Interviewing as a Data Collection Method: A Critical Review

This review aimed to answer the question of how many interviews are enough for one qualitative research? The question ‘how many interviews are enough for one qualitative research is persistently controversial among qualitative researchers in social science. For this frequently occurring question especially among novice practitioners, the majority of scholars are opted to say no universally guiding rule to decide on a required number of sample for qualitative research rather ‘it depends’. But, this also raises another insight among researchers urging them to look for different things, i.e., on what circumstance would be making a decision about the required number of respondents depend? Though we lack one guideline dictating researchers how to decide on the number of sample size, the majority of researchers agree on one reasonable answer this is ‘it depends’. Indeed, in our work, we endeavor to identify, on what it depends? We also attempted to figure out or indicate the commonly referred range of sample size in qualitative research. Generally when we sum up our review work, the decision on “How many” is depended on several factors among which the following are some; the focus of the research, the type of research question, available resource and time, institutional committee requirements, the judgments of epistemic community in which a researcher is located, the nature of the selected group, the domain of inquiry, the experience of the researcher with qualitative research, and so on. Specific to number 20-60 is the most frequently observed range of sample size in qualitative research which of course is determined by the aforementioned factors.

Qualitative social science research is fundamentally embedded in grounded theory concerned with how the social world is interpreted, realized, understood and experienced, or produced. Qualitative investigation seeks answers to their questions in the realistic world. They congregate what they see, hear and read from the people and places and from events and activities and their main purpose are to learn about some aspects of the social world and to generate new understandings that can be used by that social world. The main objective of this study is the interpretation of social world especially of cultures and people’s life-ways rather than seeking causal explanations for social-cultural practices. Nevertheless, in very rapidly changing information dominated globalized world, innovative traditions of the perception of emerging local and global contexts and realities need to be exposed and accepted as well as practiced in qualitative social science research. Janapriya Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, Vol. III (December 2014), page: 54-61

Australia employs an evidence-based approach to public health policy, emphasizing disease prevention, health promotion, and healthcare access that is informed by relevant research. However, implementing effective policy can be challenging due to the complexity of various public health issues. Social and behavioral factors significantly impact individual and community health outcomes, necessitating a deeper understanding of their interrelationships. Social science theories and methodologies provide critical insights into the complex relationships between individuals and society. This perspective paper highlights the critical role of qualitative social science research in shaping public policy by offering rich, contextual insights that quantitative data alone cannot capture. This article examines the benefit of incorporating qualitative social science research in a New South Wales (NSW) local health district's pursuit of evidence-based approaches. Through five case studies, we demonstrate how qualitative social science research has been instrumental in addressing key public health challenges, particularly in managing zoonotic diseases and pandemics, ultimately informing and shaping public health policy.

Over the years the research endeavours in social sciences have been directed towards producing profound discoveries about humankind and the society they live in. Now-a-days qualitative research has been flourishing in many fields of the social sciences. Rapid social change and the resulting diversification of life scenarios are increasingly confronting social researchers with new social contexts and perspectives. There is a specific relevance for qualitative research to the study of social contexts and life situations. This has lead to the development of several social theories and social research methods which have still continued to develop in order to understand the diverse social problems. The challenge for social scientists and researchers worldwide is to continue in the search for a unified consensus on what methodology is to be adopted for research for meeting the emerging diverse needs of humankind and the society. This thought has led to the proliferation of pluralism or multi-method research in which the researcher synthesizes multiple research methodologies in order to study social problems in a holistic way. This concept of pluralism in research has to a greater extend subverted methodological tribalism which had existed till the recent past. This paper focuses on the philosophical assumptions as guidelines to research paradigms have influenced the development of social research theory and social research methods towards pluralism. This paper intends to explore pluralism in qualitative Social Science researches as it may be applied methodologically and philosophically. In this context, the paper heeds a thought on refocusing pluralistic qualitative research in terms of its needs and demands based on the level and depth of the study undertaken. Key Terms: Qualitative research, methodological pluralism, research paradigms, philosophical assumptions

This introduction prefaces the papers that comprise this special issue entitled 'Using Video in Social Science and Health Research' (ISBN 978-1-921348-24-2). This issue contributes to a recent burgeoning of interest in, and use of, video based methodologies in the health and social sciences. This collection of papers, received from Austria, Australia and the United Kingdom, shows video-recording to be a truly multidisciplinary resource that is adopted to assist research into diverse contexts and topics, involving collaborative engagements with research participants from all walks of life. Video methodologies are clearly creative, evolving, challenging and rewarding.With many people using video cameras to record important life events, lay access to video recording equipment is common. In turn, popular video recordings are frequently shared on websites where they are accessed not only by people known to the participants or recorder, but by unknown individuals in a myriad of geographic locations. People are increasingly accustomed to having their everyday lives recorded, often with the understanding that the footage may be viewed by numerous other people. To use video recordings in research is to harness this wider cultural aspect which in turn can reveal the complexities of everyday experiences and realities.INTRODUCING THE PAPERS OF THE SPECIAL ISSUEThe majority of papers in this special issue adopt a participatory approach to investigating the daily experiences of participants. For example, Foster's project saw her become a fellow member with her participants in the production of video accounts about parenting in circumstances of economic disadvantage (2009). A participatory approach also features in the applications of video research in this issue that are informed by ethnography. For instance, three papers contribute to the development of two specific methodologies: 'video ethnography' and 'videoreflexivity' in Australian tertiary hospital settings. Carroll (2009) uses a feminist theoretical framework to unpack aspects of power embedded in the relationship between the researcher, participants and the video camera in video ethnography and video-reflexivity. Forsyth's paper identifies the way that differing modalities of engagement with the video camera during video ethnography led to two participant groups performing, accounting for and redesigning their work in contrasting ways. Iedema and colleagues' research (2009) engaged clinicians in reflexive viewing of their work, which led clinicians to creatively redesign problematic aspects of their handover practices. In a similar vein, Grant and Luxford (2009) video child and family health nurses interacting with migrant mothers and ask the nurses to watch the footage to assist in their reflection on intercultural communication practices. Each of these papers emphasise the value of clinician-led learning and practice change that result from the research adopting these methods.Also using video with clinicians, Leap and colleagues' paper (2009) incorporated video recordings of consultations and discussions with women, carers and health professionals as one component of an instrumental tool for training midwives and other health care professionals. The study showed that incorporating video methods with text based resources facilitated interactive inter-professional learning to a greater extent than would have been possible with a solely textbased tool. This highlights a broader trend empiricised by this special issue: a shift in qualitative social science research from a reliance on text-based data collection, analysis, and dissemination to more dialogic, evolving methodologies.Lammer's research (2009) also utilised video recordings of patients and clinicians. Her paper in this issue shows how the combination of video, visual art, interviews and ethnography richly conveyed the experiences of women undergoing surgical treatment for breast cancer. By presenting these accounts to clinicians, Lammer aimed to enhance the emotional communicative competence of clinicians (2009). …

In the ever-evolving landscape of qualitative social science research, innovative methodologies are crucial for capturing the complexities of human behavior and societal dynamics. Bricolage, a versatile approach derived from Claude Lévi-Strauss’s structuralist inquiry, has flourished within post-structuralism, post-modernism, critical theories, feminism, and cultural studies. Despite its growing recognition, challenges persist in comprehending and applying bricolage due to its interdisciplinary and eclectic nature. More established research methodologies face limitations in adapting to contemporary realities, whereas bricolage offers a pliable and adaptive lens. This paper explores bricolage’s conceptual underpinnings and real-world application, aiming to underline the importance of embracing innovative research methodologies. By presenting bricolage as a potent tool for generating knowledge, this study seeks to inspire researchers to explore its rich potential in understanding the multifaceted landscapes of human experience.

Reflexivity as a concept and practice is widely recognized and acknowledged in qualitative social science research. In this article, through an account of the ‘reflexive moments’ I encountered during my doctoral research, which employed critical theory perspective and constructivist grounded theory methodology, I elaborate how ethics, methodology and theory construction are intertwined. Further, I dwell on the significance of reflexivity, particularly in qualitative research analysing bioethics concepts. Through an account of the universal ethical principles that ‘I’, as a researcher, encounter, and a micro-analysis of the observed relationships that influence the theoretical construction and arguments developed, I explore the quandaries an ethics researcher undertaking a reflexive approach faces. I elucidate that reflexivity unveils – for both researcher and reader – how the researcher(s) arrive(s) at certain positions during the knowledge construction process. I conclude by stating that reflexivity demystifies the moral and epistemological stances of both the study and researcher(s).

The pharmaceuticalisation of sleep is a contentious issue. Sleep medicines get a ‘bad press’ due to their potential for dependence and other side effects, including studies reporting increased mortality risks for long‐term users. Yet relatively little qualitative social science research has been conducted into how people understand and negotiate their use/non‐use of sleep medicines in the context of their everyday lives. This paper draws on focus group data collected in the UK to elicit collective views on and experiences of prescription hypnotics across different social contexts. Respondents, we show, drew on a range of moral repertoires which allowed them to present themselves and their relationships with hypnotics in different ways. Six distinct repertoires about hypnotic use are identified in this regard: the ‘deserving’ patient, the ‘responsible’ user, the ‘compliant’ patient, the ‘addict’, the ‘sinful’ user and the ‘noble’ non user. These users and non‐users are constructed drawing on cross‐cutting themes of addiction and control, ambivalence and reflexivity. Such issues are in turn discussed in relation to recent sociological debates on the pharmaceuticalisation/de‐pharmaceuticalisation of everyday life and the consumption of medicines in the UK today.

Abstract: Autoethnography is prominent in qualitative social science research but is relatively less common in accounting research, though its influence is beginning to grow as researchers recognize this rich and innovative methodological approach. Autoethnography enables the researcher themselves to form a subject of lived inquiry within the social context of accounting and its environs. For qualitative accounting researchers this offers new forms of knowing and understanding experience, emotion and identity in the social context of the accounting profession or accounting academia, or in relation to the social construction of accounting itself. This chapter outlines what autoethnography is as both a research process and a product of research; explores the ontological, epistemological and methodological issues arising from such an approach; discusses the various forms that autoethnography takes; outlines ways of writing autoethnography; illustrates how it has been used in contemporary accounting research; discusses some of the dilemmas and tensions involved; and evaluates its future possibilities in accounting research.

This paper problematizes the current use of interviews in qualitative research, questioning whether interview data might have become privileged over other types of data. Seeking to explore how interviews have been used in top-tier qualitative research, our study is grounded in a systematic analysis of 353 empirical articles that use interviews published in Academy of Management Journal and Administrative Science Quarterly between 1986 and 2020. Our analysis resulted in four interrelated themes—hierarchy of data, marginalization of the researcher, disappearing contexts, and loss of subjectivity—that we view as “silences” related to the use and predominance of interviews in qualitative research. Building from our presentation of each theme, we conclude with a way forward in how researchers may engage with interviews to develop more impactful and interesting theoretical contributions.

Who is sensitising whom? A participatory interview guide development as an awareness tool within a health care research project

Hollway and Jefferson’s free association narrative interview method is an approach to qualitative research interviewing that draws on concepts and practices traditionally associated with psychoanalytic therapy. Owing to this “psychosocial” framework, the method is an attractive proposition to psychodynamically orientated practitioner-researchers and various studies by researchers in counselling and clinical psychology and the allied fieldsof social work and mental health nursing have made use of the method or aspects of it. In this article, I describe and reflect on the completion of one study informed by the method which sought to explore how professionals working in English local authority children’s services experience the suffering of parents. Specifically, I am concerned with some of the more practical issues involved in doing the research. The topics covered comprise gaining access to and interviewing a suitable sample of professionals; interviewing technique and the analysis of interview material; and the role of researcher reflexivity and the use of the researcher’s “countertransference” experience (with a specific concern for boredom).Overall, the article contributes to furthering thinking about this method as a tool of social work research and what it means to do qualitative research and research interviews with social work practitioners in a psychoanalytically informed way.

This study explores foundations of qualitative social work research. A template-based review was completed on 100 articles from social work journals. Reviewers examined five things: (1) purpose or aims of research, (2) rationale or justification for work, (3) populations studied, (4) presence of four markers (addressing theory, paradigm, reflexivity, and power dynamics), and (5) implications presented. Results underscore exploratory nature of qualitative social work research; authors were most likely to use word explore and least likely to use term to describe their aims. The most common rationale given for research was a gap in literature (77%), followed by severity or extent of problem (50%). Authors emphasized perspectives of respondents, who were most likely to be social work practitioners (39%) or clients (28%). Among markers examined, authors were most likely to mention use of theory (55%) and a research paradigm (51%) and least likely to apply reflexivity (16%) or acknowledge power dynamics inherent in research (7%). Finally, authors were most likely to identify practice implications in their work (90%), followed by research (60%), theory (38%), and policy (29%). KEY WORDS: epistemology; qualitative methods; research methods; social work research; theory Social inquiry is shaped by epistemology of researcher, his or her underlying assumptions about process of knowing (Denzin, 2002). Epistemology may be seen as theories of knowledge that justify knowledge-building process that is actively or consciously adopted by (Carter & Little, 2007; Pascale, 2010). These assumptions guide our decisions about topics, research questions, theories, methods, analyses, and conclusions and help us evaluate knowledge contributions of published work (Carter & Little, 2007; Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2011; Pascale, 2010). Koch and Hamngton (1998) recognized that bring to research product, data generated, a range of literature, a positioning of this literature, a positioning of oneself, and moral socio-political contexts (p. 882). Examining ways our social locations shape our process of knowing can help us understand why certain questions get asked and answered, examine how values shape observation (Pascale, 2010; Takacs, 2003, p. 37). Anastas (2004) noted that researcher's epistemology affects kind of scholarly work done, how one values scholarship and understands its political import, and how one situates oneself in relation to work. Marshall and Rossman (2006) noted importance of epistemological integrity, in which authors account for logical and compelling connections between genre, overall strategy, research questions, design, and (p. 55). Researchers demonstrate their engagement with work through explicit discussion of their research paradigm or inquiry tradition, which is fundamental for rigorous qualitative research (Anastas, 2004; Marshall & Rossman, 2006). Qualitative research should reveal a consistency and integrity of approach that is easily recognized by reader and reviewer (Padgett, 2009, p. 102). Given importance of epistemology to research endeavor, social work researchers must make explicit decisions made in process of inquiry if they are serious about contributing to knowledge base of profession. As Padgett pointed out, the burden of proof is on researcher (p. 102) to be accountable to readers regarding underlying assumptions and logic of our work. We focus our discussion on epistemology as research praxis that contributes to development of knowledge in our field. Our aim in this section of article is to discuss practice of epistemology to support social work researchers using qualitative methods to think and write more explicitly about foundations of our work. …

Focus groups as a tool for critical social research in nurse education

Digital features like virtual reality have hardly been used in the framework of data collection in qualitative social work research. Virtual reality holds specific promise because it allows the immersion of participants in a situation and has the potential to strengthen the ecological validity of data. In this light, we examined the use of a virtual reality serious game in qualitative in-person interviews in the framework of a prevention-oriented HIV social research project. We designed and developed an immersive virtual reality serious game, and integrated it into 24 problem-centred in-person interviews. The integration was feasible, and the virtual reality serious game was well accepted. It prompted participants to elaborate their lived experiences more extensively and in depth. Participants subsequently recalled episodes they had not mentioned before, complemented their narratives and brought up new topics. The atmosphere became less formal, and participants were even more communicative. The use of virtual reality seems to have the potential to open up new perspectives, broaden epistemic possibilities and complement the qualitative methods used to investigate, in particular, verbal and non-verbal communication and interaction processes. From an ethical perspective, the use of virtual reality should be well reflected upon regarding possible after-effects for the participants.