Participants’ experiences of the qualitative interview: considering the importance of research paradigms
By Jennifer R. Wolgemuth, Zeynep Erdil-Moody, Tara Opsal, Jennifer E. Cross, Tanya Kaanta, Ellyn M. Dickmann, S. Colomer. 2015
181 citations recorded by the source corpus.
We used a multiple-case study to investigate participants’ experiences in interviews from six qualitative studies that differed in interview orientations, designs, methods, participants, and topics. Roulston’s (2010a, 2010b) interview orientation heuristic guided our ‘paradigm-driven’ analysis of participants’ experiences. We found no differences in participants’ articulation of benefits and risks by interview orientation. Participants’ experiences differed based on the opportunity to reflect on their interview experiences, the sensitivity of the topic explored, and the number of interviews conducted. We discuss the implications of our findings for ‘paradigm-driven’ qualitative research and suggest ethical questions qualitative interview researchers can ask to maximize the benefits of their interviews.
Subfields: Education, Public Administration, Sociology and Political Science
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3de7c13d1adac3698faf53fa712954593a485256
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Education
In Public Administration
In Sociology and Political Science
Citations in the corpus
- Feedback from research participants: are member checks useful in qualitative research? (2017, background): “Member checks may also be conducted with specific participants who may have concerns about being identified, how they are represented in a report, or have asked that some parts of the interview to be excluded (Wolgemuth et al. 2015, p. 360).”