5.3 Conducting the Interviews
61
The Phase 1 open-ended interviews ranged from 30 min to one hour and revolved
around a series of questions that explored the participants’ perceptions of social
investment in O&G sector, and the research design, and elicited their recommendations for the research design, research field and recruitment process (for
recommendations from P16, P18 and P19, see Appendix F).
Participants in Phases 2, 3 and 4 participants took part in semi-structured interviews (Appendix C and D) and questions were made available to all participants before the interviews took place. Each interview lasted for approximately
40 min (with few exceptions) and were audio-recorded (with two exceptions) and
transcribed. One Phase 1 interview was not audio-recorded but notes were taken.
After each interview, I took field notes of my perceptions of how the interview
went my field notes added a reflective data to each interview transcript that allowed
me to contextualise some of the participants’ (non) responses and interactions. Each
interview was unique, although I followed a similar sequence of interview questions. The way I participated in the interviews—through making comments and
expressing personal views—changed over time from April 2015 to January 2017, as
demonstrated in my following field note examples.
The following excerpt from my field note reflection from the first interview in
April 2015 (Phase 2) indicates how I perceived one participant’s response as being
influenced by my positioning during the interview.
The interview happened in a great atmosphere. P1 was very comfortable about sharing his/her
ideas and impressions. Nonetheless, I was a bit nervous and I frequently interrupted him/her
to talk about my own experience. My positioning annoyed me because I had the feeling that
I somehow was influencing P1 to give the responses that I wanted to hear.
However, a reflection from an interview conducted in February 2016 indicated a shift
in my way of conducting the research interviews.
Today I felt terrible! The interview wasn’t so great! I felt that I did not make P5 comfortable
during the interview. I was trying to be quieter and I think I was just too quiet. He/she just
wasn’t at ease and the interview didn’t flow…
By January 2017, my approach was more relaxed, which seemed to make the
interviews flowed more effectively. Here is another excerpt from my field notes.
Today I felt more confident about not relying on the interview questions, and the interview
resembled a friendly, but deep conversation. After the interview was finished, I checked the
audio and my actual interview questions and I realised I had covered it all! Impressive! For
future interviews, I will NOT read the questions, ever again!
I am aware that my reflections do not necessarily reflect the participants’ perceptions
and that writing about my interpretations of the interview without asking for my
participants’ perception makes my interpretation partial (Nairn, Munro, & Smith,
2005). Nonetheless, my field notes reveal the challenges of establishing rapport
during the interviews and how this seemed to be affected when I was too silent or too
talkative. Rapport did not necessarily depend on giving my personal views, rather it
involved making the participant as comfortable as possible by acknowledging their
participation and creating a sense of the value to their contributions (DiCicco-Bloom
& Crabtree, 2006).
61
The Phase 1 open-ended interviews ranged from 30 min to one hour and revolved
around a series of questions that explored the participants’ perceptions of social
investment in O&G sector, and the research design, and elicited their recommendations for the research design, research field and recruitment process (for
recommendations from P16, P18 and P19, see Appendix F).
Participants in Phases 2, 3 and 4 participants took part in semi-structured interviews (Appendix C and D) and questions were made available to all participants before the interviews took place. Each interview lasted for approximately
40 min (with few exceptions) and were audio-recorded (with two exceptions) and
transcribed. One Phase 1 interview was not audio-recorded but notes were taken.
After each interview, I took field notes of my perceptions of how the interview
went my field notes added a reflective data to each interview transcript that allowed
me to contextualise some of the participants’ (non) responses and interactions. Each
interview was unique, although I followed a similar sequence of interview questions. The way I participated in the interviews—through making comments and
expressing personal views—changed over time from April 2015 to January 2017, as
demonstrated in my following field note examples.
The following excerpt from my field note reflection from the first interview in
April 2015 (Phase 2) indicates how I perceived one participant’s response as being
influenced by my positioning during the interview.
The interview happened in a great atmosphere. P1 was very comfortable about sharing his/her
ideas and impressions. Nonetheless, I was a bit nervous and I frequently interrupted him/her
to talk about my own experience. My positioning annoyed me because I had the feeling that
I somehow was influencing P1 to give the responses that I wanted to hear.
However, a reflection from an interview conducted in February 2016 indicated a shift
in my way of conducting the research interviews.
Today I felt terrible! The interview wasn’t so great! I felt that I did not make P5 comfortable
during the interview. I was trying to be quieter and I think I was just too quiet. He/she just
wasn’t at ease and the interview didn’t flow…
By January 2017, my approach was more relaxed, which seemed to make the
interviews flowed more effectively. Here is another excerpt from my field notes.
Today I felt more confident about not relying on the interview questions, and the interview
resembled a friendly, but deep conversation. After the interview was finished, I checked the
audio and my actual interview questions and I realised I had covered it all! Impressive! For
future interviews, I will NOT read the questions, ever again!
I am aware that my reflections do not necessarily reflect the participants’ perceptions
and that writing about my interpretations of the interview without asking for my
participants’ perception makes my interpretation partial (Nairn, Munro, & Smith,
2005). Nonetheless, my field notes reveal the challenges of establishing rapport
during the interviews and how this seemed to be affected when I was too silent or too
talkative. Rapport did not necessarily depend on giving my personal views, rather it
involved making the participant as comfortable as possible by acknowledging their
participation and creating a sense of the value to their contributions (DiCicco-Bloom
& Crabtree, 2006).