether de-anonymization is ever feasible or desirable, it is also important to address whether the replicability of interview studies is meaningful. For example, the flexibility of interviews allows for the unexpected and the unforeseen to be incorporated into the scope of the research 61 . However, this flexibility means that we cannot expect reproducibility in the conventional sense, given that different researchers will elicit different types of data from participants. Sharing interview transcripts with other researchers, for instance, downplays the contextual nature of an interview.

Drawing on Bauer and Gaskell, we propose several measures to enhance rigour in qualitative research: transparency, grounding interpretations and aiming for theoretical transferability and significance 62 .

Researchers should be transparent when describing their methodological choices. Transparency means documenting who was interviewed, where and when (without requiring de-anonymization, for example, by documenting their characteristics), as well as the questions they were asked. It means carefully considering who was left out of the interviews and what that could mean for the researcher’s findings. It also means carefully considering who the researcher is and how their identity shaped the research process (integrating and articulating reflexivity into whatever is written up).

Second, researchers should ground their interpretations in the data. Grounding means presenting the evidence upon which the interpretation relies. Quotes and extracts should be extensive enough to allow the reader to evaluate whether the researcher’s interpretations are grounded in the data. At each step, researchers should carefully compare their own explanations and interpretations with alternative explanations. Doing so systematically and frequently allows researchers to become more confident in their claims. Here, researchers should justify the link between data and analysis by using quotes to justify and demonstrate the analytical point, while making sure the analytical point offers an interpretation of quotes (Box  4 ).

An important step in considering alternative explanations is to seek out disconfirming evidence 4 , 63 . This involves looking for instances where participants deviate from what the majority are saying and thus bring into question the theory (or explanation) that the researcher is developing. Careful analysis of such examples can often demonstrate the salience and meaning of what appears to be the norm (see Table  2 for examples) 54 . Considering alternative explanations and paying attention to disconfirming evidence allows the researcher to refine their own theories in respect of the data.

Finally, researchers should aim for theoretical transferability and significance in their discussions of findings. One way to think about this is to imagine someone who is not interested in the empirical study. Articulating theoretical transferability and significance usually takes the form of broadening out from the specific findings to consider explicitly how the research has refined or altered prior theoretical approaches. This process also means considering under what other conditions, aside from those of the study, the researcher thinks their theoretical revision would be supported by and why. Importantly, it also includes thinking about the limitations of one’s own approach and where the theoretical implications of the study might not hold.

Box 4 An example of grounding interpretations in data (from Rao 34 )

In an article explaining how unemployed men frame their job loss as a pervasive experience, Rao writes the following: “Unemployed men in this study understood unemployment to be an expected aspect of paid work in the contemporary United States. Robert, a white unemployed communications professional, compared the economic landscape after the Great Recession with the tragic events of September 11, 2001:

Part of your post-9/11 world was knowing people that died as a result of terrorism. The same thing is true with the [Great] Recession, right? … After the Recession you know somebody who was unemployed … People that really should be working.

The pervasiveness of unemployment rendered it normal, as Robert indicates.”

Here, the link between the quote presented and the analytical point Rao is making is clear: the analytical point is grounded in a quote and an interpretation of the quote is offered 34 .

Limitations and optimizations

When deciding which research method to use, the key question is whether the method provides a good fit for the research questions posed. In other words, researchers should consider whether interviews will allow them to successfully access the social phenomena necessary to answer their question(s) and whether the interviews will do so more effectively than other methods. Table  3 summarizes the major strengths and limitations of interviews. However, the accompanying text below is organized around some key issues, where relative strengths and weaknesses are presented alongside each other, the aim being that readers should think about how these can be balanced and optimized in relation to their own research.

Breadth versus depth of insight

Achieving an overall breadth of insight, in a statistically representative sense, is not something that is possible or indeed desirable when conducting in-depth interviews. Instead, the strength of conducting interviews lies in their ability to generate various sorts of depth of insight. The experiences or views of participants that can be accessed by conducting interviews help us to understand participants’ subjective realities. The challenge, therefore, is for researchers to be clear about why depth of insight is the focus and what we should aim to glean from these types of insight.

Naturalistic or artificial interviews

Interviews make use of a form of interaction with which people are familiar 64 . By replicating a naturalistic form of interaction as a tool to gather social science data, researchers can capitalize on people’s familiarity and expectations of what happens in a conversation. This familiarity can also be a challenge, as people come to the interview with preconceived ideas about what this conversation might be for or about. People may draw on experiences of other similar conversations when taking part in a research interview (for example, job interviews, therapy sessions, confessional conversations, chats with friends). Researchers should be aware of such potential overlaps and think through their implications both in how the aims and purposes of the research interview are communicated to participants and in how interview data are interpreted.

Further, some argue that a limitation of interviews is that they are an artificial form of data collection. By taking people out of their daily lives and asking them to stand back and pass comment, we are creating a distance that makes it difficult to use such data to say something meaningful about people’s actions, experiences and views. Other approaches, such as ethnography, might be more suitable for tapping into what people actually do, as opposed to what they say they do 65 .

Dynamism and replicability

Interviews following a semi-structured format offer flexibility both to the researcher and the participant. As the conversation develops, the interlocutors can explore the topics raised in much more detail, if desired, or pass over ones that are not relevant. This flexibility allows for the unexpected and the unforeseen to be incorporated into the scope of the research.

However, this flexibility has a related challenge of replicability. Interviews cannot be reproduced because they are contingent upon the interaction between the researcher and the participant in that given moment of interaction. In some research paradigms, replicability can be a way of interrogating the robustness of research claims, by seeing whether they hold when they are repeated. This is not a useful framework to bring to in-depth interviews and instead quality criteria (such as transparency) tend to be employed as criteria of rigour.

Accessing the private and personal

Interviews have been recognized for their strength in accessing private, personal issues, which participants may feel more comfortable talking about in a one-to-one conversation. Furthermore, interviews are likely to take a more personable form with their extended questions and answers, perhaps making a participant feel more at ease when discussing sensitive topics in such a context. There is a similar, but separate, argument made about accessing what are sometimes referred to as vulnerable groups, who may be difficult to make contact with using other research methods.

There is an associated challenge of anonymity. There can be types of in-depth interview that make it particularly challenging to protect the identities of participants, such as interviewing within a small community, or multiple members of the same household. The challenge to ensure anonymity in such contexts is even more important and difficult when the topic of research is of a sensitive nature or participants are vulnerable.

Increasingly, researchers are collaborating in large-scale interview-based studies and integrating interviews into broader mixed-methods designs. At the same time, interviews can be seen as an old-fashioned (and perhaps outdated) mode of data collection. We review these debates and discussions and point to innovations in interview-based studies. These include the shift from face-to-face interviews to the use of online platforms, as well as integrating and adapting interviews towards more inclusive methodologies.

Collaborating and mixing

Qualitative researchers have long worked alone 66 . Increasingly, however, researchers are collaborating with others for reasons such as efficiency, institutional incentives (for example, funding for collaborative research) and a desire to pool expertise (for example, studying similar phenomena in different contexts 67 or via different methods). Collaboration can occur across disciplines and methods, cases and contexts and between industry/business, practitioners and researchers. In many settings and contexts, collaboration has become an imperative 68 .

Cheek notes how collaboration provides both advantages and disadvantages 68 . For example, collaboration can be advantageous, saving time and building on the divergent knowledge, skills and resources of different researchers. Scholars with different theoretical or case-based knowledge (or contacts) can work together to build research that is comparative and/or more than the sum of its parts. But such endeavours also carry with them practical and political challenges in terms of how resources might actually be pooled, shared or accounted for. When undertaking such projects, as Morse notes, it is worth thinking about the nature of the collaboration and being explicit about such a choice, its advantages and its disadvantages 66 .

A further tension, but also a motivation for collaboration, stems from integrating interviews as a method in a mixed-methods project, whether with other qualitative researchers (to combine with, for example, focus groups, document analysis or ethnography) or with quantitative researchers (to combine with, for example, surveys, social media analysis or big data analysis). Cheek and Morse both note the pitfalls of collaboration with quantitative researchers: that quality of research may be sacrificed, qualitative interpretations watered down or not taken seriously, or tensions experienced over the pace and different assumptions that come with different methods and approaches of research 66 , 68 .

At the same time, there can be real benefits of such mixed-methods collaboration, such as reaching different and more diverse audiences or testing assumptions and theories between research components in the same project (for example, testing insights from prior quantitative research via interviews, or vice versa), as long as the skillsets of collaborators are seen as equally beneficial to the project. Cheek provides a set of questions that, as a starting point, can be useful for guiding collaboration, whether mixed methods or otherwise. First, Cheek advises asking all collaborators about their assumptions and understandings concerning collaboration. Second, Cheek recommends discussing what each perspective highlights and focuses on (and conversely ignores or sidelines) 68 .

A different way to engage with the idea of collaboration and mixed methods research is by fostering greater collaboration between researchers in the Global South and Global North, thus reversing trends of researchers from the Global North extracting knowledge from the Global South 69 . Such forms of collaboration also align with interview innovations, discussed below, that seek to transform traditional interview approaches into more participatory and inclusive (as part of participatory methodologies).

Digital innovations and challenges

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has centred the question of technology within interview-based fieldwork. Although conducting synchronous oral interviews online — for example, via Zoom, Skype or other such platforms — has been a method used by a small constituency of researchers for many years, it became (and remains) a necessity for many researchers wanting to continue or start interview-based projects while COVID-19 prevents face-to-face data collection.

In the past, online interviews were often framed as an inferior form of data collection for not providing the kinds of (often necessary) insights and forms of immersion face-to-face interviews allow 70 , 71 . Online interviews do tend to be more decontextualized than interviews conducted face-to-face 72 . For example, it is harder to recognize, engage with and respond to non-verbal cues 71 . At the same time, they broaden participation to those who might not have been able to access or travel to sites where interviews would have been conducted otherwise, for example people with disabilities. Online interviews also offer more flexibility in terms of scheduling and time requirements. For example, they provide more flexibility around precarious employment or caring responsibilities without having to travel and be away from home. In addition, online interviews might also reduce discomfort between researchers and participants, compared with face-to-face interviews, enabling more discussion of sensitive material 71 . They can also provide participants with more control, enabling them to turn on and off the microphone and video as they choose, for example, to provide more time to reflect and disconnect if they so wish 72 .

That said, online interviews can also introduce new biases based on access to technology 72 . For example, in the Global South, there are often urban/rural and gender gaps between who has access to mobile phones and who does not, meaning that some population groups might be overlooked unless researchers sample mindfully 71 . There are also important ethical considerations when deciding between online and face-to-face interviews. Online interviews might seem to imply lower ethical risks than face-to-face interviews (for example, they lower the chances of identification of participants or researchers), but they also offer more barriers to building trust between researchers and participants 72 . Interacting only online with participants might not provide the information needed to assess risk, for example, participants’ access to a private space to speak 71 . Just because online interviews might be more likely to be conducted in private spaces does not mean that private spaces are safe, for example, for victims of domestic violence. Finally, online interviews prompt further questions about decolonizing research and engaging with participants if research is conducted from afar 72 , such as how to include participants meaningfully and challenge dominant assumptions while doing so remotely.

A further digital innovation, modulating how researchers conduct interviews and the kinds of data collected and analysed, stems from the use and integration of (new) technology, such as WhatsApp text or voice notes to conduct synchronous or asynchronous oral or written interviews 73 . Such methods can provide more privacy, comfort and control to participants and make recruitment easier, allowing participants to share what they want when they want to, using technology that already forms a part of their daily lives, especially for young people 74 , 75 . Such technology is also emerging in other qualitative methods, such as focus groups, with similar arguments around greater inclusivity versus traditional offline modes. Here, the digital challenge might be higher for researchers than for participants if they are less used to such technology 75 . And while there might be concerns about the richness, depth and quality of written messages as a form of interview data, Gibson reports that the reams of transcripts that resulted from a study using written messaging were dense with meaning to be analysed 75 .

Like with online and face-to-face interviews, it is important also to consider the ethical questions and challenges of using such technology, from gaining consent to ensuring participant safety and attending to their distress, without cues, like crying, that might be more obvious in a face-to-face setting 75 , 76 . Attention to the platform used for such interviews is also important and researchers should be attuned to the local and national context. For example, in China, many platforms are neither legal nor available 76 . There, more popular platforms — like WeChat — can be highly monitored by the government, posing potential risks to participants depending on the topic of the interview. Ultimately, researchers should consider trade-offs between online and offline interview modalities, being attentive to the social context and power dynamics involved.

The next 5–10 years

Continuing to integrate (ethically) this technology will be among the major persisting developments in interview-based research, whether to offer more flexibility to researchers or participants, or to diversify who can participate and on what terms.

Pushing the idea of inclusion even further is the potential for integrating interview-based studies within participatory methods, which are also innovating via integrating technology. There is no hard and fast line between researchers using in-depth interviews and participatory methods; many who employ participatory methods will use interviews at the beginning, middle or end phases of a research project to capture insights, perspectives and reflections from participants 77 , 78 . Participatory methods emphasize the need to resist existing power and knowledge structures. They broaden who has the right and ability to contribute to academic knowledge by including and incorporating participants not only as subjects of data collection, but as crucial voices in research design and data analysis 77 . Participatory methods also seek to facilitate local change and to produce research materials, whether for academic or non-academic audiences, including films and documentaries, in collaboration with participants.

In responding to the challenges of COVID-19, capturing the fraught situation wrought by the pandemic and the momentum to integrate technology, participatory researchers have sought to continue data collection from afar. For example, Marzi has adapted an existing project to co-produce participatory videos, via participants’ smartphones in Medellin, Colombia, alongside regular check-in conversations/meetings/interviews with participants 79 . Integrating participatory methods into interview studies offers a route by which researchers can respond to the challenge of diversifying knowledge, challenging assumptions and power hierarchies and creating more inclusive and collaborative partnerships between participants and researchers in the Global North and South.

Brinkmann, S. & Kvale, S. Doing Interviews Vol. 2 (Sage, 2018). This book offers a good general introduction to the practice and design of interview-based studies.

Silverman, D. A Very Short, Fairly Interesting And Reasonably Cheap Book About Qualitative Research (Sage, 2017).

Yin, R. K. Case Study Research And Applications: Design And Methods (Sage, 2018).

Small, M. L. How many cases do I need?’ On science and the logic of case selection in field-based research. Ethnography 10 , 5–38 (2009). This article convincingly demonstrates how the logic of qualitative research differs from quantitative research and its goal of representativeness.

Google Scholar  

Gerson, K. & Damaske, S. The Science and Art of Interviewing (Oxford Univ. Press, 2020).

Glaser, B. G. & Strauss, A. L. The Discovery Of Grounded Theory: Strategies For Qualitative Research (Aldine, 1967).

Braun, V. & Clarke, V. To saturate or not to saturate? Questioning data saturation as a useful concept for thematic analysis and sample-size rationales. Qual. Res. Sport Exerc. Health 13 , 201–216 (2021).

Guest, G., Bunce, A. & Johnson, L. How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods 18 , 59–82 (2006).

Vasileiou, K., Barnett, J., Thorpe, S. & Young, T. Characterising and justifying sample size sufficiency in interview-based studies: systematic analysis of qualitative health research over a 15-year period. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 18 , 148 (2018).

Silverman, D. How was it for you? The Interview Society and the irresistible rise of the (poorly analyzed) interview. Qual. Res. 17 , 144–158 (2017).

Jerolmack, C. & Murphy, A. The ethical dilemmas and social scientific tradeoffs of masking in ethnography. Sociol. Methods Res. 48 , 801–827 (2019).

MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Reyes, V. Ethnographic toolkit: strategic positionality and researchers’ visible and invisible tools in field research. Ethnography 21 , 220–240 (2020).

Guillemin, M. & Gillam, L. Ethics, reflexivity and “ethically important moments” in research. Qual. Inq. 10 , 261–280 (2004).

Summers, K. For the greater good? Ethical reflections on interviewing the ‘rich’ and ‘poor’ in qualitative research. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. 23 , 593–602 (2020). This article argues that, in qualitative interview research, a clearer distinction needs to be drawn between ethical commitments to individual research participants and the group(s) to which they belong, a distinction that is often elided in existing ethics guidelines.

Yusupova, G. Exploring sensitive topics in an authoritarian context: an insider perspective. Soc. Sci. Q. 100 , 1459–1478 (2019).

Hemming, J. in Surviving Field Research: Working In Violent And Difficult Situations 21–37 (Routledge, 2009).

Murphy, E. & Dingwall, R. Informed consent, anticipatory regulation and ethnographic practice. Soc. Sci. Med. 65 , 2223–2234 (2007).

Kostovicova, D. & Knott, E. Harm, change and unpredictability: the ethics of interviews in conflict research. Qual. Res. 22 , 56–73 (2022). This article highlights how interviews need to be considered as ethically unpredictable moments where engaging with change among participants can itself be ethical.

Andersson, R. Illegality, Inc.: Clandestine Migration And The Business Of Bordering Europe (Univ. California Press, 2014).

Ellis, R. What do we mean by a “hard-to-reach” population? Legitimacy versus precarity as barriers to access. Sociol. Methods Res. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124121995536 (2021).

Article   Google Scholar  

Braun, V. & Clarke, V. Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide (Sage, 2022).

Alejandro, A. & Knott, E. How to pay attention to the words we use: the reflexive review as a method for linguistic reflexivity. Int. Stud. Rev. https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viac025 (2022).

Alejandro, A., Laurence, M. & Maertens, L. in International Organisations and Research Methods: An Introduction (eds Badache, F., Kimber, L. R. & Maertens, L.) (Michigan Univ. Press, in the press).

Teeger, C. “Both sides of the story” history education in post-apartheid South Africa. Am. Sociol. Rev. 80 , 1175–1200 (2015).

Crotty, M. The Foundations Of Social Research: Meaning And Perspective In The Research Process (Routledge, 2020).

Potter, J. & Hepburn, A. Qualitative interviews in psychology: problems and possibilities. Qual. Res. Psychol. 2 , 281–307 (2005).

Taylor, S. What is Discourse Analysis? (Bloomsbury Publishing, 2013).

Riessman, C. K. Narrative Analysis (Sage, 1993).

Corbin, J. M. & Strauss, A. Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons and evaluative criteria. Qual. Sociol. 13 , 3–21 (1990).

Timmermans, S. & Tavory, I. Theory construction in qualitative research: from grounded theory to abductive analysis. Sociol. Theory 30 , 167–186 (2012).

Fereday, J. & Muir-Cochrane, E. Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: a hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. Int. J. Qual. Meth. 5 , 80–92 (2006).

Potter, J. & Hepburn, A. Eight challenges for interview researchers. Handb. Interview Res. 2 , 541–570 (2012).

Tobias Neely, M. Fit to be king: how patrimonialism on Wall Street leads to inequality. Socioecon. Rev. 16 , 365–385 (2018).

Rao, A. H. Gendered interpretations of job loss and subsequent professional pathways. Gend. Soc. 35 , 884–909 (2021). This article used interview data from unemployed men and women to illuminate how job loss becomes a pivotal moment shaping men’s and women’s orientation to paid work, especially in terms of curtailing women’s participation in paid work.

Hart, C. G. Trajectory guarding: managing unwanted, ambiguously sexual interactions at work. Am. Sociol. Rev. 86 , 256–278 (2021).

Goode, J. P. & Stroup, D. R. Everyday nationalism: constructivism for the masses. Soc. Sci. Q. 96 , 717–739 (2015).

Antonsich, M. The ‘everyday’ of banal nationalism — ordinary people’s views on Italy and Italian. Polit. Geogr. 54 , 32–42 (2016).

Fox, J. E. & Miller-Idriss, C. Everyday nationhood. Ethnicities 8 , 536–563 (2008).

Yusupova, G. Cultural nationalism and everyday resistance in an illiberal nationalising state: ethnic minority nationalism in Russia. Nations National. 24 , 624–647 (2018).

Kiely, R., Bechhofer, F. & McCrone, D. Birth, blood and belonging: identity claims in post-devolution Scotland. Sociol. Rev. 53 , 150–171 (2005).

Brubaker, R. & Cooper, F. Beyond ‘identity’. Theory Soc. 29 , 1–47 (2000).

Brubaker, R. Ethnicity Without Groups (Harvard Univ. Press, 2004).

Knott, E. Kin Majorities: Identity And Citizenship In Crimea And Moldova From The Bottom-Up (McGill Univ. Press, 2022).

Bucher, B. & Jasper, U. Revisiting ‘identity’ in international relations: from identity as substance to identifications in action. Eur. J. Int. Relat. 23 , 391–415 (2016).

Carter, P. L. Stubborn Roots: Race, Culture And Inequality In US And South African Schools (Oxford Univ. Press, 2012).

Bourdieu, P. in Cultural Theory: An Anthology Vol. 1, 81–93 (eds Szeman, I. & Kaposy, T.) (Wiley-Blackwell, 2011).

Calarco, J. M. Negotiating Opportunities: How The Middle Class Secures Advantages In School (Oxford Univ. Press, 2018).

Carter, P. L. Keepin’ It Real: School Success Beyond Black And White (Oxford Univ. Press, 2005).

Carter, P. L. ‘Black’ cultural capital, status positioning and schooling conflicts for low-income African American youth. Soc. Probl. 50 , 136–155 (2003).

Warikoo, N. K. The Diversity Bargain Balancing Acts: Youth Culture in the Global City (Univ. California Press, 2011).

Morris, E. W. “Tuck in that shirt!” Race, class, gender and discipline in an urban school. Sociol. Perspect. 48 , 25–48 (2005).

Lareau, A. Social class differences in family–school relationships: the importance of cultural capital. Sociol. Educ. 60 , 73–85 (1987).

Warikoo, N. Addressing emotional health while protecting status: Asian American and white parents in suburban America. Am. J. Sociol. 126 , 545–576 (2020).

Teeger, C. Ruptures in the rainbow nation: how desegregated South African schools deal with interpersonal and structural racism. Sociol. Educ. 88 , 226–243 (2015). This article leverages ‘ deviant ’ cases in an interview study with South African high schoolers to understand why the majority of participants were reluctant to code racially charged incidents at school as racist.

Ispa-Landa, S. & Conwell, J. “Once you go to a white school, you kind of adapt” black adolescents and the racial classification of schools. Sociol. Educ. 88 , 1–19 (2015).

Dwyer, P. J. Punitive and ineffective: benefit sanctions within social security. J. Soc. Secur. Law 25 , 142–157 (2018).

Summers, K. & Young, D. Universal simplicity? The alleged simplicity of Universal Credit from administrative and claimant perspectives. J. Poverty Soc. Justice 28 , 169–186 (2020).

Summers, K. et al. Claimants’ Experiences Of The Social Security System During The First Wave Of COVID-19 . https://www.distantwelfare.co.uk/winter-report (2021).

Desmond, M. Evicted: Poverty And Profit In The American City (Crown Books, 2016).

Reyes, V. Three models of transparency in ethnographic research: naming places, naming people and sharing data. Ethnography 19 , 204–226 (2018).

Robson, C. & McCartan, K. Real World Research (Wiley, 2016).

Bauer, M. W. & Gaskell, G. Qualitative Researching With Text, Image And Sound: A Practical Handbook (SAGE, 2000).

Lareau, A. Listening To People: A Practical Guide To Interviewing, Participant Observation, Data Analysis And Writing It All Up (Univ. Chicago Press, 2021).

Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E. G. Naturalistic Inquiry (Sage, 1985).

Jerolmack, C. & Khan, S. Talk is cheap. Sociol. Methods Res. 43 , 178–209 (2014).

Morse, J. M. Styles of collaboration in qualitative inquiry. Qual. Health Res. 18 , 3–4 (2008).

ADS   Google Scholar  

Lamont, M. et al. Getting Respect: Responding To Stigma And Discrimination In The United States, Brazil And Israel (Princeton Univ. Press, 2016).

Cheek, J. Researching collaboratively: implications for qualitative research and researchers. Qual. Health Res. 18 , 1599–1603 (2008).

Botha, L. Mixing methods as a process towards indigenous methodologies. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. 14 , 313–325 (2011).

Howlett, M. Looking at the ‘field’ through a zoom lens: methodological reflections on conducting online research during a global pandemic. Qual. Res. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794120985691 (2021).

Reñosa, M. D. C. et al. Selfie consents, remote rapport and Zoom debriefings: collecting qualitative data amid a pandemic in four resource-constrained settings. BMJ Glob. Health 6 , e004193 (2021).

Mwambari, D., Purdeková, A. & Bisoka, A. N. Covid-19 and research in conflict-affected contexts: distanced methods and the digitalisation of suffering. Qual. Res. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794121999014 (2021).

Colom, A. Using WhatsApp for focus group discussions: ecological validity, inclusion and deliberation. Qual. Res. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794120986074 (2021).

Kaufmann, K. & Peil, C. The mobile instant messaging interview (MIMI): using WhatsApp to enhance self-reporting and explore media usage in situ. Mob. Media Commun. 8 , 229–246 (2020).

Gibson, K. Bridging the digital divide: reflections on using WhatsApp instant messenger interviews in youth research. Qual. Res. Psychol. 19 , 611–631 (2020).

Lawrence, L. Conducting cross-cultural qualitative interviews with mainland Chinese participants during COVID: lessons from the field. Qual. Res. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794120974157 (2020).

Ponzoni, E. Windows of understanding: broadening access to knowledge production through participatory action research. Qual. Res. 16 , 557–574 (2016).

Kong, T. S. Gay and grey: participatory action research in Hong Kong. Qual. Res. 18 , 257–272 (2018).

Marzi, S. Participatory video from a distance: co-producing knowledge during the COVID-19 pandemic using smartphones. Qual. Res. https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941211038171 (2021).

Kvale, S. & Brinkmann, S. InterViews: Learning The Craft Of Qualitative Research Interviewing (Sage, 2008).

Rao, A. H. The ideal job-seeker norm: unemployment and marital privileges in the professional middle-class. J. Marriage Fam. 83 , 1038–1057 (2021).

Rivera, L. A. Ivies, extracurriculars and exclusion: elite employers’ use of educational credentials. Res. Soc. Stratif. Mobil. 29 , 71–90 (2011).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to the MY421 team and students for prompting how best to frame and communicate issues pertinent to in-depth interview studies.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Methodology, London School of Economics, London, UK

Eleanor Knott, Aliya Hamid Rao, Kate Summers & Chana Teeger

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

The authors contributed equally to all aspects of the article.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eleanor Knott .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information.

Nature Reviews Methods Primers thanks Jonathan Potter and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

A pre-written interview outline for a semi-structured interview that provides both a topic structure and the ability to adapt flexibly to the content and context of the interview and the interaction between the interviewer and participant. Others may refer to the topic guide as an interview protocol.

Here we refer to the participants that take part in the study as the sample. Other researchers may refer to the participants as a participant group or dataset.

This involves dividing a population into smaller groups based on particular characteristics, for example, age or gender, and then sampling randomly within each group.

A sampling method where the guiding logic when deciding who to recruit is to achieve the most relevant participants for the research topic, in terms of being rich in information or insights.

Researchers ask participants to introduce the researcher to others who meet the study’s inclusion criteria.

Similar to stratified sampling, but participants are not necessarily randomly selected. Instead, the researcher determines how many people from each category of participants should be recruited. Recruitment can happen via snowball or purposive sampling.

A method for developing, analysing and interpreting patterns across data by coding in order to develop themes.

An approach that interrogates the explicit, implicit and taken-for-granted dimensions of language as well as the contexts in which it is articulated to unpack its purposes and effects.

A form of transcription that simplifies what has been said by removing certain verbal and non-verbal details that add no further meaning, such as ‘ums and ahs’ and false starts.

The analytic framework, theoretical approach and often hypotheses, are developed prior to examining the data and then applied to the dataset.

The analytic framework and theoretical approach is developed from analysing the data.

An approach that combines deductive and inductive components to work recursively by going back and forth between data and existing theoretical frameworks (also described as an iterative approach). This approach is increasingly recognized not only as a more realistic but also more desirable third alternative to the more traditional inductive versus deductive binary choice.

A theoretical apparatus that emphasizes the role of cultural processes and capital in (intergenerational) social reproduction.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Knott, E., Rao, A.H., Summers, K. et al. Interviews in the social sciences. Nat Rev Methods Primers 2 , 73 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43586-022-00150-6

Download citation

Accepted : 14 July 2022

Published : 15 September 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s43586-022-00150-6

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Development of a digital intervention for psychedelic preparation (dipp).

• Rosalind G. McAlpine
• Matthew D. Sacchet
• Sunjeev K. Kamboj

Scientific Reports (2024)

Between the dog and the wolf: an interpretative phenomenological analysis of bicultural, sexual minority people’s lived experiences

• Emelie Louise Miller
• Ingrid Zakrisson

Discover Psychology (2024)

Acknowledging that Men are Moral and Harmed by Gender Stereotypes Increases Men’s Willingness to Engage in Collective Action on Behalf of Women

• Alexandra Vázquez
• Lucía López-Rodríguez
• Marco Brambilla

Sex Roles (2024)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

How to Conduct a Sociology Research Interview

Getty Images / Eric Audras / ONOKY

• Research, Samples, and Statistics
• Key Concepts
• Major Sociologists
• News & Issues
• Recommended Reading
• Archaeology

Interviewing is a method of qualitative research (used by sociologists and other social scientists) in which the researcher asks open-ended questions orally. This research method is useful for collecting data that reveal the values, perspectives, experiences and worldviews of the population under study. Interviewing is often paired with other research methods including survey research , focus groups , and ethnographic observation .

Key Takeaways: Research Interviews in Sociology

• Sociologists sometimes conduct in-depth interviews, which involve asking open-ended questions.
• One advantage of in-depth interviews is that they are flexible, and the researcher can ask follow-up questions to the respondent’s answers.
• The steps necessary for conducting an in-depth interview include preparing for data collection, conducting the interviews, transcribing and analyzing the data, and disseminating the study results.

Interviews, or in-depth interviews, are different from survey interviews in that they are less structured. In survey interviews, the questionnaires are rigidly structured—the questions must all be asked in the same order, in the same way, and only the pre-defined answer choices can be given. In-depth qualitative interviews, on the other hand, are more flexible.

In an in-depth interview, the interviewer has a general plan of inquiry and may also have a specific set of questions or topics to discuss. However, it is not necessary for the interviewer to stick to predetermined questions, nor is it necessary to ask questions in a particular order. The interviewer must, however, be fully familiar with the subject in order to have an idea of potential questions to ask, and must plan so that things proceed smoothly and naturally. Ideally, the respondent does most of the talking while the interviewer listens, takes notes, and guides the conversation in the direction it needs to go. In such a scenario, the respondent’s answers to the initial questions should shape the subsequent questions. The interviewer needs to be able to listen, think, and talk almost simultaneously.

Steps of the Interviewing Process

Although in-depth interviews are more flexible than survey studies, it is important for researchers to follow particular steps in order to ensure that useful data is collected. Below, we’ll review the steps of preparing for and conducting in-depth interviews, and for using the data.

Determining the Topic

First, it's necessary that the researcher decides on the purpose of the interviews and the topics that should be discussed in order to meet that purpose. Are you interested in a population's experience of a life event, set of circumstances, a place, or their relationships with other people? Are you interested in their identity and how their social surroundings and experiences influence it? It's the researcher's job to identify which questions to ask and topics to bring up to elucidate data that will address the research question.

Planning Interview Logistics

Next, the researcher must plan the interview process. How many people must you interview? What variety of demographic characteristics should they have? Where will you find your participants and how will you recruit them? Where will interviews take place and who will do the interviewing? Are there any ethical considerations that must be accounted for? A researcher must answer these questions and others before conducting interviews.

Conducting Interviews

Now you're ready to conduct your interviews. Meet with your participants and/or assign other researchers to conduct interviews, and work your way through the entire population of research participants. Typically interviews are conducted face-to-face, but they can also be done via telephone or video chat. Each interview should be recorded. Researchers sometimes take notes by hand, but more commonly a digital audio recording device is used.

Transcribing Interview Data

Once you've collected your interview data you must turn it into usable data by transcribing it—creating a written text of the conversations that composed the interview. Some find this to be a cumbersome and time-consuming task. Efficiency can be achieved with voice-recognition software, or by hiring a transcription service. However, many researchers find the process of transcription a useful way to become intimately familiar with the data, and may even begin to see patterns within it during this stage.

Data Analysis

Interview data can be analyzed after it has been transcribed. With in-depth interviews, analysis takes the form of reading through the transcripts to code them for patterns and themes that provide a response to the research question. Sometimes unexpected findings occur, and these findings should not be discounted even though they may not relate to the initial research question.

Validating the Data

Next, depending on the research question and the type of answer sought, a researcher may wish to verify the reliability and validity of the information gathered by checking the data against other sources.

Sharing Research Results

Finally, no research is complete until it is reported, whether written, orally presented, or published through other forms of media.

• Social Surveys: Questionnaires, Interviews, and Telephone Polls
• Pilot Study in Research
• Tips on Conducting an Interview
• How to Conduct Interviews for News Stories
• Abstract Writing for Sociology
• Types of Medical School Interviews and What to Expect
• Data Sources For Sociological Research
• The Different Types of Sampling Designs in Sociology
• Definition and Overview of Grounded Theory
• Definition of Idiographic and Nomothetic
• Top Tips for Acing a Teacher Interview
• Teacher Interview Questions and Suggested Answers
• What Is a Research Paper?
• An Overview of Qualitative Research Methods
• Macro- and Microsociology
• 3 Surveys for Student Feedback to Improve Instruction

18 Social Scientist Interview Questions (With Example Answers)

It's important to prepare for an interview in order to improve your chances of getting the job. Researching questions beforehand can help you give better answers during the interview. Most interviews will include questions about your personality, qualifications, experience and how well you would fit the job. In this article, we review examples of various social scientist interview questions and sample answers to some of the most common questions.

or download as PDF

Common Social Scientist Interview Questions

What inspired you to pursue a career in social science, what do you think are the most important methods for studying social phenomena, what do you think sets social science apart from other disciplines, what do you think are the most pressing issues facing social science today, what do you think are the most important challenges facing social science in the future, what do you think is the most important contribution of social science to society, what do you think is the most important thing that social science can do for the world, what do you think is the most pressing need for social science research, what do you think is the most important goal of social science, what do you think is the most important thing that social science can accomplish, what do you think is the most important aspect of social science, what do you think is the most important issue facing social science today, what do you think is the most important thing that social science can offer to society, what do you think is the most pressing issue facing social science today, what do you think is the most important challenge facing social science in the future.

There are many reasons why someone might pursue a career in social science. Some people are inspired by the opportunity to help others, while others are motivated by the chance to make a difference in the world. Still others are drawn to the field by the challenge of understanding complex social phenomena.

Why is it important?

It is important for interviewers to ask this question because it can help them to better understand the motivations and goals of the person they are interviewing. By learning what inspires someone to pursue a career in social science, interviewers can gain insights into their values, interests, and goals. This information can be used to determine whether or not the person is a good fit for the position they are interviewing for.

Example: “ I was always interested in the social sciences, and after completing my undergraduate degree, I decided to pursue a career in this field. I was inspired by the work of social scientists who were able to make a difference in society, and I wanted to be able to do the same. I also wanted to help people understand the social world around them and how they can make a positive impact on it. ”

An interviewer might ask "What do you think are the most important methods for studying social phenomena?" to a/an Social Scientist in order to gain insights into the Social Scientist's research methods and priorities. It is important to understand the Social Scientist's research methods and priorities in order to understand the Social Scientist's work.

Example: “ There are a number of different methods that social scientists use to study social phenomena. Some of the most important methods include surveys, experiments, observation, and analysis of secondary data. Surveys are a common method used to collect data from a large number of people. Experiments are another common method used to study social phenomena. In an experiment, researchers manipulate one or more variables and then observe the effects on other variables. Observational studies are another type of research method in which researchers observe people’s behavior without manipulating any variables. Finally, analysts often use secondary data, such as census data, to study social phenomena. ”

There are a few reasons why an interviewer would ask this question to a social scientist. First, it allows the interviewer to gauge the interviewee's understanding of social science. Second, it allows the interviewer to get a sense of the interviewee's passion for social science. Finally, it allows the interviewer to see how the interviewee views social science in relation to other disciplines.

It is important for the interviewer to ask this question for a few reasons. First, it allows the interviewer to get a sense of the interviewee's understanding of social science. Second, it allows the interviewer to get a sense of the interviewee's passion for social science. Finally, it allows the interviewer to see how the interviewee views social science in relation to other disciplines.

Example: “ Social science is the study of human societies and the relationships between people within those societies. It encompasses a wide range of disciplines, including economics, history, political science, sociology, anthropology, and psychology. What sets social science apart from other disciplines is its focus on human behavior. Social scientists strive to understand how people think, feel, and behave. They use this knowledge to develop theories about how society works and to design policies that will improve the human condition. ”

An interviewer might ask "What do you think are the most pressing issues facing social science today?" to a social scientist in order to get a sense of the social scientist's priorities and areas of focus. It is important to know what the most pressing issues are in any field in order to be able to address them effectively.

Example: “ There are a number of pressing issues facing social science today. One of the most important is the need to better understand and explain social phenomena. This includes understanding why people behave the way they do, how social institutions function, and how societies change over time. Another key issue is the need to improve communication between social scientists and policy-makers. Too often, social science research is not used effectively by policy-makers, leading to sub-optimal decision-making. Finally, social scientists must continue to work to ensure that their research is rigorous and objective. In an increasingly polarized world, it is more important than ever that social science research be seen as trustworthy and unbiased. ”

There are many possible reasons why an interviewer would ask this question to a social scientist. Some of the most important challenges facing social science in the future include:

1. Understanding the impact of technology on society and human behavior.

2. Studying the changing demographics of the world and how they will impact social interactions and relationships.

3. Examining the role of culture and social norms in shaping human behavior.

4. Investigating the root causes of social problems and finding effective solutions.

5. Promoting scientific literacy and critical thinking among the general public.

Each of these challenges is important in its own right, and addressing them will be essential for social science to continue to play a vital role in understanding and improving our world.

Example: “ There are many important challenges facing social science in the future. One of the most important is how to deal with the increasing complexity of society. As society becomes more complex, it becomes more difficult to study and understand all of the factors that affect social behavior. Another challenge is how to deal with the increasing amount of data that is available. With the advent of big data, social scientists have access to more data than ever before. However, this data is often unstructured and can be difficult to analyze. Finally, another challenge facing social science is how to make use of new technologies. Social scientists must be able to use new technologies, such as social media, to collect and analyze data. ”

There are many potential answers to this question, but the interviewer is likely looking for a response that highlights the value of social science in terms of its ability to help us understand and improve the human social condition. In other words, they are looking for a response that emphasizes how social science can help us to better understand the complexities of human social behavior and to develop more effective ways of addressing the challenges we face as a society.

One way to think about the most important contribution of social science to society is in terms of its ability to help us make sense of the world around us. Social science provides us with a framework for understanding how the various elements of society interact with and influence one another. This understanding can help us make more informed decisions about the issues we face as a society and can ultimately lead to more effective solutions.

Another way to think about the most important contribution of social science to society is in terms of its ability to help us improve the human social condition. Social science can help us identify the root causes of social problems and develop more effective interventions to address them. Additionally, social science can help us evaluate the effectiveness of existing social policies and programs and make necessary adjustments to ensure that they are achieving their intended goals.

Ultimately, the most important contribution of social science to society is its potential to improve the human social condition. By helping us to better understand the complexities of human behavior and by providing us with tools to develop more effective solutions to social problems, social science has the potential to make a positive impact on the lives of people around the world.

Example: “ There are many important contributions that social science has made to society, but one of the most important is its ability to help us understand and explain human behavior. Social science can help us understand why people behave the way they do, and how different factors can influence their behavior. This knowledge can be used to improve policies and programs that aim to improve the lives of people in society. Additionally, social science research can help us identify social problems and develop solutions to address them. ”

The interviewer is asking the Social Scientist for their opinion on the value of social science research. It is important to know the Social Scientist's opinion on the matter because it will give insight into how they prioritize their work and what they think is most important to focus on. Additionally, this question allows the interviewer to gauge the Social Scientist's level of idealism and whether they believe that social science can truly make a difference in the world.

Example: “ The most important thing that social science can do for the world is to provide a better understanding of human behavior. By understanding how people think, feel, and behave, social science can help to improve the human condition. For example, social science can be used to develop better policies and programs to reduce poverty, improve education, and promote economic development. Additionally, social science can be used to understand and solve social problems such as crime, racism, and sexism. ”

There are many pressing needs for social science research, but the most pressing need is likely to be determined by the focus of the interviewer's work. For example, if the interviewer is a sociologist, they might be most interested in research on social inequality or race relations. If the interviewer is a psychologist, they might be most interested in research on mental health or child development. It is important for the interviewer to ask this question because it allows them to learn more about the Social Scientist's research interests and expertise. Additionally, it allows the interviewer to gauge the Social Scientist's level of interest in conducting research on the pressing need that the interviewer has identified.

Example: “ There is no definitive answer to this question as it depends on the specific focus of the social scientist. However, some possible areas of research that could be considered pressing needs include: -Understanding the root causes of social problems such as poverty, crime, and inequality -Developing effective interventions to address social problems -Studying how social change occurs and what factors contribute to its success or failure -Examining the impact of new technologies on society and social interactions -Exploring ways to promote more positive social outcomes such as cooperation, altruism, and empathy ”

There are a few possible reasons why an interviewer would ask this question to a social scientist. One reason is to gauge the interviewee's understanding of social science and its goals. It is important to know whether the interviewee grasps the basic concepts of social science and is familiar with its main goals. Another reason for asking this question could be to see if the interviewee is able to think critically about the goals of social science and articulate a well-reasoned opinion. This is important because it shows whether the interviewee is able to think deeply about complex issues and communicate their thoughts clearly. Finally, the interviewer may simply be curious to know the interviewee's opinion on this topic.

Example: “ There are many important goals of social science, but one of the most important is to understand and explain human behavior. Social scientists use research methods to study how people think, feel, and behave in different situations. By understanding human behavior, social scientists can help solve problems in areas like education, health, and business. ”

The interviewer is trying to gauge the social scientist's priorities and areas of focus. It is important to know what the social scientist thinks is the most important thing that social science can accomplish in order to understand their research interests and objectives.

Example: “ There are many important things that social science can accomplish, but one of the most important is to help us understand human behavior. Social science can help us understand why people behave the way they do, and how we can change our behavior to improve our lives. ”

In order to gauge the interviewee's understanding of social science and its importance, the interviewer asks this question. It is important to understand the different aspects of social science in order to effectively communicate and work with others.

Example: “ The most important aspect of social science is the scientific study of human society and social relationships. Social science research investigates the nature and causes of social problems, such as crime, poverty, and inequality. It also examines the impact of various social policies and programs on individuals, families, and communities. ”

There can be a few reasons why an interviewer would ask this question to a social scientist. Firstly, the interviewer may be interested in the social scientist's opinion on a particular issue and how it is impacting the field of social science as a whole. Secondly, the interviewer may be looking to gauge the social scientist's level of knowledge and expertise on the current state of social science. Finally, the interviewer may be hoping to gain insights into future trends or issues that social science may face. Ultimately, it is important for the interviewer to understand the social scientist's thoughts on the current state of the field and what challenges it may face in the future.

Example: “ There are many important issues facing social science today, but one of the most pressing is the issue of inequality. Inequality has been on the rise in developed and developing countries alike, and it is now at historic levels. This has profound implications for social cohesion, economic growth, and political stability. It is therefore essential that social scientists continue to study inequality and its causes and consequences. Other important issues facing social science include climate change, migration, and the future of work. ”

The interviewer is likely asking this question to gauge the Social Scientist's priorities and to get a sense of their values. It is important to know what the Social Scientist thinks is most important because it will give insight into what they are most passionate about and what they think is most valuable to society. Additionally, this question can help to identify potential areas of research or focus for the Social Scientist.

Example: “ The most important thing that social science can offer to society is the ability to explain and predict human behavior. Social science can help us understand why people behave the way they do, and it can also help us predict how they will behave in the future. This knowledge is essential for creating policies and programs that can improve our lives and our world. ”

The interviewer is likely asking this question to gauge the interviewee's understanding of social science research and its potential applications. It is important to understand the most pressing needs for social science research in order to identify areas where further study may be needed and to develop research agendas that can address these issues. Additionally, this question can help to reveal how the interviewee's work may be relevant to addressing real-world problems.

Example: “ The most pressing need for social science research is to address the problems of inequality and social injustice. There is a growing body of evidence that suggests that these problems are getting worse, and that they are having a negative impact on people's lives. Social science research can help to identify the causes of these problems and develop solutions to address them. ”

There are several reasons why an interviewer might ask this question. First, it allows the interviewer to gauge the Social Scientist's understanding of social science and its importance to society. Second, the answer to this question can reveal the Social Scientist's priorities and values. Finally, the answer can provide insight into the Social Scientist's research interests and areas of expertise.

The most important contribution of social science to society is its ability to help us understand and explain human behavior. Social science research can help us identify the causes of social problems and develop solutions to them. Additionally, social science can help us better understand ourselves and our relationships with others.

Example: “ The social sciences have made a number of important contributions to society. One of the most important is the development of theories and methods that help us to understand human behavior. The social sciences have also helped us to understand the causes and consequences of social problems, and to develop policies and programs to address them. ”

The most pressing issue facing social science today is the need for more research on the impact of social media on society. Social media has become a pervasive force in our lives, and its impact on our behavior, thoughts, and emotions is not fully understood. As social scientists attempt to study and understand the effects of social media, they face a number of challenges, including the need for more data, better methods, and improved theory.

Example: “ There are a number of pressing issues facing social science today. One of the most important is the need to develop a more sophisticated understanding of the complex relationships between social, economic and political factors. Another key issue is the need to improve communication between social scientists and policy-makers, in order to ensure that research findings are used to inform decision-making. Other issues include the need to address problems of inequality and exclusion, and to develop a better understanding of the role of culture in shaping social change. ”

The interviewer is likely asking this question to gauge the social scientist's thoughts on the future of their field. It is important to know what challenges a social scientist believes their field is facing so that interviewers can better understand the direction of the field and the potential for future research.

Example: “ There are a number of important challenges facing social science in the future. One of the most significant is the need to address the growing global inequality. This is an issue that has been receiving increasing attention in recent years, and it is one that social science must play a role in addressing. Other challenges include climate change, the rise of populism and nationalism, and the spread of misinformation. ”

The interviewer is likely trying to gauge the interviewee's understanding of social science and its goals. It is important to understand the goals of social science in order to effectively conduct research and contribute to society.

Example: “ The most important goal of social science is to provide a better understanding of human behavior. Social science research aims to explain and predict human behavior, and this understanding can be used to improve the human condition. For example, social science research can be used to develop better policies and programs to reduce poverty or improve education. It can also be used to understand and prevent social problems such as crime or discrimination. ”

Related Interview Questions

• Social Media Strategist
• Social Science Teacher
• Social Studies Teacher
• Social Media Analyst
• Social Media Consultant
• Social Media Coordinator

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer

IndianScribes

Research, Record, and Transcribe Better

Preparing Questions for a Qualitative Research Interview

Updated on: October 5, 2023

A qualitative research interview is an invaluable tool for researchers. Whether one’s studying social phenomena, exploring personal narratives, or investigating complex issues, interviews offer a means to gain unique insights. 

“The quality of the data collected in a qualitative research interview is highly dependent on the quality and appropriateness of the questions asked.”

But how do you prepare the right questions to ensure your interviews yield rich data? In this guide, we’ll explore the types of qualitative research interviews and provide tips for crafting effective questions.

Table of Contents

Types of Qualitative Research Interviews

Before diving into question preparation, it’s important to select the type of qualitative research interview that’s best suited for the study at hand.

There are three types of qualitative research interviews:

Structured Interviews 

Structured interviews involve asking the same set of pre-written questions to every participant. This approach ensures consistency, making it easier to compare data between participants or groups later.

When conducting structured interviews, keep these guidelines in mind:

• Pre-written Questions : All questions, including probes, should be meticulously written in advance.
• Detailed Questions : Questions should be detailed enough to be used verbatim during interviews.
• Consistent Sequence : The sequence of questions should be pre-decided and consistent across interviews.

Example of a Structured Interview Question

Question : Thinking back to your childhood days in Chelsea, can you remember what kind of local music was popular at the time?

• Why do you think it was so popular?
• Where was it played?
• Were there other popular genres?

Structured interviews are ideal when you need uniform data collection across all participants. They are common in large-scale studies or when comparing responses quantitatively.

Read more: Advantages & Disadvantages of Structured Interviews

Semi-structured Interviews 

The second type of qualitative interviews are semi-structured interviews. In these interviews, the  interview guide outlines the topics to be explored, but the actual questions are not pre-written.

This approach allows interviewers the freedom to phrase questions spontaneously and explore topics in more depth.

Example of a Semi-Structured Interview Question

Question : What problems did the participant face growing up in the community?

• Education-related.
• Related to their immediate family.
• Related to the community in general.

Semi-structured interviews strike a balance between flexibility and structure. They offer a framework within which interviewers can adapt questions to participants’ responses, making them suitable for in-depth exploration.

Unstructured Interviews 

In unstructured interviews, often referred to as  informal conversational interviews , are characterized by a lack of formal guidelines, predefined questions, or sequencing.

Questions emerge during the interview based on the conversation’s flow and the interviewee’s observations. Consequently, each unstructured interview is unique, and questions may evolve over time.

Unstructured interviews are highly exploratory and can lead to unexpected insights. They are particularly valuable when studying complex or novel phenomena where predefined questions may limit understanding.

Deciding What Information You Need

Once you’ve chosen the type of interview that suits your research study, the next step is to decide what information you need to collect.

Patton’s six types of questions offer a framework for shaping your inquiries:

• Behavior or Experience : Explore participants’ actions and experiences.
• Opinion or Belief : Probe participants’ beliefs, attitudes, and opinions.
• Feelings : Delve into the emotional aspects of participants’ experiences.
• Knowledge : Assess participants’ understanding and awareness of a topic.
• Sensory : Investigate how participants perceive and interact with their environment.
• Background or Demographic : Collect information about participants’ personal characteristics and histories.

Based on these categories, create a list of the specific information you aim to collect through the interview. This step ensures that your questions align with your research objectives.

Writing the Qualitative Research Interview Questions

After deciding the type of interview and nature of information you’d like to gather, the next step is to write the actual questions. 

Using Open-Ended Questions

Open-ended questions are the backbone of qualitative research interviews. They encourage participants to share their experiences and thoughts in-depth, providing rich, detailed data.

Avoid ‘yes’ or ‘no’ questions, as they limit responses. Instead, use open-ended questions that grant participants the freedom to express themselves. Here are some examples – 

Examples of Open-Ended Questions

How do you feel about working at ABC Corp. during your initial years there?

• Encourages participants to share their emotions and experiences.

Can you describe the attitudes and approach to work of the other people working with you at the time?

• Invites participants to reflect on their colleagues’ behaviors and attitudes.

Tell me more about your relationship with your peers.

• Encourages participants to provide narrative insights into their relationships.

Read More: 100 Open-Ended Qualitative Interview Questions

Going from Unstructured to Structured Questions

Unstructured Questions allow the interviewee to guide the conversation, letting them focus on what they think is most important.

These questions make the interview longer, but also provide richer and deeper insight.

Examples of Unstructured Questions

• Tell me about your experience working at [xxx].
• What did it feel like to live in that neighborhood?
• What stood out to you as the defining characteristic of that neighborhood?

Examples of Structured Questions

• What are some ways people dealt with the health issues caused by excessive chemical industries in the neighborhood?
• As an employee at ABC Corp. during the time, did you observe any specific actions taken by the employers to address the issue?

Probing Questions

Probing questions are used to get more information about an answer or clarify something. They help interviewers dig deeper, clarify responses, and gain a more comprehensive understanding.

Examples of Probing Questions

Tell me more about that.

• Encourages participants to elaborate on their previous response.

And how did you feel about that?

• Invites participants to share their emotional reactions.

What do you mean when you say [xxx]?

• Seeks clarification on ambiguous or complex statements.

Probing questions enhance the depth and clarity of the data collected, however they should be used judiciously to avoid overwhelming participants.

A General Last Question

As your interview approaches its conclusion, it’s beneficial to have a general last question that allows the interviewee to share any additional thoughts or opinions they feel are relevant.

For instance, you might ask:

Thank you for all that valuable information. Is there anything else you’d like to add before we end?

This open-ended question provides participants with a final opportunity to express themselves fully, ensuring that no critical insights are left unshared.

Preparing questions for qualitative research interviews requires a thoughtful approach that considers the interview type, desired information, and the balance between structured and unstructured questioning.

Here’s a great guide from the Harvard University on the subject.

6 Qualitative Research Methods

Read More »

Outsourcing Transcription of Research Interviews

• Choosing the Right Setting for a Qualitative Research Interview
• 5 Ways Researchers can Transcribe from Audio to Text

Reader Interactions

hlabishi says

April 8, 2015 at 12:37 pm

I found the information valuable. It will assist me a lot with my research work.

Harpinder says

June 8, 2015 at 10:40 pm

I am going for my pilot study. Above information is really valuable for me. Thank you.

September 28, 2015 at 10:21 am

thank you for Patton’s 6 types of questions related to: 1. Behavior or experience. 2. Opinion or belief. 3. Feelings. 4. Knowledge. 5. Sensory. 6. Background or demographic. Really helpful

IBRAHIM A. ALIYU says

October 7, 2015 at 6:04 pm

Very interesting and good guides, thanks a lot

Dumisani says

July 31, 2017 at 7:55 am

Very informative. Thank you

Yongama says

June 5, 2018 at 11:57 pm

this is a good information and it helped me

Joshua Nonwo says

June 3, 2019 at 11:02 pm

vital information that really help me to do my research. thank you so much.

June 12, 2019 at 7:36 pm

Thanks a lot. Example of structured interview broadens My mind in formulating my structured research question. Indeed very helpful.

mwiine says

November 29, 2019 at 6:31 am

thanx, a lot. the information will guide me in my research.

Kayayoo isaac says

November 29, 2019 at 7:54 am

Thanks for the information, it was very much helpful to me in the area of data collection.

leslie says

December 27, 2019 at 4:29 pm

very useful thanks.

louisevbanz says

January 20, 2020 at 3:19 pm

I’d like put the writers of this in my references. May I ask who the writers are and what year was this published? Thank you very much.

Daniel says

June 1, 2020 at 6:21 pm

Thank you very much. Helpful information in my preparations for structured interviews for my research .

abby kamwana says

December 8, 2020 at 9:03 am

This is the information i was looking for thank you so much!.

Cosmas W.K. Mereku (Prof.) says

June 15, 2021 at 8:59 am

I am teaching 42 MPhil and 6 PhD postgraduate music students research methods this academic year. Your guide to qualitative research interview questions has been very useful. Because the students are in different disciplines (music education, music composition, ethnomusicology and performance), all the types of questions discussed have been very useful. Thank you very much.

Gerald Ibrahim b. says

June 16, 2021 at 12:45 pm

One of my best article ever read..thanks alot this may help me in completing my research report…

Corazon T. Balulao says

March 1, 2022 at 7:47 am

Thank you so much for sharing with us it helps me a lot doing mt basic research

antoinette says

March 28, 2022 at 7:35 am

this was very helpful

พนันบอล เล่นยังไง says

November 21, 2023 at 5:55 am

Very good article! We are linking to this particularly great article on our website. Keep up the good writing.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

• Transcription
• Qualitative Research
• Better Audio & Video
• Voice Recorders
• Focus Groups
• Terms of Service
• Privacy Policy

Privacy Overview

ReviseSociology

A level sociology revision – education, families, research methods, crime and deviance and more!

Structured Interviews in Social Research

Structured interviews are a standardised way of collecting data typically using closed, pre-coded surveys.

Table of Contents

Last Updated on September 26, 2023 by Karl Thompson

A structured interview is where interviewers ask pre-written questions to candidates in a standardised way, following an interview schedule. As far as possible the interviewer asks the same questions in the same order and the same way to all candidates. 

(An exception to this is filter questions in which case the interviewer may skip sub-questions if a negative response is provided). 

Answers to structured interviews are usually closed, or pre-coded, and the interviewer ticks the appropriate box according to the respondents’ answers. However some structured interviews may be open ended in which case the interviewer writes in the answers for the respondent.

Social surveys are the main context in which researchers will conduct structured interviews.

This post covers:

• the advantages of structured interviews
• the different contexts in which they take place (phone and computer assisted).
• the stages of conducting them: from knowing the schedule to leaving!
• their limitations.

Advantages of Structured Interviews

The main advantage of structured interviews is that they promote standardisation in both the processes of asking questions and recording answers.

This reduces bias and error in the asking of questions and makes it easier to process respondents’ answers.

The two main advantages of structured interviews are thus:

• Reducing error due to interviewer variability.
• Increasing the accuracy and ease of data processing.

Reducing error due to interviewer variability

Structured interviews help to reduce the amount of error in data collection because they are standardised.

Variability and thus error can occur in two ways:

• Intra-interviewer variability : occurs when an interviewer is not consistent with the way they ask the questions or record the answers.
• Inter-interviewer variability : when there are more than two interviewers who are not consistent with each other in the way they ask questions or record answers.

These two sources of variability can occur together and compound the the problem of reduced validity.

The common sources of error in survey research include:

• A poorly worded question.
• The way the question is asked by the interviewer.
• Misunderstanding on the part of the respondent being interviewed.
• Memory problems on the part of the respondent.
• The way the information is recorded by the interviewer.
• The way the information is processed: coding of answers or data entry.

Because the asking of questions and recording of answers are standardised, this means any variation in answers from respondents should be due to true or real variation in the respondents answers, rather than variation arising because of differences in the interview context.

Accuracy and Ease of Data Processing

Structured interviews consist of mainly closed, pre-coded questions or fixed choice questions.

With closed-questions the respondent is given a limited choice of possible answers and is asked to select which response or responses apply to them.

The interviewer then simply ticks the appropriate box.

This limit box ticking procedure limits the scope for interviewer bias to introduce error. There is no scope for the interviewer to omit or modify anything the respondent says because they are not writing down their answer.

Another advantage with pre-coded data gained from the structured interview is that it allows for ‘automatic’ data processing.

If answers had been written down or transcribed from a recording, a researcher would have to examine this qualitative data, sort and assign the various answers to categories.

For example if a survey had produced qualitative data on what respondents thought about Brexit, the researcher might categories the range of answers into ‘for Brexit’, ‘neutral’, and ‘against Brexit’.

This process of reducing more complex and varied data into fewer and simpler ‘higher level’ categories is known as coding data , or establishing a coding frame and is necessary for quantitive analysis to take place.

Coding (whether done before or after a structured interview takes place) introduces another source or potential error. Answers may be categorised incorrectly by the researchers. The researchers may categorise answers differently to how the respondents themselves would have categorised their answers.

There are two sources of error in recording data:

• Intra-rater-variability : where the person applying the coding is inconsistent in the way they apply the rules of assigning answers to categories.
• Inter-rater-variability : where two different raters apply the rules of assigning answers to categories differently.

If either or both of the above occur then variability in responses will be due to error rather than true variability in the responses.

The closed question survey/ interview avoids the above problem because respondents assign themselves to categories, simply by picking an option and the interviewer ticking a box.

There is very little opportunity with pre-coded interviews for interviewers or analysers to misinterpret or miss-assign respondents’ answers to the wrong categories.

Structured Interview Contexts

Structured interviews tend to be done when there is only one respondent. Group interviews are usually more qualitative because they dynamics of having two ore more respondents present mean answers tend to be more complex, and so tick-box answers are not usually sufficient to get valid data.

Besides the face to face interview, there are two particular contexts which are common with structured interviewing: telephone interviewing and computer assisted interviewing. (These are not mutually exclusive).

Telephone interviewing

Telephone interviews are very common with market research companies, and opinion polling companies such as YouGov. They are used less often by academic researchers but an exception to this was during the Covid-19 Pandemic when many studies which would usually rely on in-person interviews had to be carried out over the phone.

The advantages of telephone interviews

The advantages of telephone interviews compared to face to face interviews the advantages of telephone interviews are:

• Telephone interviews are cheaper and quicker to administer because there is no travel time or costs involved in accessing the respondents. The more dispersed the research sample is geographically the larger the advantage.
• Telephone interviews are easier to supervise than face to face interviews. You can have one supervisor in a room with several phone interviewers. Interviewers can be recorded and monitored, although care has to be taken with GDPR.
• Telephone interviews reduce bias due to the personal characteristics of the interviewers. It is much more difficult to tell what the class background or ethnicity or the interviewer is over the phone, for example.

The limitations of phone interviews

• People without phones cannot be part of the sample.
• Call screening with mobile phones has greatly reduced the response rate of phone surveys.
• Respondents with hearing impediments will find phone interviews more difficult.
• The length of a phone interview generally can’t be sustained over 20-25 minutes.
• There is a general belief that telephone interviews achieve lower response rates than face to face interviews.
• There is some evidence that phone interviews are less useful when dealing with sensitive topics but the data is not clear cut.
• There may. be validity problems because telephone interviews do not allow for observation. For example an interviewer cannot observe if a respondent is confused by a question.
• In cases where researchers need specific types of people, telephone interviews do not allow us to check if the correct types of people are actually those being interviewed.

Computer assisted Interviewing 

With computer assisted interviewing interviews questions are pre-written and appear on the computer screen. Interviewers follow the instructions and read out questions in order and key in the respondents’ answers, either as open or closed responses. 

There are two main types of Computer Assisted Interviewing:

• CAPI – Computer Assisted Personal Interviewing. 
• CATI – Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing.

Most telephone interviews today are Computer Assisted. There are several survey software packages that allow for the construction of effective surveys with analytics tools for data analysis. 

They are less popular for personal interviews but have been growing in popularity. 

CATI and CAPI are more common among commercial survey organisations such as IPSOS but are used less in academic research conducted by universities. 

The advantages of computer assisted interviewing

CAPI are very useful for filter questions as the software can skip to the next question if the previous one isn’t relevant. This reduces the likelihood of the interviewer asking irrelevant questions or missing out questions. 

They are also useful for prompt-questions as flash cards can be generated on the screen and shown to the respondents as required. This should mean respondents are more likely to see the flash-cards in the same way as there is no possibility for the researcher to arrange them in a different order for different respondents, as might be the case with physical flashcards. 

Another advantage of computer assisted interviewing is automatic storage on the computer or cloud upload which means there is no need to scan paper interview sheets or enter the data manually at a later date. 

Thus Computer Assisted Interviews should increase the level of standardisation and reduce the amount of variability error introduced by the interviewer. 

The disadvantages of Computer Assisted Interviewing:

• They may create a sense of distance and disconnect between the interviewer and respondents. 
• Miskeying may result in the interviewer entering incorrect data, and they are less likely to realise this than with paper interviews. 
• Interviewers need to be comfortable with the technology.

Conducting Structured Interviews 

The procedures involved with conducting an effective structure interview include:

• Knowing the interview schedule
• Gaining access 

Introducing the research 

• Establishing rapport 
• Asking questions and recording answers 
• Leaving the interview.

The processes above are specifically in relation to structured interviews, but will also apply to semi-structure interviews.

The interview schedule 

An interview schedule is the list of questions in order, with relevant instructions about how the questions are to be asked. Before conducting an interview, the interviewer should know the interview schedule inside out. 

Interviews can be stressful and pressure can cause interviewers to not follow standardised procedures. For example, interviewers may ask questions in the wrong order or miss questions out. 

When several interviewers are involved in the research process it is especially important that all of them know the interview schedule to ensure questions are asked in a standardised way. 

Gaining access

Interviews are the interface between the research and the respondents and are thus a crucial link in ensuring a good response rate. In order to gain access interviews need to:

• Be prepared to keep calling back with telephone interviews. Keep in mind the most likely times to get a response. 
• Be self-assured and confident. 
• Reassure people that you are not a salesperson, but doing research for a deeper purpose. 
• Dress appropriately. 
• Be prepared to be flexible with time: finding a time that fits the respondent if first contact isn’t convenient. 

Respondents need to be provided with a rationale explaining the purposes of the research and why they are giving up their time to take part. 

The introductory rationale may be written down or spoken. A written rationale may be sent out to prospective respondents in advance of the research taking place, as is the case with those selected to take part in the British Social Attitudes survey. A verbal rationale is employed with street-based market research, cold-calling telephone surveys and may also be reiterated during house to house surveys. 

An effective introductory statement can be crucial in getting respondents to take part. 

What should an introductory statement for social research include?

• Make clear the identity of the interviewer.
• Identify the agency which is conducting the research: for example a university or business. 
• Include details of how the research is being funded. 
• Indicate the broader purpose of the research in broad terms: what are the overall aims?
• Give an indication of the kind of data that will be collected. 
• Make it clear that participation is voluntary. 
• Make it clear that data will be anonymised and that the respondent will not be identified in any way, by data being analysed at an aggregate level. 
• Provide reassurance about the confidentiality of information. 
• Provide a respondent with the opportunity to ask questions. 

Establishing rapport with structured interviews

Rapport is what makes the respondent feel as if they want to cooperate with the researcher and take part in the research. Without rapport being established respondents may either not agree to take part or terminate the interview half way through! 

Rapport can be established through visual cues of friendliness such as positive body language, listening and good eye contact. 

However with structured interviews, establishing rapport is a delicate balancing act as it is crucial for the interviewers be as objective as possible and not get too close to the respondents.

Rapport can be achieved by being friendly with the interviewee, although interviewers shouldn’t take this too far. Too much friendliness can result in the interview taking too long and the interviewee getting bored. 

Too much rapport can also result in the respondent providing socially desirable answers. 

Asking Questions and Recording Answers 

With structured interviews it is important that researchers strive to ask the same questions in the same way to all respondents. They should ask questions as written in order to minimise error. 

Experiments in question-wording suggest that even minor variations in wording can influence replies. 

Interviewers may be tempted to deviate from the schedule because they feel awkward asking some questions to particular people, but training can help with this and make it more likely that standardisation is kept in place. 

Where recording answers is concerned, bias is far less likely with pre-coded answers. 

PROVIDING Clear instructions 

Interviews need to follow clear instructions through the progress of the interview. This is important if an interview schedule includes filter questions. 

Filter questions require the interviewer to ask questions of some respondents but not to others. Filler questions are usually indented on an interview schedule. 

For example: 

• Did you vote in the last general election…?  YES / NO 

1a (to be asked if respondent answered yes to Q1)

Which of the following political parties did you vote for? Conservatives/ Labour/ Lib Dems/ The Green Party/ Other. 

The risk of not following instructions is that the respondent may be asked questions that are irrelevant to them, which may be irritating. 

Question order

Researchers should stick to the question order on the survey. 

Leapfrogging questions may result in questions skipped not being asked because the researcher could forget to go back to them. 

Changing the question order may also lead to variability in replies because questions previously asked may affect how respondents answer questions later on in the survey. 

Three specific examples demonstrate why question order matters:

People are less likely to respond that taxes should be lowered if they are asked questions about government spending beforehand. 

In victim surveys if people are asked about their attitudes to crime first they are more likely to report that they have been a victim of crime in later questions. 

One question in the 1988 British Crime Survey asked the following question:

‘Taking everything into account, would you say the police in this area do a good job or a poor job? 

For all respondents this question appeared early on, but due to an admin error the question appeared twice in some surveys, and for those who answered the question twice:

• 66% gave the same response
• 22% gave a more positive response
• 12% gave a less positive response. 

The fact that only two thirds of respondents gave the same response twice clearly indicates that the effect of question order can be huge. 

One theory for the change is that the survey was about crime and as respondents thought more in-depth about crime as the interview progressed, 22% felt more favourable to the police and 13% less favourable, this would have varied with their own experiences. 

Rules for ordering questions in social surveys

• Early questions should be clearly related to the topic of the research about which the respondent has already been informed. This is so the respondent immediately feels like the questions are relevant. 
• Questions about age/ ethnicity/ gender etc. should not be asked at the beginning of the interview 
• Sensitive questions should be left for later.
• With a longer questionnaire, questions should be grouped into sections to break up the interview. 
• Within each subgroup general questions should precede specific ones. 
• Opinions and attitudes questions should precede questions about behaviour and knowledge. Questions about the later are less likely to be influenced by question order. 
• If a respondent has already answered a later question in the course of answering a previous one, that later question should still be asked. 

Probing questions in structured interviews 

Probing may be required in structured interviews when 

• respondents do not understand the question and either ask for or it is clear that they need more information to provide an answer. 
• The respondent does not provide a sufficient answer and needs to be probed for more information. 

The problem with the interviewer asking additional probing questions is that they introduce researcher-led variability into the interview context. 

Tactics for effective probing in structured interviews:

• Employ standardised probes . These work well when open ended answers are required. Examples of standardised probes include: ‘Could you say a little more about that?’ or ‘are there any other reasons why you think that?’. 
• If a response does not allow for a pre-existing box to be ticked In a closed ended survey the interviewer could r epeat the available options . 
• If the response requires a number rather than something like ‘often’ the researcher should just persist with asking the question .  They shouldn’t try and second guess a number!

Prompting occurs when the interviewer suggests a possible answer to a question to the respondent. This is effectively what happens with a closed question survey or interview: the options are the prompts. The important thing is that the prompts are the same for all the respondents and asked in the same way. 

During face to face interviews there may be times when it is better for researchers to use show cards (or flash cards) to display the answers rather than say them. 

Three contexts in which flashcards are better:

• When there is a long list of possible answers. For example if asking respondents about which newspapers they read, it would be easier to show them a list rather than reading them out!
• With Likert Scales, ranked for 1-5 for example, it would be easier to have a showcard with 1-5 and the respondent can point to it, rather than reading out ‘1,2,3,4,5’. 
• With some sensitive details such as income, respondents might feel more comfortable if they are shown income bands with letters attached, then they can say the letter. This allows the respondent to not state what their income is out loud. 

Leaving the Interview 

On leaving the interview thank the respondent for taking part. 

Researchers should not engage in further communication about the purpose of the research at this point beyond the standard introductory statement. To do so means this respondent may divulge further information to other respondents yet to take part, possibly biassing their responses.

Problems with structured interviews 

Four problems with structured interviews include:

• the characteristics of the interviewer interfering with the results.
• Response sets resulting in reduced validity (acquiescence and social desirability).
• The problem of lack of shared meaning.
• The feminist critique of the unequal power relationship between interviewer and respondent.

Interviewer characteristics

The characteristics of the interviewer such as their gender or ethnicity may affect the responses a respondent gives. For example, a respondent may be less likely to open up on sensitive issues with someone who is a different gender to them.  

Response Sets 

This is where respondents reply to a series of questions in a consistent way but one that is irrelevant to the concept being measured. 

This is a particular problem when respondents are answering several Likert Scale questions in a row. 

Two of the most prominent types of response set are ‘acquiescence’ and ‘social desirability bias’ 

Acquiescence 

Acquiescence refers to a tendency of some respondents to consistently agree or disagree with a set of questions. They may do this because it is quicker for them to get through the interview. This is known as satisficing. 

Satisficing is where respondents reduce the amount of effort required to answer a question. They settle for an answer that is satisfactory rather than making the effort to generate the most accurate answer. 

Examples of satisficing include:

• Agreeing with yes statements or ‘yeasaying’.
• Opting for middle point answers on scales.
• Not considering the full-range of answers in a range of closed questions, for example picking the first or last answers. 

The opposite of satisficing is optimising. Optimising is where respondents expend effort to arrive at the best and most appropriate answer to a question. 

It is possible to weed out respondents who do this by ensuring there is a mix of positive and negative sentiment in a batch of Likert questions. 

For example you may have a batch of three questions designed to measure attitudes towards Rishi Sunak’s performance as Primeminister.

If you have two scales where ‘5’ is positive and one where 5 is Negative, for example:

• Rishi Sunak is an effective leader 1.2.3.4.5
• Rishi Sunak has managed the economy well 1.2.3.4.5 
• Rishi Sunak is NOT to be trusted 1.2.3.4.5  

If someone is acquiescing without thinking about their answers, they are likely to circle all 5s, which wouldn’t make sense. Hence we could disregard this response and maybe even the entire survey from this individual. 

Social desirability bias 

Socially desirable behaviours and attitudes tend to be over-reported. This can especially be the case for sensitive questions.

Strategies for reducing social interviews bias

• Use self-completion forms rather than interviewers. 
• Soften the question for example ‘even the calmest of car drivers sometimes lose their temper when driving, has this ever happened to you?

The problem of meaning 

Structured surveys and interviews assume that respondents share the same meanings for terms as the interviewers. 

However, from an interpretivist perspective interviewer and respondent may not share the same meanings. Respondents may be ticking boxes but mean different things to what the interviewer thinks they mean. 

The issue of meaning is side-stepped in structured interviews. 

The feminist critique of structured interviews 

The structure of the interview epitomises the asymmetrical relationship between researcher and respondent. This is a critique made of all quantitative research. 

The researcher extracts information from the respondent and gives little or nothing in return. 

Interviewers are even advised not to get too familiar with respondents as giving away too much information may bias the results. 

Interviewers should refrain from expressing their opinions, presenting any personal information and engaging in off-topic chatter. All of this is very impersonal. 

This means that structured interviews are probably not appropriate for very sensitive topics that involve a more personal touch. For example with domestic violence, unstructured interviews which aim to explore the nature of violence have revealed higher levels of violence than structured interviews such as the Crime Survey of England and Wales.

Sources and signposting

Structured interviews are relevant to the social research methods module within A-level sociology.

This post was adapted from Bryman, A (2016) Social Research Methods.

Share this:

• Share on Tumblr

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Discover more from ReviseSociology

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

30 Social Psychologist Interview Questions and Answers

Common Social Psychologist interview questions, how to answer them, and example answers from a certified career coach.

Taking on the role of a social psychologist means delving into the complexities of human behavior in social contexts, exploring how individuals are influenced by and interact with others. As you prepare for your interview for such a position, it’s important to not only showcase your understanding of key psychological theories but also demonstrate your ability to apply this knowledge in real-world situations.

In this article, we provide an extensive list of potential questions you may encounter during a social psychologist job interview. Alongside these questions, we offer expert advice and sample answers designed to help you make a strong impression and confidently articulate your expertise in social psychology.

1. Can you explain how your research findings in social psychology have had a practical impact on society?

This question is designed to assess whether you can translate your theoretical knowledge and research insights into practical applications that can benefit society. It’s all about your ability to make your work relevant and useful in real-world scenarios, and to demonstrate that your research is not just academically rigorous, but also has a tangible, positive impact on people’s lives.

Example: “My research in social psychology has primarily focused on the impact of group dynamics and behavior. One key finding was how positive reinforcement within groups can significantly improve overall performance.

This insight has been applied practically in various settings, from classrooms to corporate environments, leading to improved teamwork and productivity. It’s also influenced policies around employee recognition and reward systems.

In another study, I examined the role of social media in shaping public opinion. The findings have guided organizations in their communication strategies, helping them engage more effectively with their audiences.”

2. How have you incorporated ethical considerations into your research work?

Ethics are the backbone of psychological research. Whether you’re studying social interactions or the cognitive processes behind decision-making, your work has the potential to profoundly impact people’s lives. By asking you to discuss how you’ve incorporated ethical considerations into past research, interviewers are seeking to understand whether you prioritize the well-being of research participants, respect for their autonomy, and the broader social implications of your work.

Example: “Incorporating ethical considerations in my research is a priority. I ensure that all participants provide informed consent, understanding the purpose and procedures of the study. Confidentiality is also maintained to protect their identities.

Moreover, I’m conscious about avoiding any form of harm or discomfort to the participants. This includes physical, emotional, or psychological distress.

Lastly, when interpreting and reporting results, I maintain honesty and integrity, ensuring no data manipulation occurs. This promotes transparency and trustworthiness in my work.”

3. Can you provide an example of a time when you had to adapt your approach to a study due to unexpected results?

Being a social psychologist often means venturing into the unknown, and sometimes, the unknown throws a curveball at you. The question aims to understand how you handle the unexpected. It checks your ability to remain flexible, think on your feet, and adapt your approach when your initial plan doesn’t pan out as expected. It also reflects your problem-solving skills and your ability to learn from unexpected outcomes.

Example: “During my doctoral research, I was studying the impact of social media on self-esteem. Initial results indicated no significant correlation. However, considering the prevalent literature and theories, this seemed implausible.

I revisited my methodology, realizing that I had not accounted for variables like time spent online or types of content consumed. Therefore, I adapted my approach to include these factors.

The revised study showed a nuanced picture: excessive use and exposure to idealized images correlated with lower self-esteem. This experience taught me the importance of flexibility and critical thinking in research design.”

4. How would you use social psychology to address the issues of discrimination and prejudice in a community?

The heart of social psychology lies in understanding group behavior, social perceptions, and social interactions. When it comes to tackling issues like discrimination and prejudice, your potential employer wants to know if you can leverage theories and practices within social psychology to effect real, positive change. Can you, for instance, design and implement interventions that can reduce prejudice or foster more inclusive attitudes within a community? This question tests your ability to apply your knowledge and skills in a practical, impactful way.

Example: “Social psychology can be instrumental in addressing discrimination and prejudice. One approach is through intergroup contact theory, which suggests that interaction between diverse groups reduces prejudice. Therefore, creating opportunities for positive, equal-status interactions among community members can foster understanding and reduce bias.

Another strategy is social norming, where we highlight the majority’s acceptance of diversity to influence behavior. This can help alter perceptions or misconceptions about group norms, leading to a reduction in discriminatory attitudes.

Lastly, education on unconscious biases helps individuals recognize and challenge their own prejudices. Through these strategies, social psychology can effectively tackle discrimination and prejudice within communities.”

5. What strategies do you employ to ensure the psychological well-being of your research participants?

Ethical considerations are paramount in the field of social psychology, particularly when it comes to research. The well-being of your participants is always the top priority. By asking this question, potential employers are trying to assess your understanding of ethical guidelines, your commitment to participant welfare, and your ability to implement effective strategies to ensure no harm comes to those involved in your studies.

Example: “Ensuring the psychological well-being of research participants is paramount. I employ a few strategies to achieve this:

Informed Consent: Participants are given detailed information about the study, potential risks and benefits, ensuring they understand what they’re consenting to.

Anonymity and Confidentiality: Personal data is handled with utmost care, assuring participants their information will not be disclosed without permission.

Debriefing: After the study, participants are fully informed about the purpose and methods used in the research. This helps alleviate any stress or confusion that may have arisen during participation.

Access to Support: If the study involves potentially distressing content, I provide resources for professional help.

These measures not only protect participants but also enhance the integrity and validity of the research.”

6. Could you discuss a time when you used social psychology principles to resolve conflict?

Conflict resolution is a significant part of a social psychologist’s role, and applying the principles of social psychology to such situations serves as a testament to your skills in real-world applications. Interviewers want to see how you’ve practically used your knowledge to address complex human interactions and conflicts, and the outcomes you’ve achieved. This can demonstrate your problem-solving abilities, your understanding of human behavior, and your capacity to use theory in practice.

Example: “In a team project, we experienced conflict due to differing opinions. I used the principle of cognitive dissonance to address this. I facilitated a discussion where everyone shared their viewpoints and how they arrived at them. This allowed team members to understand each other’s perspectives better, reducing the discomfort associated with holding conflicting views.

I also applied social identity theory by reinforcing our common goals and emphasizing that despite our differences, we were one team aiming for success. This fostered unity and cooperation among us, effectively resolving the conflict.”

7. How do you approach the challenge of ensuring cultural sensitivity in your research?

The essence of social psychology is understanding human behavior in a social context, which invariably includes diverse cultures, beliefs, and attitudes. The ability to approach research with cultural sensitivity is critical in this field. Not only does it reflect the inclusivity and ethical responsibility of the researcher, but it also directly impacts the validity and reliability of the study. Therefore, interviewers want to know how you ensure cultural sensitivity in your research.

Example: “In my research, cultural sensitivity is paramount. I ensure this by incorporating diverse perspectives from the start. This includes involving participants or consultants from various backgrounds in study design.

I also use culturally appropriate methodologies and instruments. If a tool isn’t available, I adapt existing ones with due respect to cultural nuances.

Moreover, I continuously educate myself about different cultures and biases that could influence interpretation of results. Ethical guidelines are strictly followed to respect all cultures involved.

Thus, through inclusive planning, respectful methodology, and continuous learning, I maintain cultural sensitivity.”

8. Can you detail a project where you applied theories of group behavior?

As a social psychologist, your job is to understand and analyze how people’s thoughts, feelings, and behaviors are influenced by the actual, imagined, or implied presence of others. A key component of this is understanding group dynamics. By asking this question, interviewers want to gauge your practical experience in applying theoretical concepts to real-life scenarios. They’re interested in your ability to translate complex theories into actionable insights.

Example: “One project where I applied theories of group behavior was during my research on workplace dynamics. I utilized the Social Identity Theory to understand how individuals identify with their work groups and how this impacts productivity.

I conducted surveys and interviews to gather data, then analyzed it considering key factors like group cohesion, intergroup competition, and leadership style. The findings revealed that a strong identification with a work group significantly improved performance and job satisfaction.

This project highlighted the importance of fostering positive group identities in workplaces, which can be achieved through inclusive leadership and team-building activities.”

9. In your opinion, what are the key considerations when designing a survey for a social psychology study?

As a social psychologist, one of your main tasks will be to design and conduct research that investigates the ways individuals’ thoughts, feelings, and behaviors are influenced by others. The design of a survey or questionnaire is a critical step in collecting useful data. Therefore, interviewers are interested in your understanding of the process, from ensuring the questions are clear and unbiased, to considering the ethical aspects of the research. They want to know how you think critically about the methodology behind your science.

Example: “When designing a survey for a social psychology study, it’s crucial to ensure the questions are clear and unbiased. The language used should be understandable by all participants to avoid misinterpretation.

The type of data you want to collect also influences your design. If you’re seeking qualitative insights, open-ended questions are ideal. For quantitative data, multiple-choice or Likert scale questions may be more appropriate.

Sampling is another key consideration. You need a representative sample that reflects the population you’re studying. This ensures your findings can be generalised.

Lastly, consider ethical aspects such as informed consent and confidentiality. Participants must understand what they’re agreeing to and their responses should be kept anonymous.”

10. How would you handle a situation where your research findings contradict popular societal beliefs?

This question is designed to assess your professional integrity and your ability to navigate the challenging terrain of social dynamics. As a social psychologist, you’ll often encounter situations where your research findings may not align with widely held societal beliefs. This could potentially spark controversy or resistance. Interviewers want to ensure that you can handle such situations with tact, professionalism, and dedication to the truth.

Example: “In such a situation, I would ensure my research is robust and reproducible. If it’s solid, then the contradiction to societal beliefs provides an opportunity for further dialogue and learning.

It’s crucial to communicate these findings in a respectful and clear manner. This includes acknowledging the existing belief while presenting the new evidence with transparency about its limitations.

Engaging stakeholders in conversation can help address concerns or misunderstandings. It’s not about proving who’s right or wrong but fostering understanding through scientific inquiry.”

11. What role do you think social psychologists should play in influencing public policy?

This question is designed to gauge your understanding of the real-world applications of social psychology. It’s one thing to conduct research and understand human behavior, but it’s another to apply this knowledge in a way that can effect positive changes in society. Therefore, your answer will provide insight into how you perceive the value of your work and the extent of its potential impact.

Example: “Social psychologists have a crucial role in shaping public policy. They provide valuable insights into human behavior and societal dynamics, which can inform policies to address social issues effectively.

For instance, understanding prejudice and discrimination can help craft anti-discrimination laws or diversity training programs. Similarly, knowledge of group behavior can guide strategies for community engagement or conflict resolution.

However, it’s essential that social psychologists maintain objectivity, providing evidence-based recommendations without imposing personal beliefs. Their goal should be to facilitate informed decision-making, not dictate outcomes.”

12. Could you explain your approach to conducting a longitudinal study?

Asking this question, hiring committees aim to gauge your research methodology skills. Longitudinal studies are an essential part of social psychology, as they allow for observing how individual or group behavior changes over time. By understanding your approach to conducting such studies, they can assess your ability to design, implement, and analyze research that provides valuable insights into human behavior.

Example: “Conducting a longitudinal study involves several key steps.

The initial phase is defining the research question and identifying the sample population. The next step is ensuring ethical considerations are met, such as informed consent from participants.

Data collection methods need to be consistent over time for valid comparisons. This could involve surveys, interviews or observations.

Analyzing data in a longitudinal study can be complex due to its nature of repeated measures on the same subjects. So, it’s crucial to use appropriate statistical techniques.

Lastly, interpretation should consider potential biases like attrition or changes in societal norms over time. It’s also important to communicate findings effectively to both academic audiences and stakeholders involved in the study.”

13. How have you incorporated technology into your research methods?

As a social psychologist, your research methods need to evolve with the times. In this digital age, technology plays a critical role in data collection, analysis, and presentation. Employers want to see if you leverage technology in innovative ways to improve the quality, efficiency, and effectiveness of your research. It’s also important to know how comfortable you are with using these modern tools.

Example: “Incorporating technology into my research methods has been pivotal. For instance, I use online surveys to gather data from a wider audience. This approach enhances the diversity and volume of responses.

I also utilize software for statistical analysis which allows me to interpret complex data sets more accurately.

Moreover, I leverage digital platforms like social media to observe behavioral patterns in real-time. It’s an effective way to study group dynamics or societal trends.

Finally, cloud-based collaboration tools have made it possible to work with other researchers remotely, expanding the scope and impact of our studies.”

14. Can you elaborate on a time when your research findings were used to develop a community intervention program?

This question is designed to give the interviewer a glimpse into your practical application skills. It’s not just about conducting research and gathering data as a social psychologist, but also about how your work has been applied to real-world situations, especially in terms of creating positive change. They want to see evidence of your ability to use your research findings to influence policies or programs that improve community well-being.

Example: “In my research on youth substance abuse, I identified a correlation between lack of after-school activities and increased drug use. This data was used to develop an intervention program that focused on providing structured, engaging activities for local youths during high-risk afternoon hours.

The program included sports, arts, mentorship opportunities, and homework help. Post-implementation surveys showed a significant decrease in reported substance use among participants, validating the effectiveness of our data-driven approach.”

15. How would you approach a project that requires you to study the impact of social media on adolescent behavior?

Your potential employer wants to assess your research skills and methodologies, particularly in the context of contemporary issues like social media. They want to know if you can design a research study that will yield meaningful data, if you have the ability to adapt traditional psychological research methods to new media, and how you would handle any ethical considerations that arise from studying adolescent behavior.

Example: “I would approach this project through a multi-faceted lens.

First, I’d conduct a thorough literature review to understand previous research on the topic. This will help identify gaps and guide our study’s focus.

Next, I’d design an empirical study with both qualitative and quantitative methods. Surveys or interviews could capture adolescents’ personal experiences with social media. Meanwhile, behavioral experiments can provide measurable data on its impact.

Ethics is crucial in such sensitive research. We must ensure participants’ anonymity and consent while also considering potential risks and benefits.

Finally, interpreting results should involve collaboration with experts from different fields like sociology, technology, and education for a comprehensive understanding.”

16. Can you discuss a time when you had to question the validity of your own research findings?

As a social psychologist, you’re expected to produce reliable and valid research that contributes to the field’s understanding of human behavior. This question is designed to assess your ability to critically analyze your own work, identify potential flaws or biases, and make necessary adjustments to ensure the accuracy of your results. It speaks to your integrity and commitment to scientific rigor.

Example: “During a study on the impact of social media usage on mental health, my initial findings suggested no significant correlation. However, I was skeptical due to existing literature indicating otherwise.

I decided to reassess my research design and data collection methods. Upon review, I realized that self-reported measures could have led to response bias, affecting the validity of the results.

To rectify this, I incorporated objective measures like time spent online and revised the study. The new findings showed a moderate negative correlation between excessive social media use and mental health, aligning more with established research. This experience reinforced the importance of questioning one’s own work for robust outcomes.”

17. What methods have you used to ensure the reliability and validity of your data?

In the realm of social psychology, the accuracy and credibility of your research data is paramount. It’s the backbone of your findings and therefore your reputation. By asking this question, hiring managers aim to gauge your understanding of good research practices and your ability to implement them. They want to ensure that you can conduct research that is both rigorous and ethically sound.

Example: “In my research, I use a variety of methods to ensure data reliability and validity. For instance, I employ triangulation, where multiple data sources or methodologies are used to cross-verify results.

I also conduct pilot studies to test the effectiveness of instruments before full-scale implementation. This helps in refining measurement tools for better accuracy.

Furthermore, I utilize statistical tests such as Cronbach’s alpha to assess internal consistency reliability.

For validity, I consider both construct and content validity. Construct validity is ensured by aligning the operational definition of variables with theoretical constructs. Content validity involves expert reviews to ascertain that all aspects of a concept are measured.

Overall, these strategies help me maintain rigorous standards in my research work.”

18. How have you handled disagreements or conflicts within your research team?

Collaboration is a cornerstone of most research endeavors, from study design to data collection to publication. It’s inevitable that disagreements will arise, and it’s important to handle them effectively to ensure the progress and quality of the research. Your interviewers want to know that you can navigate these situations constructively, and that you’re able to balance advocating for your own ideas with listening to and respecting the perspectives of your colleagues.

Example: “In research, disagreements are inevitable. When such situations arise in my team, I adopt a collaborative approach to conflict resolution. I encourage open communication where everyone feels safe to express their views without fear of judgment or reprisal.

For instance, we once had differing opinions on the interpretation of some data. Instead of imposing my view, I initiated a meeting where each member presented their perspective and supporting evidence. This not only resolved the disagreement but also led to richer insights from diverse viewpoints.

Resolving conflicts promptly and constructively is crucial for maintaining a productive work environment. It fosters mutual respect and encourages innovative thinking.”

19. Can you describe a time when you had to defend your research methodology?

Being a social psychologist involves making complex decisions about how to measure human behavior, and there will be times when others question your methods. These situations can be challenging, but they’re also an important part of the scientific process. By asking this question, interviewers want to see that you can thoughtfully and confidently defend your research choices. They are also interested in your ability to handle critique and potentially adapt your methodology based on constructive feedback.

Example: “During a research project on social influence, my choice of using qualitative methods was questioned. Critics argued that quantitative data would provide more objective results.

I defended my approach by explaining the depth and richness of insights qualitative methods can offer. I highlighted how interviews and focus groups allow for exploration of individual experiences, perceptions, and motivations – crucial elements in understanding social influence.

This method also allowed us to identify new themes and patterns that might not have been captured through structured questionnaires. My defense was accepted, and the study yielded valuable findings that were well-received.”

20. How do you ensure that your research findings are communicated effectively to non-academic audiences?

This question is asked because as a social psychologist, your research won’t exist in a vacuum. It’s essential to be able to translate complex concepts into a language that’s accessible for a wider audience. This skill is essential for influencing policy, informing public opinion, and even obtaining funding for future research. Your ability to communicate effectively can also reflect on your teaching skills, an important aspect of a career in academia.

Example: “To effectively communicate research findings to non-academic audiences, I focus on simplifying complex concepts and using relatable examples. It’s crucial to avoid jargon and use clear, everyday language that the audience can understand. Visual aids like charts, graphs, or infographics are also helpful in making data more digestible. Furthermore, I emphasize the practical implications of the research, as people often connect better with information that has a direct impact on their lives. Lastly, it’s important to be open and responsive to questions, ensuring any misunderstandings are clarified.”

21. Can you provide an example of how you have used statistical analysis in your research?

Being a social psychologist involves a significant amount of research, and a key aspect of this is being able to understand and apply statistical analysis. This question helps the interviewer assess your ability to use statistical techniques to analyze and interpret data, which is crucial for drawing meaningful conclusions from your research. Your answer can demonstrate your technical skills, as well as your ability to think critically and solve complex problems.

Example: “In my research on the impact of social media usage on mental health, I used statistical analysis extensively. I collected data through surveys and conducted a regression analysis to determine any correlation between time spent on social media and reported levels of anxiety or depression.

The results showed a significant positive correlation, indicating that higher social media use could potentially lead to increased mental health issues. This was crucial in supporting our hypothesis and provided valuable insights for further studies on digital wellbeing.

So, statistical analysis is an essential tool in my research process, providing empirical evidence to support theoretical concepts.”

22. How have you integrated the principles of social psychology into your teaching methods?

As a social psychologist, your understanding of human behavior and group dynamics should inform your teaching style. The question aims to gauge how well you can apply your knowledge in the field to your teaching practices. This can include fostering a safe and inclusive learning environment, creating engaging group activities, or using real-world examples to illustrate concepts. Your answer will give the interviewer insights into your pedagogical philosophy and your ability to make complex psychological concepts accessible to students.

Example: “Incorporating social psychology principles into my teaching methods is crucial. For instance, I use the concept of group dynamics to foster a collaborative learning environment. This encourages students to learn from each other and understand different perspectives.

I also utilize cognitive dissonance theory to challenge students’ preconceived notions, prompting them to critically analyze their beliefs. Furthermore, I apply self-perception theory in assessments by encouraging self-evaluation, which fosters personal growth and self-awareness.

By integrating these principles, I aim to create an engaging and dynamic educational atmosphere that promotes critical thinking and interpersonal understanding.”

23. Can you discuss a time when you had to deal with ethical dilemmas in your research?

Ethics is a cornerstone in the field of psychology, especially in research. Your ability to navigate ethical dilemmas speaks volumes about your integrity, judgement, and respect for your research participants. By asking this question, hiring managers are looking to understand how you handle complex ethical situations and whether you can uphold the highest standards of ethical conduct in your work.

Example: “During a research project on the impact of socioeconomic status on cognitive development in children, I encountered an ethical dilemma. We found that some participants were living in conditions detrimental to their mental health.

While our role as researchers was to observe and report findings, it felt morally wrong not to intervene. After discussing with my team, we decided to maintain our professional boundaries but also provided participants with information about local resources they could access for help.

This experience taught me the importance of balancing empathy with professionalism in research.”

24. How would you handle a situation where a research participant is not providing truthful responses?

The essence of social psychology research is the collection of accurate data from research participants. When participants are dishonest or misleading, it can drastically skew results and impact the validity of a study. So, potential employers want to know that you have the skills and strategies to handle such situations, ensuring the integrity of your research.

Example: “In such a situation, I would first ensure that the participant understands the importance of honest responses for the integrity of the research. If this doesn’t work, it might be beneficial to use indirect questioning techniques or structured questionnaires which can elicit more truthful responses.

However, if dishonesty continues, as an ethical researcher, I may have to exclude their data from the study. It’s crucial to maintain the validity and reliability of the research above all else.”

25. What is your approach towards interdisciplinary research in social psychology?

Interdisciplinary research is the name of the game in social psychology. When hiring managers ask this question, they want to know how you approach combining knowledge from different fields to gain a more comprehensive understanding of social behavior. This indicates not only your ability to think outside the box, but also your capacity to work collaboratively with professionals from varying disciplines.

Example: “Interdisciplinary research in social psychology is crucial for gaining a holistic understanding of human behavior. My approach involves integrating insights from diverse fields such as sociology, anthropology, and neuroscience. This collaboration allows us to explore the complex interplay between individual cognition, group dynamics, and societal structures.

Moreover, I use mixed methods combining qualitative and quantitative data. Qualitative analysis provides rich, contextualized insights while quantitative data offers statistical rigor.

In essence, interdisciplinary research enriches our comprehension of social phenomena, fostering innovative solutions to pressing social issues.”

26. Can you elaborate on a time when you had to manage a large-scale research project?

Large-scale research projects are a significant part of the social psychologist’s job, often involving various complications and requiring diligent management. The question aims to assess your experience and competence in overseeing such projects, including planning, team coordination, problem-solving, and meeting deadlines. It also seeks to understand how you handle pressure and adapt to unexpected changes or challenges.

Example: “During my PhD, I led a research project investigating the impact of social media on self-esteem. This involved coordinating a team to collect data from over 10,000 participants, managing ethical approval processes, and ensuring rigorous data analysis.

Our challenge was handling such a large dataset while maintaining accuracy in our findings. To address this, we automated part of the data cleaning process with Python scripts, which increased efficiency and reduced human error.

The study resulted in significant insights into how different demographics interact with social media and its effects on their self-perception. It was published in a high-impact journal, demonstrating successful management of a large-scale research project.”

27. How have you ensured your research findings are accessible to people with varying levels of understanding of social psychology?

This question is a way for the interviewers to assess your communication skills. In the role of a social psychologist, it’s not just about conducting research and drawing conclusions. It’s also about clearly communicating these findings to a wide range of people – from fellow professionals in the field to laymen who may not have an understanding of social psychology. This skill is critical as it enables your work to have the widest possible impact.

Example: “In my research, I aim to make findings accessible through various methods. One way is by using clear and simple language in reports, avoiding jargon as much as possible.

I also use visual aids like graphs or diagrams to illustrate complex ideas. These can be more intuitive for those unfamiliar with the subject.

Moreover, when presenting findings, I adapt my approach based on the audience’s level of understanding. For instance, if speaking to a non-academic audience, I focus on practical implications rather than theoretical underpinnings.

Lastly, I believe in open access publishing to ensure anyone interested can reach our work. This democratizes knowledge, making it available beyond academic circles.”

28. Can you discuss a time when your research findings were not well received by the public?

This question is about resilience and how you handle criticism or rejection. As a social psychologist, your research may challenge societal norms or reveal uncomfortable truths. At times, these findings may not be welcomed by the public. Interviewers want to know how you handle such situations, whether you can stand by your research while also addressing concerns and criticisms in a respectful and professional manner.

Example: “In a study I conducted on the impact of social media on mental health, my findings suggested that excessive use could lead to increased anxiety and depression. These results were not well received by the public, particularly those heavily invested in social media platforms.

The backlash was intense with many questioning the validity of the research. However, as a Social Psychologist, it’s crucial to remain objective and stand by empirical evidence despite potential controversy. It also opened up an opportunity for dialogue about responsible usage and digital wellbeing.”

29. How do you handle criticism or negative feedback about your research work?

Research, especially in the field of social psychology, often encounters criticism and negative feedback due to its subjective nature and the diversity of perspectives. This question allows interviewers to gauge your resilience, your ability to adapt and improve, and your commitment to the scientific process. Your response can enlighten them about your professional maturity and your approach to constructive criticism, both of which are essential in a research-oriented field.

Example: “Criticism and negative feedback are integral parts of research work. I view them as opportunities for growth rather than setbacks. When I receive such feedback, I take a step back to objectively analyze the points raised.

If the criticism is valid, I strive to incorporate it into my work to improve the quality of my research. In cases where I disagree with the feedback, I initiate a constructive discussion with the critic to gain more insight into their perspective.

Maintaining an open mind and being receptive to diverse viewpoints is crucial in social psychology. This approach ensures continuous learning and improvement in my research work.”

30. Can you provide an example of how you have used your research findings to influence change in social behavior?

As a social psychologist, your research is all about understanding human behavior in social contexts. But the real value of your work comes when you can use your findings to influence positive change, whether that’s on an individual, community, or societal level. So, hiring managers want to know if you have the ability to translate your theoretical knowledge into practical applications that can make a real difference.

Example: “In a recent project, I studied the impact of public health campaigns on smoking cessation. My research found that messages emphasizing immediate health benefits were more effective than those highlighting long-term consequences.

Based on these findings, we redesigned a local anti-smoking campaign to focus on short-term gains like improved breathing and taste perception. Post-campaign surveys showed an increase in quit attempts, suggesting our strategy was successful. This demonstrates how empirical research can directly inform strategies for social behavior change.”

30 Quarry Manager Interview Questions and Answers

30 legal associate interview questions and answers, you may also be interested in..., 30 flatbed driver interview questions and answers, 30 replenishment analyst interview questions and answers, 30 planning assistant interview questions and answers, 30 property developer interview questions and answers.