Monday, 22 October 2012

Don't overlook the framing of interview questions


In this week’s reading, Luker discusses a few ethnographic research methods: participant observation, interview, and focus group. She talked in details about the preparation work, procedures, nuances and cautions of each method. Luker expresses a generally positive attitude towards potential bias/disadvantages in research. Whereas Knight is rather fair and objective presenting both pros and cons and especially cautions the reader about the cons. I like Luker’s approach and I see her chapter more like a manual where positivity is seen as a momentum to overcome obstacles in research.

The part I found most interesting is Luker mentioned that people usually make sense of the world according the limitaed numbers of tools and templates that available to them at that time and space. Thus when conducting interviews, it is important to be aware of how people put together the inventory of tools available to them. I just conducted an interview recently for one of the assignments in another course. The unexpected challenge I encountered was that I found the interviewee and myself speaking in different mindsets. Even though I did preparation prior to the interview, the questions I asked still somewhat reflected the tools and information available to me to frame my views on certain issues, and such frame is not shared by others outside the circle and thus they do not understand the question the way I intended. I needed to elaborate a little to let them know what I was looking for, and of course the interview took much longer than I expected. I’m sure some of it was due to my inexperience, yet I’ve learnt that it is vital to form meaningful and effective interview questions. Even so, unexpected issues would still rise in the field. It is a continuous endeavor to adjust and perfect not only the questions, but also strategies, soft skills and nuances like body languages throughout a research. 

No comments:

Post a Comment