From Doxastic to Epistemic: A Typology and Critique of Qualitative Interview Styles.

Astrid Berner-Rodoreda,Caitlin Kennedy,Nir Eyal,Svend Brinkmann,Till Bärnighausen,Malabika Sarker,Daniel Wikler,Shannon A Mcmahon

doi:10.1177/1077800418810724

Abstract

Qualitative interview styles have been guided by precedent within academic disciplines. The nature of information sought, and the role of interviewer and interviewee are key determinants across styles, which range from doxastic (focused on understanding interviewees’ experiences or behaviors) to epistemic (focused on co-constructing knowledge). In this article, we position common interview styles along a doxastic–epistemic continuum, and according to the role of the interviewee (from respondent to equal partner). Through our typology and critique of interview styles, we enhance epistemic interviewing by introducing “deliberative interviews,” which are more debate oriented and closer to equality in the interviewee and interviewer relationship than existing interview styles. Deliberative interviews require a comprehensive, pre-interview briefing on the subject matter followed by interactive deliberation wherein complex issues are debated across viewpoints in an effort to devise solutions. The effectiveness of this interview style in generating new knowledge warrants empirical testing across academic disciplines.

Highlights

Qualitative interviews are an integral part of many, if not most, qualitative research studies, in the fields of sociology, social anthropology, psychology, education, and public health (Brinkmann, 2007; DiCicco-Bloom & Crabtree, 2006; Kvale, 2007; Qu & Dumay, 2011; Seidman, 1998; Spradley, 1979)
We construct a typology of interviews based on the doxastic–epistemic distinction, and a related but separate distinction based on the role of the interviewee
Building on Curato’s work (2012), we have argued that there is need for an expansion of epistemic-type approaches, in academic fields that are concerned with complex ethical and moral issues and, require recommendations and solutions based on the active and informed engagement of the interviewee with the interviewer for joint deliberation and co-construction of new knowledge and insights

Summary

Introduction

Qualitative interviews are an integral part of many, if not most, qualitative research studies, in the fields of sociology, social anthropology, psychology, education, and public health (Brinkmann, 2007; DiCicco-Bloom & Crabtree, 2006; Kvale, 2007; Qu & Dumay, 2011; Seidman, 1998; Spradley, 1979). As with group deliberation methods, an in-depth and balanced background briefing before the interview or dialogue begins is an essential element of a deliberative interview, as the knowledge level of interviewer and interviewee on the topic to be discussed should not differ considerably.13 Since many interview partners are not familiar with an interview situation in which their point of view is questioned and in which they are expected to challenge the interviewer, a thorough methodological briefing is necessary.

Results

Conclusion