The Interview Method In Psychology

Key Takeaways

• Data Collection Through Conversation: An interview gathers information by having a researcher ask a participant questions directly, unlike a questionnaire completed alone.
• Structure Is a Trade-Off: Structured interviews are easy to replicate and compare; unstructured interviews sacrifice that consistency for richer, more detailed answers.
• Semi-Structured Interviews Are Most Common: They combine a fixed core of questions with the freedom to probe, making them the most widely used format in psychology research.
• Focus Groups Add Group Dynamics: Interviewing several people together saves time and can surface shared views, but conformity and dominant speakers can distort the data.
• The Interviewer Can Bias the Data: An interviewer’s gender, ethnicity, or perceived status can shape how participants respond, especially on sensitive topics.
• Not Ideal for Sensitive Topics: People often feel more comfortable disclosing sensitive information, such as truancy or discrimination, on an anonymous questionnaire than face to face.
• Ethics Require Genuine Informed Consent: Participants must know what the interview involves and how it will be recorded, with a real chance to remove material afterward.

How Do Interviews Work?

Researchers can ask different types of questions, generating different types of data. For example, closed questions provide people with a fixed set of responses, whereas open questions allow people to express what they think in their own words.

While face-to-face interviews are typical, researchers can also conduct interviews by telephone, email, or online chat, trading in-person cues for wider reach and lower cost.

The researcher will often record interviews, and the data will be written up as a transcript (a written account of interview questions and answers) which can be analyzed later.

It should be noted that interviews may not be the best method for researching sensitive topics (e.g., truancy in schools, discrimination, etc.) as people may feel more comfortable completing a questionnaire in private.

There are different types of interviews, with a key distinction being the extent of structure. Semi-structured is most common in psychology research. Unstructured interviews have a free-flowing style, while structured interviews involve preset questions asked in a particular order.

Structured Interview

A structured interview is a quantitative research method. The interviewer asks a set of prepared closed-ended questions from an interview schedule, reading them out exactly as worded.

Interview schedules have a standardized format, meaning the same questions are asked to each interviewee in the same order (see Fig. 1).

   Figure 1. An example of an interview schedule

The interviewer will not deviate from the interview schedule (except to clarify the meaning of the question) or probe beyond the answers received. Replies are recorded on a questionnaire. The researcher presets the order and wording of the questions, and sometimes the range of alternative answers.

A structured interview is also known as a formal interview (like a job interview).

Strengths

1. Structured interviews are easy to replicate because they use a fixed set of closed questions, which are simple to quantify and test for reliability.
2. Structured interviews are quick to conduct, so researchers can interview many people in a short time. This produces a large, representative sample whose findings can be generalized to the wider population.

Limitations

1. Structured interviews are not flexible. This means new questions cannot be asked impromptu (i.e., during the interview), as an interview schedule must be followed.
2. The answers from structured interviews lack detail as only closed questions are asked, which generates quantitative data. This means a researcher won’t know why a person behaves a certain way.

Unstructured Interview

Unstructured interviews do not use any set questions, instead, the interviewer asks open-ended questions based on a specific research topic, and will try to let the interview flow like a natural conversation. The interviewer modifies his or her questions to suit the candidate’s specific experiences.

Unstructured interviews are sometimes referred to as ‘discovery interviews’ and are more like a ‘guided conversation’ than a strictly structured interview. They are sometimes called informal interviews.

Unstructured interviews are most useful in qualitative research to analyze attitudes and values. Though they rarely provide a valid basis for generalization, unstructured interviews let researchers probe social actors’ subjective points of view.

Interviewer Self-Disclosure

Interviewer self-disclosure involves the interviewer revealing personal information or opinions during the research interview. This may increase rapport but risks changing dynamics away from a focus on facilitating the interviewee’s account.

In unstructured interviews, the informal conversational style may deliberately include elements of interviewer self-disclosure, mirroring ordinary conversation dynamics.

Interviewer self-disclosure risks changing the dynamics away from facilitation of interviewee accounts. It should not be ruled out entirely but requires skillful handling informed by reflection.

• Builds Rapport, Risks Convergence: An informal style with some self-disclosure can increase rapport and openness, but raises the chance participants echo the interviewer’s own opinions.
• True Neutrality Is Unlikely: Complete interviewer neutrality is rare; too much informality or self-disclosure can turn the interview into an ordinary conversation that produces consensus accounts.
• Risk of Intrusiveness: Overly personal disclosures can feel irrelevant or intrusive to participants and may invite unwanted intimacy on uncomfortable topics.
• Default to Caution: The safest approach avoids self-disclosure in most cases; an informal style still needs careful judgment and substantial interviewing experience.
• Redirect Personal Questions: If asked for personal opinions, the interviewer can note the defined roles and defer that discussion until after the interview.

Strengths

1. Unstructured interviews are more flexible as questions can be adapted and changed depending on the respondents’ answers. The interview can deviate from the interview schedule.
2. Unstructured interviews generate rich qualitative data through open questions, letting respondents talk in depth and in their own words.
3. They also have increased validity, because the interviewer can probe for deeper understanding, ask for clarification, and let the interviewee steer the interview’s direction.

Limitations

1. It can be time-consuming to conduct an unstructured interview and analyze the qualitative data (using methods such as thematic analysis).
2. Employing and training interviewers is more expensive than collecting data via questionnaires. For example, interviewers need skills such as the ability to establish rapport and knowing when to probe.
3. Interviews inevitably shape, or “co-construct,” the data collected: the researcher’s own questions and framing partly determine what a participant says, alongside the participant’s own account. Techniques like open questions only partly offset this.

Focus Group Interview

Focus group interview is a qualitative approach where a group of respondents are interviewed together, used to gain an in‐depth understanding of social issues.

This type of interview is often referred to as a focus group. The interviewer, or moderator, has the job of bringing the group to focus on the issue at hand. Initially, the goal was to reach a consensus among the group. As techniques for analyzing qualitative group data have developed, there is less emphasis on consensus building.

The method aims to obtain data from a purposely selected group of individuals rather than from a statistically representative sample of a broader population.

The interview moderator’s role is to keep the group interacting productively and on topic. Ideally, the moderator resembles the participants in appearance, has strong knowledge of the topic, and exercises mild, unobtrusive control over dominant talkers and shy participants.

A researcher must be highly skilled to conduct a focus group interview. For example, the moderator may need certain skills, including the ability to establish rapport and know when to probe.

Weiner (2005) used focus groups with Czech female factory workers both to build her interview schedule and to recruit participants for the study’s later stages.

Strengths

1. Group interviews generate rich qualitative data through open questions, letting respondents talk in depth and in their own words. This includes observational data, such as body language and facial expressions.
2. Group responses are helpful when researchers want to elicit perspectives on a shared experience. They also encourage diverse thinking, reduce researcher bias, and capture a wider range of views.
3. They also have increased validity, because participants who are used to talking in groups often feel more comfortable and behave more naturally.
4. When participants share common experiences, focus groups let them build on each other’s comments, producing richer data than individual interviews.
5. Focus groups are a type of group interview method used in market research and consumer psychology that are cost-effective for gathering the views of consumers.

Limitations

1. The researcher must ensure that they keep all the interviewees’ details confidential and respect their privacy. This is difficult when using a group interview. For example, the researcher cannot guarantee that the other people in the group will keep information private.
2. Group interviews are less reliable as they use open questions and may deviate from the interview schedule, making them difficult to repeat.
3. Focus groups also have potential pitfalls, such as conformity, social desirability, and oppositional behavior, that can reduce the usefulness of the data.

For example, group interviews may sometimes lack validity as participants may lie to impress the other group members. They may conform to peer pressure and give false answers.

To avoid these pitfalls, the interviewer must understand how people function in groups and how to lead a productive discussion.

Semi-Structured Interview

Semi-structured interviews lie between structured and unstructured interviews. The interviewer prepares the same set of questions to be answered by all interviewees. Additional questions might be asked during the interview to clarify or expand certain issues.

In semi-structured interviews, the interviewer has more freedom to digress and probe beyond the answers. The interview guide contains a list of questions and topics that need to be covered during the conversation, usually in a particular order.

Semi-structured interviews are most useful to address the ‘what’, ‘how’, and ‘why’ research questions. Researchers can perform both qualitative and quantitative analyses on data from semi-structured interviews.

Strengths

1. Semi-structured interviews allow respondents to answer more on their terms in an informal setting yet provide uniform information making them ideal for qualitative analysis.
2. The flexible nature of semi-structured interviews allows ideas to be introduced and explored during the interview based on the respondents’ answers.
3. Semi-structured interviews can provide reliable, comparable qualitative data. They also let the interviewer probe responses, asking the interviewee to clarify or expand on what they said.

Limitations

1. The data generated remain fundamentally shaped by the interview context itself. Analysis rarely acknowledges this endemic co-construction.
2. They are more time-consuming (to conduct, transcribe, and analyze) than structured interviews.
3. The quality of findings is more dependent on the individual skills of the interviewer than in structured interviews. Skill is required to probe effectively while avoiding biasing responses.

Narrative Interview

A narrative interview is a more recent, minimally structured approach that aims to reduce the interviewer’s influence on the interviewee’s account.

Rather than working through a list of questions, the interviewer often uses just one opening instruction, such as “Tell me about your childhood.” The interviewer then acts as an active listener who does not redirect the story’s flow.

Strengths

1. Narrative interviews aim to capture an unadulterated version of the interviewee’s reality, with minimal shaping from the interviewer’s own questions or assumptions.

Limitations

1. Some participants offer little data with so few prompts, and analyzing the rich accounts that narrative interviews do produce can take an extremely long time.

The Interviewer Effect

Face-to-face interviews raise methodological problems, because interviewers are themselves role players whose perceived status may influence how respondents reply.

Because an interview is a social interaction, the interviewer’s appearance or behavior may influence the respondent’s answers. This can bias the study’s results and make them invalid.

For example, the gender, ethnicity, body language, age, and social status of the interviewer can all create an interviewer effect. Rosenthal (1966) first identified this pattern: interviewer gender affects rapport, with female interviewees often treated more attentively and warmly than others. If there is a perceived status disparity between the interviewer and the interviewee, the results of interviews have to be interpreted with care. This is pertinent for sensitive topics such as health.

Consider a researcher investigating sexism among men: would a female interviewer be preferable to a male one? If a female interviewer were used, male participants might lie about being sexist to impress her, creating an interviewer effect.

Flooding interviews with researcher’s agenda

The interactional nature of interviews means the researcher fundamentally shapes the discourse, rather than just neutrally collecting it. This shapes what is talked about and how participants can respond.

• The interviewer’s assumptions, interests, and categories don’t just shape the specific interview questions asked. They also shape the framing, task instructions, recruitment, and ongoing responses/prompts.
• Flooding the interview with the researcher’s agenda makes it difficult to separate what comes from the participant from what reflects the interviewer’s concerns.
• The interviewer therefore shapes the participant’s talk, rather than the talk naturally reflecting the participant’s own views or practices.
• Avoiding this effect is difficult, because interviews inherently involve the researcher setting an agenda. Still, the talk extracted may say more about the interview process than the reality it claims to reflect.

Interview Design

First, you must choose whether to use a structured or unstructured interview.

Characteristics of Interviewers

Next, you must consider who will be the interviewer, and this will depend on what type of person is being interviewed. There are several variables to consider:

• Gender and age: This can greatly affect respondents’ answers, particularly on personal issues.
• Personal characteristics: Some people are easier to get on with than others. Also, the interviewer’s accent and appearance (e.g., clothing) can affect the rapport between the interviewer and interviewee.
• Language: The interviewer’s language should be appropriate to the vocabulary of the group of people being studied. For example, the researcher must change the questions’ language to match the respondents’ social background, age, educational level, social class, ethnicity, etc.
• Ethnicity: People may have difficulty interviewing people from different ethnic groups.
• Interviewer expertise should match research sensitivity: inexperienced students should avoid interviewing highly vulnerable groups.

Interview Location

An interview’s location can influence how the interviewer and interviewee relate, and may exaggerate a power dynamic in either direction. Researchers usually offer interviewees a choice of location to help them feel comfortable and encourage participation.

However, the interviewer’s safety is an overriding consideration. At minimum, a responsible person should know where the interviewer has gone and when they are due back.

Remote Interviews

The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated remote interviewing for research continuity. However online interview platforms provide increased flexibility even under normal conditions.

They enable access to participant groups across geographical distances without travel costs or arrangements. Online interviews can be efficiently scheduled to align with researcher and interviewee availability.

There are practical considerations in setting up remote interviews. Interviewees require access to internet and an online platform such as Zoom, Microsoft Teams or Skype through which to connect.

Certain modifications help build initial rapport in the remote format. Allowing time at the start of the interview for casual conversation while testing audio/video quality helps participants settle in. Minor delays can disrupt turn-taking flow, so alerting participants to speak slightly slower than usual minimizes accidental interruptions.

Keeping remote interviews under an hour avoids fatigue from staring at a screen. Seeking advanced ethical clearance for verbal consent at the interview start saves participant time. Adapting to the remote context shows care for interviewees and aids rich discussion.

However, it remains important to critically reflect on how removing in-person dynamics may shape the co-created data. Perhaps some nuances of trust and disclosure differ over video.

Developing an Interview Schedule

An interview schedule is a list of pre-planned, structured questions that have been prepared, to serve as a guide for interviewers, researchers and investigators in collecting information or data about a specific topic or issue.

1. List the key themes or topics that must be covered to address your research questions. This will form the basic content.
2. Organize the content logically, such as chronologically following the interviewee’s experiences. Place more sensitive topics later in the interview.
3. Develop the list of content into actual questions and prompts. Carefully word each question: keep them open-ended, non-leading, and focused on examples.
4. Add prompts to remind you to cover areas of interest.
5. Pilot test the interview schedule to check it generates useful data and revise as needed.
6. Be prepared to refine the schedule throughout data collection as you learn which questions work better.
7. Practice skills like asking follow-up questions to get depth and detail. Stay flexible to depart from the schedule when needed.
8. Keep questions brief and clear. Avoid multi-part questions that risk confusing interviewees.
9. Listen actively during interviews to determine which pre-planned questions can be skipped based on information the participant has already provided.

The key is balancing preparation with the flexibility to adapt questions based on each interview interaction. With practice, you’ll gain skills to conduct productive interviews that obtain rich qualitative data.

Types of Interview Questions

Spradley (1979) identified three broad question types interviewers can draw on to achieve different results:

• Descriptive Questions: Ask for a large amount of information about an event or place, such as “Could you describe your hospital ward for me?”
• Structural Questions: Help establish the meaning of an important concept to the interviewee, for example by exploring what a role or activity means to them.
• Contrast Questions: Ask how two words or ideas the interviewee has mentioned differ from each other, such as the difference between homework and schoolwork.

The Power of Silence

Strategic use of silence is a key technique to generate interviewee-led data, but it requires judgment about appropriate timing and duration to maintain mutual understanding.

• Unlike ordinary conversation, the interviewer aims to facilitate the interviewee’s contribution without interrupting. This often means resisting the urge to speak the moment an interviewee’s sentence seems to end (a “turn construction unit,” or TCU).
• Leaving a silence after a TCU encourages the interviewee to provide more material without being led by the interviewer. However, this simple technique requires confidence, as silence can feel socially awkward.
• Allowing longer silences, such as 24 seconds, can work well later in an interview. Early on, though, even short silences may disrupt rapport if they cause misalignment between speakers.
• Silence also allows interviewees time to think before answering. Rushing to re-ask or amend questions can limit responses.
• Blunt backchannels like “mm hm” also avoid interrupting flow. Interruptions, especially to finish an interviewee’s turn, are problematic as they make the ownership of perspectives unclear.
• If interviewers incorrectly complete turns, an upside is it can produce extended interviewee narratives correcting the record. However, silence would have been better to let interviewees shape their own accounts.

Interviewing Children

By understanding the unique challenges and employing these solutions, interviewers can create a more child-friendly and effective interview process, promoting accurate and reliable information gathering from young witnesses.

Pitfalls to Avoid

1. Using directive questioning: Adults naturally gravitate towards a directive questioning style, particularly when interviewing children. This approach involves asking a series of focused questions that prompt for specific details, such as “Where was your mom when you got hurt?” While directive questions are sometimes necessary, relying on them can lead to several issues:
   • Speculation and misinterpretation: Children may misinterpret questions due to immature language and memory skills, leading them to speculate or provide inaccurate information. For example, children might not fully grasp the meaning of words like “before” and “after”.
   • Limited information: Directive questions often result in brief answers, restricting the child’s opportunity to provide a full and detailed account of the event.
2. Children’s desire to cooperate: Children are generally inclined to answer any question posed by an authority figure, even if they don’t understand the question or know the answer. This can result in inaccurate responses or speculation to please the interviewer.
3. Ignoring developmental differences: Failing to accommodate children’s developmental levels can significantly impact the interview’s effectiveness. Consider these factors:
   • Language development: Young children may not understand complex vocabulary, grammatical structures, or abstract concepts. For instance, words like “aunt” and “uncle” can be challenging for children because their meaning shifts depending on the speaker.
   • Memory capabilities: Children’s memory abilities are still developing, making them more susceptible to memory errors and suggestibility. Questions that repeatedly cue specific details can inadvertently alter their recollections.
   • Attention span and fatigue: Children, especially younger ones, have shorter attention spans and tire more easily than adults. Lengthy interviews or those with excessive questioning can lead to fatigue and reduce the quality of their responses.
4. Reluctance to talk: Children may be hesitant to talk due to various reasons, such as fear of getting into trouble, an inhibited temperament, distrust of unfamiliar adults, or feeling overwhelmed. This can make it challenging to obtain information from them.

Solutions

• Adopt a child-centered approach: Interviewers prioritize creating a supportive and less intimidating environment by using techniques tailored to the child’s developmental level and cultural background. This includes using developmentally appropriate language, building rapport, and employing a patient and non-judgmental demeanor.
• Emphasize open-ended questions: Interviewers favor open-ended prompts, such as “Tell me everything that happened” or “What happened next?”, over narrowly focused questions. These invitations encourage children to give detailed, accurate accounts in their own words.
• Use a questioning cycle: Interviewers combine open-ended invitations with focused prompts to gather specific details while maintaining a conversational flow. This involves cycling back to broader, open-ended prompts after asking focused questions to ensure a thorough understanding of the situation.
• Provide ample time to respond: Interviewers let children respond at their own pace, recognizing they may need longer to process information. This patience reduces pressure and encourages more thoughtful answers.
• Build rapport: Establishing rapport is crucial for creating a safe and comfortable space for children to share their experiences. Interviewers achieve this by engaging in neutral conversations, showing genuine interest in the child’s life, and using a calm and reassuring tone.
• Deliver clear interview instructions: Interviewers provide clear and concise instructions, explaining the ground rules of the interview, emphasizing honesty, and encouraging the child to ask for clarification if needed.
• Use interview aids cautiously: While tools like drawings or diagrams can be helpful, interviewers use them with caution, ensuring they don’t lead or suggest information to the child. These aids mainly help clarify or expand on what the child has already said.
• Be prepared for multiple interviews: It’s often necessary to conduct multiple interviews to allow children time to process information and recall additional details. Subsequent interviews provide an opportunity to clarify information and explore inconsistencies.

Recording & Transcription

Design choices

Design choices around recording and engaging closely with transcripts influence analytic insights, as well as practical feasibility. Weighing up relevant tradeoffs is key.

1. Audio recording is standard, but video better captures contextual details, which is useful for some topics/analysis approaches. Participants may find video invasive for sensitive research.
2. Digital formats enable the sharing of anonymized clips. Additional microphones reduce audio issues.
3. Doing all transcription is time-consuming. Outsourcing can save researcher effort but needs confidentiality assurances. Always carefully check outsourced transcripts.
4. Online platform auto-captioning can facilitate rapid analysis, but accuracy limitations mean full transcripts remain ideal. Software cleans up caption file formatting.
5. Verbatim transcripts best capture nuanced meaning, but the level of detail needed depends on the analysis approach. Referring back to recordings is still advisable during analysis.
6. Transcripts versus recordings highlight different interaction elements. Transcripts make overt disagreements clearer through the wording itself. Recordings better convey tone and affiliativeness.

Transcribing Interviews & Focus Groups

Here are the steps for transcribing interviews:

1. Play back audio/video files to develop an overall understanding of the interview
2. Format the transcription document:

• Add line numbers
• Separate interviewer questions and interviewee responses
• Use formatting like bold, italics, etc. to highlight key passages

3. Provide sentence-level clarity in the interviewee’s responses while preserving their authentic voice and word choices
4. Break longer passages into smaller paragraphs to help with coding
5. If translating the interview to another language, use qualified translators and back-translate where possible
6. Select a notation system to indicate pauses, emphasis, laughter, interruptions, etc., and adapt it as needed for your data
7. Insert screenshots, photos, or documents discussed in the interview at the relevant point in the transcript
8. Read through multiple times, revising formatting and notations
9. Double-check the accuracy of transcription against audio/videos
10. De-identify transcript by removing identifying participant details

Transcription should produce a formatted written record of the interview that captures its meaning and highlights important passages, ready for coding. Careful transcription is the vital first step in analysis.

Coding Transcripts

The goal of transcription and coding is to systematically transform interview responses into a set of codes and themes that capture key concepts, experiences and beliefs expressed by participants. Taking care with transcription and coding procedures enhances the validity of qualitative analysis.

1. Read through the transcript multiple times to become immersed in the details
2. Identify manifest/obvious codes and latent/underlying meaning codes
3. Highlight insightful participant quotes that capture key concepts (in vivo codes)
4. Create a codebook to organize and define codes with examples
5. Use an iterative cycle of inductive (data-driven) coding and deductive (theory-driven) coding
6. Refine codebook with clear definitions and examples as you code more transcripts
7. Collaborate with other coders to establish the reliability of codes

Ethical Issues

Informed Consent

The participant information sheet must give potential interviewees a good idea of what is involved if taking part in the research.

This will include the general topics covered in the interview, where the interview might take place, and how long it is expected to last. It will also cover how the interview will be recorded, how participants’ anonymity will be managed, and what incentives are offered.

It might be considered good practice to consider true informed consent in interview research to require two distinguishable stages:

1. Consent to undertake and record the interview.
2. Consent to use the material in the research once the interview is complete and its content is known. This may come after the interviewee has seen a transcript copy and had a chance to remove sections, if desired.

Power and Vulnerability

• Early feminist views that sensitivity could equalize power differences are likely naive. The interviewer and interviewee inhabit different knowledge spheres and social categories, indicating structural disparities.
• Power fluctuates within interviews. Researchers rely on participation, yet interviewees control openness and can undermine data collection. Assumptions should be avoided.
• Interviews on sensitive topics may feel like quasi-counseling. Interviewers must refrain from dual roles, instead supplying support service details to all participants.
• Interviewees recruited for trauma experiences may reveal more than anticipated. While generating analytic insights, this risks leaving them feeling exposed.
• Ultimately, power balances resist reconciliation. But reflexively analyzing operations of power serves to qualify rather than nullify situated qualitative accounts.

Vulnerable Groups

Some groups, such as those with mental health issues, extreme views, or criminal backgrounds, risk being discredited: researchers may treat them skeptically.

This creates tensions with qualitative approaches, which often center subjective perspectives with an empathetic ethos. Analysis should balance openness to offered accounts with critically examining stakes and motivations behind them.

Sources

Potter, J., & Hepburn, A. (2005). Qualitative interviews in psychology: Problems and possibilities. Qualitative research in Psychology, 2(4), 281-307.

Houtkoop-Steenstra, H. (2000). Interaction and the standardized survey interview: The living questionnaire. Cambridge University Press

Madill, A. (2011). Interaction in the semi-structured interview: A comparative analysis of the use of
and response to indirect complaints. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 8(4), 333–353.

Maryudi, A., & Fisher, M. (2020). The power in the interview: A practical guide for identifying the critical role of actor interests in environment research. Forest and Society, 4(1), 142–150

O’Key, V., Hugh-Jones, S., & Madill, A. (2009). Recruiting and engaging with people in deprived locales: Interviewing families about their eating patterns. Social Psychological Review, 11(20), 30–35.

Puchta, C., & Potter, J. (2004). Focus group practice. Sage.

Rosenthal, R. (1966). Experimenter effects in behavioral research. Appleton-Century-Crofts.

Schaeffer, N. C. (1991). Conversation with a purpose— Or conversation? Interaction in the standardized interview. In P. P. Biemer, R. M. Groves, L. E. Lyberg, & N. A. Mathiowetz (Eds.), Measurement errors in surveys (pp. 367–391). Wiley.

Silverman, D. (1973). Interview talk: Bringing off a research instrument. Sociology, 7(1), 31–48.

Weiner, E. S. (2005). No (wo)man’s land: The post-socialist purgatory of Czech female factory workers. Social Problems, 52(4), 572–592. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2005.52.4.572

Spradley, J. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. Holt, Rinehart & Winston.