Abstract
The semi-structured research interview is often criticized for not producing reliable and valid results due to 1) interviewer bias, and 2) non-commitment on the part of the informants, and 3) for being an expensive information gathering tool. By applying a CA perspective in the analysis of semi-structured interview data it is shown, however, that in the present case both interviewers and informants were very much concerned with producing true, accurate and valid responses. It is shown that among the interactive resources they have at their disposal, some of them are especially suited to ensure validity and are often recurred to by both parts. They concern e.g. question-response managment, the management of pauses, and repair organization. That the semi-struc tured research interview is an expensive information gathering tool cannot be denied. However, and all other things being equal, if validity is secured, it may turn out be a more safe research instrument than the structured interview.
Highlights
The semi-structured research interview is often critized for not producing reliable and valid results due to 1) interviewer bias, and 2) non-commitment on the part of the informants, and 3) for being an expensive information gathering tool
If we look at fragment (1) below about argumentation technique and efficiency the central part of the question concerns efficiency
If we accept the idea that the construction of the social world takes place in the local management of context and meaning in conversation, the interview turns out to be an interactive event that is of interest in its own right
Summary
The semi-structured research interview is often critized for not producing reliable and valid results due to 1) interviewer bias, and 2) non-commitment on the part of the informants, and 3) for being an expensive information gathering tool. This paper is a study of some of the interactive resources used by interviewers and informants in their joint construction of semi-structured research interviews. What this paper intends is to demonstrate that the interviewers and informants that participated in the generation of the interview data used for the present analysis, per se were concerned with questions of veracity and validity. This will be shown through the analysis of repair interaction, question-response management, specific types of formulations used for verification purposes and of how meaning is negotiated. In so far as the meanings of questions and responses remain uncertain, so does the validity of the measures produced
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: HERMES - Journal of Language and Communication in Business
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
