Wait: Have I ACTUALLY completed my draft?! And interview ponderings.....

Well I never thought I'd see the day....the day when I can finally say I have finished my draft........finished!! Well for now at least.....I'm in slight ignorant bliss as it's technically 'Easter holidays' so feedback isn't possible right now. But it does mean I don't have to spend every waking moment feeling exceptionally guilty if I'm NOT doing something towards Module 2.

I have to admit, lockdown has allowed me to dedicate an increased amount of time to do the work. Although quarantine isn't my preferred state, I admit it's an effective way of getting study done!

I came to realise recently how useful it is to get some distance from an assignment before coming back to it. It gives the potential to look at something with new eyes which was helpful when making edits to my drafts. I was able to see my work from an outside perspective, almost stepping into an external reader's lense. It was therefore evident what needed further clarity. Sometimes I'd lose the thread of a topic mid paragraph, or observe that a connection was unclear. I suppose that's why peer proof reading can be a fruitful tool. 

I consider it a bit like perceiving a work of art. Five people could be looking at one painting and all will have their own perspectives on the meaning, style, intention, what they believe the artist was trying to convey. The artist responsible is the one who knows their true intentions, but in publicicing their work, they should come to expect some diverse perceptions.

However, no rest for the wicked. There is plenty to still be getting on with- especially as I have only very roughly planned the entire twelve week project and there are many preparation factors which need to be considered. Equally, you can never learn enough so I hope that I can use my time wisely to read some more literature to further enlighten myself, (rather than get hooked on Tiger King obviously).

One aspect I have been thinking more about is the interview process which serves as my method of data collection. Obviously, due to the current Covid-19 measures, face to face interviews may not be possible, but in an ideal situation they would be preferable. Given the nature of my research being that it is qualitative, I believe the quality of my data would be strengthened if I can capture authenticity from a participant. Words can only offer so much in an interview as it's not so much about WHAT is said, but HOW it is said.

As Robert Weiss states:

“Social cues, such as voice, intonation, body language etc. of the interviewee can give the interviewer a lot of extra information that can be added to the verbal answer of the interviewee on a question.” (Weiss, 1994).

I have been listening to the audio version of Weiss' book “Learning from Strangers” and it gives a great insight into the benefits of interviewing in qualitative research. 

Much of what is explained is relatable on a personal level as I am currently a participant for a medical trial which has been fairly extensive. The procedure I had requires monthly follow ups for at least a year, which means that every month I must attend appointments where I am interviewed in both semi structured and structured formats. I also have to complete up to 15 surveys and questionnaires, some qualitative in their approach and others more statistical.

I have to say, from experience I find it far more difficult to answer with a quantitative value when a topic is so intangible. Eg- “On a scale of 1-6, how much would it bother you if you were prevented from doing a certain behaviour? Well each month, my scale may be considered at different extents. It would depend on my frame of mind that day as to how I answer the question. Maybe I'm feeling more dramatic so I'll describe a 6, but the next morning I could pitch a 4! Yet none of these factors are taken into account when looking at the results, and from that one numerical value a chain of interpretation can arise during the analysis. 

 

Sometimes I'm so bored of answering questions that I just explain my answer is the same as last month “no change”. In fact, putting my critical hat on, the researcher often can be quite leading in her questioning with phrases such as “I presume that's the same as last month too?” or “I'm guessing that's still a 6?”. I've only noticed the behaviour of the researcher as I've been progressing over Module 2 as I'm suddenly so aware of all the work which goes into recruiting participants! 

I can reflect now on the ethical procedures which have been put in place which are far more extensive than are necessary in my research proposal. I have also recognised aspects such as the use of a participant number during all the audio recordings, and the effect note taking during the interviews has on how they flow. That being said, it's not my job to act as some sort of researcher audit committee! But I will use reflective observation during the coming months in the hope that I can gain more knowledge from the interviewing process.

Another resource I found useful was via Kvale (1996) who has defined nine different types of interview question which can be utilised.

• Introduction questions: to introduce the topic. 
  • Follow up questions: For elaboration eg: What did you mean...?' or Probing questions which are similar but more specific in their purpose. Do you have any examples?'
• Specifying questions: eg 'What did he say next?' 
  •  Direct questions: Which only have a yes or no answer. (I expect these will be few and far between when I come to interview). Indirect questions: will be preferable as they allow for expansion.
• Structuring questions: To move on to the next topic (perhaps if the participant is veering off the subject).
  • Interpreting questions: To clarify that you understand- vital for accuracy of interpretation.
• Silence: Something I never even considered! But is expected as a participant reflects/thinks.

(Kvale, 2006)

The next step for me would be to identify what I hope to discover through the interviews, so I can then begin to phrase my questions according to the above categories. I believe a process of trial and error will be necessary and there will be a continual learning process as I consider what did and didn't work. Of course, different participants will respond in different ways so I will use reflection in action to try and navigate my way through the process. Perhaps making decisions as I go as to how to phrase a topic so that it is effectively communicated.

 One aspect I didn't really ponder over was highlighted in an interesting TED talk I came across. The video displays Marc Pachter's experience of his career span which focused on questioning American Greats. In it, he explains what he believes makes a great interview. 

The main takeaway points I gathered are as follows:

 1) Empathy is vital. I will aim to convey my empathic attitude during any interview, really trying to understand and connect with what is being said. Empathy is the root of human connection and I believe that it promotes honesty. It hopefully would also make a participant feel at ease.

2) In his words “All people want is to be truthful about who they are”. He observed that the older age group perhaps had a more reflective attitude and were able to convey the ins and outs of their lifelong journey. I do hope to interview a range of ages, but I will acknowledge that seeking older participants who are in the 'past dancers' category may be preferable. 

3) One problem? The outer shell. Something I can relate to. The 'put on a show' automatic mentality of performers. It can sometimes be hard to crack through that outer persona to reveal the true thoughts and emotions of someone. Especially in a short interview window. Hopefully, knowing 3-5 of the 6 participants will help harvest authenticity.

I have included the link to the video below. I definitely recommend taking a look if you are planning to use interviews as a data collection technique! 

Marc Pachter: The art of the interview: 

"Marc Pachter has conducted live interviews with some of the most intriguing characters in recent American history as part of a remarkable series created for the Smithsonian's National Portrait Gallery. He reveals the secret to a great interview and shares extraordinary stories of talking with Steve Martin, Clare Booth Luce and more." 

 Pachter (2008)

Finally, my next step: Thinking about Pilot interviews which should be a great way to establish what 

may or may not work. I cannot plan these pilot intervews to be face to face just yet obviously....maybe later Spring? Summer? Will we be released from our 4 walled confinement by then? I'm keeping everything crossed!

References

 

Carter, A. (2020). Fresh Eyes Quote. Jpg http://www.picturequotes.com/fresh-eyes-quotes

    Kvale, S. (2006). InterViews: an introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

 

Pachter, M. (2008, January). Retrieved April 18, 2020, from https://www.ted.com/talk/marc_pachter_the_art_of_the_interview?language=en

Weiss, R. S. (1994). Learning from strangers, the art and method of qualitative interview studies. New York, NY:   Free Pr.