disadvantages of semi structured interviews in research

Semi-structured Interviews

• Reference work entry
• First Online: 01 January 2020
• pp 4825–4830
• Cite this reference work entry

• Danielle Magaldi 3 &
• Matthew Berler 4  

22k Accesses

64 Citations

Open-ended interview ; Qualitative interview ; Systematic exploratory interview ; Thematic interview

The semi-structured interview is an exploratory interview used most often in the social sciences for qualitative research purposes or to gather clinical data. While it generally follows a guide or protocol that is devised prior to the interview and is focused on a core topic to provide a general structure, the semi-structured interview also allows for discovery, with space to follow topical trajectories as the conversation unfolds.

Introduction

Qualitative interviews exist on a continuum, ranging from free-ranging, exploratory discussions to highly structured interviews. On one end is unstructured interviewing, deployed by approaches such as ethnography, grounded theory, and phenomenology. This style of interview involves a changing protocol that evolves based on participants’ responses and will differ from one participant to the next. On the other end of the continuum...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Durable hardcover edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Baumbusch, J. (2010). Semi-structured interviewing in practice-close research. Journal for Specialists in Pediatric Nursing; Hoboken, 15 (3), 255–258.

Article   Google Scholar  

Clarkin, A. J., Ammaniti, M., & Fontana, A. (2015). The use of a psychodynamic semi-structured personality assessment interview in school settings. Adolescent Psychiatry, 5 (4), 237–244. https://doi.org/10.2174/2210676606666160502125435 .

Cooper, Z., & Fairburn, C. (1987). The Eating Disorder Examination: A semi-structured interview for the assessment of the specific psychopathology of eating disorders. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 6 (1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-108X(198701)6:1<1::AID-EAT2260060102>3.0.CO;2-9 .

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Google Scholar  

Dearnley, C. (2005). A reflection on the use of semi-structured interviews. Nurse Researcher, 13 (1), 19–28. https://doi.org/10.7748/nr2005.07.13.1.19.c5997 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

DiCicco-Bloom, B., & Crabtree, B. F. (2006). The qualitative research interview. Medical Education, 40 (4), 314–321. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02418.x .

Elliott, R., Fischer, C. T., & Rennie, D. L. (1999). Evolving guidelines for publication of qualitative research studies in psychology and related fields. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 38 (3), 215–229.

Fylan, F. (2005). Semi-structured interviewing. In A handbook of research methods for clinical and health psychology (pp. 65–77). New York: Oxford University Press.

Galanter, C. A., & Patel, V. L. (2005). Medical decision making: A selective review for child psychiatrists and psychologists. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 46 (7), 675–689. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2005.01452.x .

Galletta, A. (2013). Mastering the semi-structured interview and beyond: From research design to analysis and publication . New York: New York University Press.

Book   Google Scholar  

Gibbs, L., Kealy, M., Willis, K., Green, J., Welch, N., & Daly, J. (2007). What have sampling and data collection got to do with good qualitative research? Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 31 (6), 291–295. https://doi.org/10.1028/bdj.2008.192 .

Glenn, C. R., Weinberg, A., & Klonsky, E. D. (2009). Relationship of the Borderline Symptom List to DSM-IV borderline personality disorder criteria assessed by semi-structured interview. Psychopathology; Basel, 42 (6), 394–398.

Haverkamp, B. E. (2005). Ethical perspectives on qualitative research in applied psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52 (2), 146.

Hill, C., Knox, S., Thompson, B., Williams, E., Hess, S., & Ladany, N. (2005). Consensual qualitative research: An update. Journal of Counseling Psychology . Retrieved from http://epublications.marquette.edu/edu_fac/18

Hutsebaut, J., Kamphuis, J. H., Feenstra, D. J., Weekers, L. C., & De Saeger, H. (2017). Assessing DSM–5-oriented level of personality functioning: Development and psychometric evaluation of the Semi-Structured Interview for Personality Functioning DSM–5 (STiP-5.1). Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 8 (1), 94–101. https://doi.org/10.1037/per0000197 .

Kallio, H., Pietilä, A., Johnson, M., & Kangasniemi, M. (2016). Systematic methodological review: Developing a framework for a qualitative semi-structured interview guide. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 72 (12), 2954–2965. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13031 .

Kaufman, J., Birmaher, B., Brent, D., Rao, U., Flynn, C., Moreci, P., … Ryan, N. (1997). Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School-Age Children-Present and Lifetime Version (K-SADS-PL): Initial reliability and validity data. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 36 (7), 980–988. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004583-199707000-00021 .

Knox, S., & Burkard, A. W. (2014). Qualitative research interviews: An update. In W. Lutz, S. Knox, W. Lutz, & S. Knox (Eds.), Quantitative and qualitative methods in psychotherapy research (pp. 342–354). New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Kraus, S. E., Hamzah, A., Omar, Z., Suandi, T., Ismail, I. A., & Zahari, M. Z. (2009). Preliminary investigation and interview guide development for studying how Malaysian farmers form their mental models of farming. The Qualitative Report, 14 (2), 245–260.

McTate, E. A., & Leffler, J. M. (2017). Diagnosing disruptive mood dysregulation disorder: Integrating semi-structured and unstructured interviews. Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 22 (2), 187–203. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359104516658190 .

Pierucci-Lagha, A., Gelernter, J., Chan, G., Arias, A., Cubells, J. F., Farrer, L., & Kranzler, H. R. (2007). Reliability of DSM-IV diagnostic criteria using the semi-structured assessment for drug dependence and alcoholism (SSADDA). Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 91 (1), 85–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2007.04.014 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2010a). Essentials of nursing research: Appraising evidence for nursing practice . Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

Polit, D. S., & Beck, C. T. (2010b). Essentials of nursing research. Appraising evidence for nursing practice (7th ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven Publishers.

Ramos-Quiroga, J. A., Nasillo, V., Richarte, V., Corrales, M., Palma, F., Ibáñez, P., … Kooij, J. J. S. (2016). Criteria and concurrent validity of DIVA 2.0: A semi-structured diagnostic interview for adult ADHD. Journal of Attention Disorders . https://doi.org/10.1177/1087054716646451 .

Rennie, D. L. (2004). Reflexivity and person-centered counseling. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 44 , 182–203.

Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2005). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Ryan, A. B. (2006). Post-positivist approaches to research. In Researching and writing your thesis: A guide for postgraduate students (pp. 12–26). Ireland: MACE: Maynooth Adult and Community Education.

Turner, D. W. (2010). Qualitative interview design: A practical guide for novice researcher. The Qualitative Report, 15 (3), 754–760.

Whiting, L. S. (2008). Semi-structured interviews: Guidance for novice researchers. Nursing Standard, 22 (23), 35–40.

Williams, E. N., & Morrow, S. L. (2009). Achieving trustworthiness in qualitative research: A pan-paradigmatic perspective. Psychotherapy Research, 19 (4–5), 576–582.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

City University of New York, Lehman College, New York City, NY, USA

Danielle Magaldi

Pace University, New York City, NY, USA

Matthew Berler

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Danielle Magaldi .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Oakland University, Rochester, MI, USA

Virgil Zeigler-Hill

Todd K. Shackelford

Section Editor information

Department of Educational Sciences, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy

Patrizia Velotti

Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Magaldi, D., Berler, M. (2020). Semi-structured Interviews. In: Zeigler-Hill, V., Shackelford, T.K. (eds) Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24612-3_857

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24612-3_857

Published : 22 April 2020

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-319-24610-9

Online ISBN : 978-3-319-24612-3

eBook Packages : Behavioral Science and Psychology Reference Module Humanities and Social Sciences Reference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Share this entry

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Published: 05 October 2018

Interviews and focus groups in qualitative research: an update for the digital age

• P. Gill 1 &
• J. Baillie 2  

British Dental Journal volume  225 ,  pages 668–672 ( 2018 ) Cite this article

30k Accesses

51 Citations

20 Altmetric

Metrics details

Highlights that qualitative research is used increasingly in dentistry. Interviews and focus groups remain the most common qualitative methods of data collection.

Suggests the advent of digital technologies has transformed how qualitative research can now be undertaken.

Suggests interviews and focus groups can offer significant, meaningful insight into participants' experiences, beliefs and perspectives, which can help to inform developments in dental practice.

Qualitative research is used increasingly in dentistry, due to its potential to provide meaningful, in-depth insights into participants' experiences, perspectives, beliefs and behaviours. These insights can subsequently help to inform developments in dental practice and further related research. The most common methods of data collection used in qualitative research are interviews and focus groups. While these are primarily conducted face-to-face, the ongoing evolution of digital technologies, such as video chat and online forums, has further transformed these methods of data collection. This paper therefore discusses interviews and focus groups in detail, outlines how they can be used in practice, how digital technologies can further inform the data collection process, and what these methods can offer dentistry.

You have full access to this article via your institution.

Similar content being viewed by others

Determinants of behaviour and their efficacy as targets of behavioural change interventions

Bayesian statistics and modelling

Interviews in the social sciences

Introduction.

Traditionally, research in dentistry has primarily been quantitative in nature. 1 However, in recent years, there has been a growing interest in qualitative research within the profession, due to its potential to further inform developments in practice, policy, education and training. Consequently, in 2008, the British Dental Journal (BDJ) published a four paper qualitative research series, 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 to help increase awareness and understanding of this particular methodological approach.

Since the papers were originally published, two scoping reviews have demonstrated the ongoing proliferation in the use of qualitative research within the field of oral healthcare. 1 , 6 To date, the original four paper series continue to be well cited and two of the main papers remain widely accessed among the BDJ readership. 2 , 3 The potential value of well-conducted qualitative research to evidence-based practice is now also widely recognised by service providers, policy makers, funding bodies and those who commission, support and use healthcare research.

Besides increasing standalone use, qualitative methods are now also routinely incorporated into larger mixed method study designs, such as clinical trials, as they can offer additional, meaningful insights into complex problems that simply could not be provided by quantitative methods alone. Qualitative methods can also be used to further facilitate in-depth understanding of important aspects of clinical trial processes, such as recruitment. For example, Ellis et al . investigated why edentulous older patients, dissatisfied with conventional dentures, decline implant treatment, despite its established efficacy, and frequently refuse to participate in related randomised clinical trials, even when financial constraints are removed. 7 Through the use of focus groups in Canada and the UK, the authors found that fears of pain and potential complications, along with perceived embarrassment, exacerbated by age, are common reasons why older patients typically refuse dental implants. 7

The last decade has also seen further developments in qualitative research, due to the ongoing evolution of digital technologies. These developments have transformed how researchers can access and share information, communicate and collaborate, recruit and engage participants, collect and analyse data and disseminate and translate research findings. 8 Where appropriate, such technologies are therefore capable of extending and enhancing how qualitative research is undertaken. 9 For example, it is now possible to collect qualitative data via instant messaging, email or online/video chat, using appropriate online platforms.

These innovative approaches to research are therefore cost-effective, convenient, reduce geographical constraints and are often useful for accessing 'hard to reach' participants (for example, those who are immobile or socially isolated). 8 , 9 However, digital technologies are still relatively new and constantly evolving and therefore present a variety of pragmatic and methodological challenges. Furthermore, given their very nature, their use in many qualitative studies and/or with certain participant groups may be inappropriate and should therefore always be carefully considered. While it is beyond the scope of this paper to provide a detailed explication regarding the use of digital technologies in qualitative research, insight is provided into how such technologies can be used to facilitate the data collection process in interviews and focus groups.

In light of such developments, it is perhaps therefore timely to update the main paper 3 of the original BDJ series. As with the previous publications, this paper has been purposely written in an accessible style, to enhance readability, particularly for those who are new to qualitative research. While the focus remains on the most common qualitative methods of data collection – interviews and focus groups – appropriate revisions have been made to provide a novel perspective, and should therefore be helpful to those who would like to know more about qualitative research. This paper specifically focuses on undertaking qualitative research with adult participants only.

Overview of qualitative research

Qualitative research is an approach that focuses on people and their experiences, behaviours and opinions. 10 , 11 The qualitative researcher seeks to answer questions of 'how' and 'why', providing detailed insight and understanding, 11 which quantitative methods cannot reach. 12 Within qualitative research, there are distinct methodologies influencing how the researcher approaches the research question, data collection and data analysis. 13 For example, phenomenological studies focus on the lived experience of individuals, explored through their description of the phenomenon. Ethnographic studies explore the culture of a group and typically involve the use of multiple methods to uncover the issues. 14

While methodology is the 'thinking tool', the methods are the 'doing tools'; 13 the ways in which data are collected and analysed. There are multiple qualitative data collection methods, including interviews, focus groups, observations, documentary analysis, participant diaries, photography and videography. Two of the most commonly used qualitative methods are interviews and focus groups, which are explored in this article. The data generated through these methods can be analysed in one of many ways, according to the methodological approach chosen. A common approach is thematic data analysis, involving the identification of themes and subthemes across the data set. Further information on approaches to qualitative data analysis has been discussed elsewhere. 1

Qualitative research is an evolving and adaptable approach, used by different disciplines for different purposes. Traditionally, qualitative data, specifically interviews, focus groups and observations, have been collected face-to-face with participants. In more recent years, digital technologies have contributed to the ongoing evolution of qualitative research. Digital technologies offer researchers different ways of recruiting participants and collecting data, and offer participants opportunities to be involved in research that is not necessarily face-to-face.

Research interviews are a fundamental qualitative research method 15 and are utilised across methodological approaches. Interviews enable the researcher to learn in depth about the perspectives, experiences, beliefs and motivations of the participant. 3 , 16 Examples include, exploring patients' perspectives of fear/anxiety triggers in dental treatment, 17 patients' experiences of oral health and diabetes, 18 and dental students' motivations for their choice of career. 19

Interviews may be structured, semi-structured or unstructured, 3 according to the purpose of the study, with less structured interviews facilitating a more in depth and flexible interviewing approach. 20 Structured interviews are similar to verbal questionnaires and are used if the researcher requires clarification on a topic; however they produce less in-depth data about a participant's experience. 3 Unstructured interviews may be used when little is known about a topic and involves the researcher asking an opening question; 3 the participant then leads the discussion. 20 Semi-structured interviews are commonly used in healthcare research, enabling the researcher to ask predetermined questions, 20 while ensuring the participant discusses issues they feel are important.

Interviews can be undertaken face-to-face or using digital methods when the researcher and participant are in different locations. Audio-recording the interview, with the consent of the participant, is essential for all interviews regardless of the medium as it enables accurate transcription; the process of turning the audio file into a word-for-word transcript. This transcript is the data, which the researcher then analyses according to the chosen approach.

Types of interview

Qualitative studies often utilise one-to-one, face-to-face interviews with research participants. This involves arranging a mutually convenient time and place to meet the participant, signing a consent form and audio-recording the interview. However, digital technologies have expanded the potential for interviews in research, enabling individuals to participate in qualitative research regardless of location.

Telephone interviews can be a useful alternative to face-to-face interviews and are commonly used in qualitative research. They enable participants from different geographical areas to participate and may be less onerous for participants than meeting a researcher in person. 15 A qualitative study explored patients' perspectives of dental implants and utilised telephone interviews due to the quality of the data that could be yielded. 21 The researcher needs to consider how they will audio record the interview, which can be facilitated by purchasing a recorder that connects directly to the telephone. One potential disadvantage of telephone interviews is the inability of the interviewer and researcher to see each other. This is resolved using software for audio and video calls online – such as Skype – to conduct interviews with participants in qualitative studies. Advantages of this approach include being able to see the participant if video calls are used, enabling observation of non-verbal communication, and the software can be free to use. However, participants are required to have a device and internet connection, as well as being computer literate, potentially limiting who can participate in the study. One qualitative study explored the role of dental hygienists in reducing oral health disparities in Canada. 22 The researcher conducted interviews using Skype, which enabled dental hygienists from across Canada to be interviewed within the research budget, accommodating the participants' schedules. 22

A less commonly used approach to qualitative interviews is the use of social virtual worlds. A qualitative study accessed a social virtual world – Second Life – to explore the health literacy skills of individuals who use social virtual worlds to access health information. 23 The researcher created an avatar and interview room, and undertook interviews with participants using voice and text methods. 23 This approach to recruitment and data collection enables individuals from diverse geographical locations to participate, while remaining anonymous if they wish. Furthermore, for interviews conducted using text methods, transcription of the interview is not required as the researcher can save the written conversation with the participant, with the participant's consent. However, the researcher and participant need to be familiar with how the social virtual world works to engage in an interview this way.

Conducting an interview

Ensuring informed consent before any interview is a fundamental aspect of the research process. Participants in research must be afforded autonomy and respect; consent should be informed and voluntary. 24 Individuals should have the opportunity to read an information sheet about the study, ask questions, understand how their data will be stored and used, and know that they are free to withdraw at any point without reprisal. The qualitative researcher should take written consent before undertaking the interview. In a face-to-face interview, this is straightforward: the researcher and participant both sign copies of the consent form, keeping one each. However, this approach is less straightforward when the researcher and participant do not meet in person. A recent protocol paper outlined an approach for taking consent for telephone interviews, which involved: audio recording the participant agreeing to each point on the consent form; the researcher signing the consent form and keeping a copy; and posting a copy to the participant. 25 This process could be replicated in other interview studies using digital methods.

There are advantages and disadvantages of using face-to-face and digital methods for research interviews. Ultimately, for both approaches, the quality of the interview is determined by the researcher. 16 Appropriate training and preparation are thus required. Healthcare professionals can use their interpersonal communication skills when undertaking a research interview, particularly questioning, listening and conversing. 3 However, the purpose of an interview is to gain information about the study topic, 26 rather than offering help and advice. 3 The researcher therefore needs to listen attentively to participants, enabling them to describe their experience without interruption. 3 The use of active listening skills also help to facilitate the interview. 14 Spradley outlined elements and strategies for research interviews, 27 which are a useful guide for qualitative researchers:

Greeting and explaining the project/interview

Asking descriptive (broad), structural (explore response to descriptive) and contrast (difference between) questions

Asymmetry between the researcher and participant talking

Expressing interest and cultural ignorance

Repeating, restating and incorporating the participant's words when asking questions

Creating hypothetical situations

Asking friendly questions

Knowing when to leave.

For semi-structured interviews, a topic guide (also called an interview schedule) is used to guide the content of the interview – an example of a topic guide is outlined in Box 1 . The topic guide, usually based on the research questions, existing literature and, for healthcare professionals, their clinical experience, is developed by the research team. The topic guide should include open ended questions that elicit in-depth information, and offer participants the opportunity to talk about issues important to them. This is vital in qualitative research where the researcher is interested in exploring the experiences and perspectives of participants. It can be useful for qualitative researchers to pilot the topic guide with the first participants, 10 to ensure the questions are relevant and understandable, and amending the questions if required.

Regardless of the medium of interview, the researcher must consider the setting of the interview. For face-to-face interviews, this could be in the participant's home, in an office or another mutually convenient location. A quiet location is preferable to promote confidentiality, enable the researcher and participant to concentrate on the conversation, and to facilitate accurate audio-recording of the interview. For interviews using digital methods the same principles apply: a quiet, private space where the researcher and participant feel comfortable and confident to participate in an interview.

Box 1: Example of a topic guide

Study focus: Parents' experiences of brushing their child's (aged 0–5) teeth

1. Can you tell me about your experience of cleaning your child's teeth?

How old was your child when you started cleaning their teeth?

Why did you start cleaning their teeth at that point?

How often do you brush their teeth?

What do you use to brush their teeth and why?

2. Could you explain how you find cleaning your child's teeth?

Do you find anything difficult?

What makes cleaning their teeth easier for you?

3. How has your experience of cleaning your child's teeth changed over time?

Has it become easier or harder?

Have you changed how often and how you clean their teeth? If so, why?

4. Could you describe how your child finds having their teeth cleaned?

What do they enjoy about having their teeth cleaned?

Is there anything they find upsetting about having their teeth cleaned?

5. Where do you look for information/advice about cleaning your child's teeth?

What did your health visitor tell you about cleaning your child's teeth? (If anything)

What has the dentist told you about caring for your child's teeth? (If visited)

Have any family members given you advice about how to clean your child's teeth? If so, what did they tell you? Did you follow their advice?

6. Is there anything else you would like to discuss about this?

Focus groups

A focus group is a moderated group discussion on a pre-defined topic, for research purposes. 28 , 29 While not aligned to a particular qualitative methodology (for example, grounded theory or phenomenology) as such, focus groups are used increasingly in healthcare research, as they are useful for exploring collective perspectives, attitudes, behaviours and experiences. Consequently, they can yield rich, in-depth data and illuminate agreement and inconsistencies 28 within and, where appropriate, between groups. Examples include public perceptions of dental implants and subsequent impact on help-seeking and decision making, 30 and general dental practitioners' views on patient safety in dentistry. 31

Focus groups can be used alone or in conjunction with other methods, such as interviews or observations, and can therefore help to confirm, extend or enrich understanding and provide alternative insights. 28 The social interaction between participants often results in lively discussion and can therefore facilitate the collection of rich, meaningful data. However, they are complex to organise and manage, due to the number of participants, and may also be inappropriate for exploring particularly sensitive issues that many participants may feel uncomfortable about discussing in a group environment.

Focus groups are primarily undertaken face-to-face but can now also be undertaken online, using appropriate technologies such as email, bulletin boards, online research communities, chat rooms, discussion forums, social media and video conferencing. 32 Using such technologies, data collection can also be synchronous (for example, online discussions in 'real time') or, unlike traditional face-to-face focus groups, asynchronous (for example, online/email discussions in 'non-real time'). While many of the fundamental principles of focus group research are the same, regardless of how they are conducted, a number of subtle nuances are associated with the online medium. 32 Some of which are discussed further in the following sections.

Focus group considerations

Some key considerations associated with face-to-face focus groups are: how many participants are required; should participants within each group know each other (or not) and how many focus groups are needed within a single study? These issues are much debated and there is no definitive answer. However, the number of focus groups required will largely depend on the topic area, the depth and breadth of data needed, the desired level of participation required 29 and the necessity (or not) for data saturation.

The optimum group size is around six to eight participants (excluding researchers) but can work effectively with between three and 14 participants. 3 If the group is too small, it may limit discussion, but if it is too large, it may become disorganised and difficult to manage. It is, however, prudent to over-recruit for a focus group by approximately two to three participants, to allow for potential non-attenders. For many researchers, particularly novice researchers, group size may also be informed by pragmatic considerations, such as the type of study, resources available and moderator experience. 28 Similar size and mix considerations exist for online focus groups. Typically, synchronous online focus groups will have around three to eight participants but, as the discussion does not happen simultaneously, asynchronous groups may have as many as 10–30 participants. 33

The topic area and potential group interaction should guide group composition considerations. Pre-existing groups, where participants know each other (for example, work colleagues) may be easier to recruit, have shared experiences and may enjoy a familiarity, which facilitates discussion and/or the ability to challenge each other courteously. 3 However, if there is a potential power imbalance within the group or if existing group norms and hierarchies may adversely affect the ability of participants to speak freely, then 'stranger groups' (that is, where participants do not already know each other) may be more appropriate. 34 , 35

Focus group management

Face-to-face focus groups should normally be conducted by two researchers; a moderator and an observer. 28 The moderator facilitates group discussion, while the observer typically monitors group dynamics, behaviours, non-verbal cues, seating arrangements and speaking order, which is essential for transcription and analysis. The same principles of informed consent, as discussed in the interview section, also apply to focus groups, regardless of medium. However, the consent process for online discussions will probably be managed somewhat differently. For example, while an appropriate participant information leaflet (and consent form) would still be required, the process is likely to be managed electronically (for example, via email) and would need to specifically address issues relating to technology (for example, anonymity and use, storage and access to online data). 32

The venue in which a face to face focus group is conducted should be of a suitable size, private, quiet, free from distractions and in a collectively convenient location. It should also be conducted at a time appropriate for participants, 28 as this is likely to promote attendance. As with interviews, the same ethical considerations apply (as discussed earlier). However, online focus groups may present additional ethical challenges associated with issues such as informed consent, appropriate access and secure data storage. Further guidance can be found elsewhere. 8 , 32

Before the focus group commences, the researchers should establish rapport with participants, as this will help to put them at ease and result in a more meaningful discussion. Consequently, researchers should introduce themselves, provide further clarity about the study and how the process will work in practice and outline the 'ground rules'. Ground rules are designed to assist, not hinder, group discussion and typically include: 3 , 28 , 29

Discussions within the group are confidential to the group

Only one person can speak at a time

All participants should have sufficient opportunity to contribute

There should be no unnecessary interruptions while someone is speaking

Everyone can be expected to be listened to and their views respected

Challenging contrary opinions is appropriate, but ridiculing is not.

Moderating a focus group requires considered management and good interpersonal skills to help guide the discussion and, where appropriate, keep it sufficiently focused. Avoid, therefore, participating, leading, expressing personal opinions or correcting participants' knowledge 3 , 28 as this may bias the process. A relaxed, interested demeanour will also help participants to feel comfortable and promote candid discourse. Moderators should also prevent the discussion being dominated by any one person, ensure differences of opinions are discussed fairly and, if required, encourage reticent participants to contribute. 3 Asking open questions, reflecting on significant issues, inviting further debate, probing responses accordingly, and seeking further clarification, as and where appropriate, will help to obtain sufficient depth and insight into the topic area.

Moderating online focus groups requires comparable skills, particularly if the discussion is synchronous, as the discussion may be dominated by those who can type proficiently. 36 It is therefore important that sufficient time and respect is accorded to those who may not be able to type as quickly. Asynchronous discussions are usually less problematic in this respect, as interactions are less instant. However, moderating an asynchronous discussion presents additional challenges, particularly if participants are geographically dispersed, as they may be online at different times. Consequently, the moderator will not always be present and the discussion may therefore need to occur over several days, which can be difficult to manage and facilitate and invariably requires considerable flexibility. 32 It is also worth recognising that establishing rapport with participants via online medium is often more challenging than via face-to-face and may therefore require additional time, skills, effort and consideration.

As with research interviews, focus groups should be guided by an appropriate interview schedule, as discussed earlier in the paper. For example, the schedule will usually be informed by the review of the literature and study aims, and will merely provide a topic guide to help inform subsequent discussions. To provide a verbatim account of the discussion, focus groups must be recorded, using an audio-recorder with a good quality multi-directional microphone. While videotaping is possible, some participants may find it obtrusive, 3 which may adversely affect group dynamics. The use (or not) of a video recorder, should therefore be carefully considered.

At the end of the focus group, a few minutes should be spent rounding up and reflecting on the discussion. 28 Depending on the topic area, it is possible that some participants may have revealed deeply personal issues and may therefore require further help and support, such as a constructive debrief or possibly even referral on to a relevant third party. It is also possible that some participants may feel that the discussion did not adequately reflect their views and, consequently, may no longer wish to be associated with the study. 28 Such occurrences are likely to be uncommon, but should they arise, it is important to further discuss any concerns and, if appropriate, offer them the opportunity to withdraw (including any data relating to them) from the study. Immediately after the discussion, researchers should compile notes regarding thoughts and ideas about the focus group, which can assist with data analysis and, if appropriate, any further data collection.

Qualitative research is increasingly being utilised within dental research to explore the experiences, perspectives, motivations and beliefs of participants. The contributions of qualitative research to evidence-based practice are increasingly being recognised, both as standalone research and as part of larger mixed-method studies, including clinical trials. Interviews and focus groups remain commonly used data collection methods in qualitative research, and with the advent of digital technologies, their utilisation continues to evolve. However, digital methods of qualitative data collection present additional methodological, ethical and practical considerations, but also potentially offer considerable flexibility to participants and researchers. Consequently, regardless of format, qualitative methods have significant potential to inform important areas of dental practice, policy and further related research.

Gussy M, Dickson-Swift V, Adams J . A scoping review of qualitative research in peer-reviewed dental publications. Int J Dent Hygiene 2013; 11 : 174–179.

Article   Google Scholar  

Burnard P, Gill P, Stewart K, Treasure E, Chadwick B . Analysing and presenting qualitative data. Br Dent J 2008; 204 : 429–432.

Gill P, Stewart K, Treasure E, Chadwick B . Methods of data collection in qualitative research: interviews and focus groups. Br Dent J 2008; 204 : 291–295.

Gill P, Stewart K, Treasure E, Chadwick B . Conducting qualitative interviews with school children in dental research. Br Dent J 2008; 204 : 371–374.

Stewart K, Gill P, Chadwick B, Treasure E . Qualitative research in dentistry. Br Dent J 2008; 204 : 235–239.

Masood M, Thaliath E, Bower E, Newton J . An appraisal of the quality of published qualitative dental research. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2011; 39 : 193–203.

Ellis J, Levine A, Bedos C et al. Refusal of implant supported mandibular overdentures by elderly patients. Gerodontology 2011; 28 : 62–68.

Macfarlane S, Bucknall T . Digital Technologies in Research. In Gerrish K, Lathlean J (editors) The Research Process in Nursing . 7th edition. pp. 71–86. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell; 2015.

Google Scholar  

Lee R, Fielding N, Blank G . Online Research Methods in the Social Sciences: An Editorial Introduction. In Fielding N, Lee R, Blank G (editors) The Sage Handbook of Online Research Methods . pp. 3–16. London: Sage Publications; 2016.

Creswell J . Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five designs . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1998.

Guest G, Namey E, Mitchell M . Qualitative research: Defining and designing In Guest G, Namey E, Mitchell M (editors) Collecting Qualitative Data: A Field Manual For Applied Research . pp. 1–40. London: Sage Publications, 2013.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Pope C, Mays N . Qualitative research: Reaching the parts other methods cannot reach: an introduction to qualitative methods in health and health services research. BMJ 1995; 311 : 42–45.

Giddings L, Grant B . A Trojan Horse for positivism? A critique of mixed methods research. Adv Nurs Sci 2007; 30 : 52–60.

Hammersley M, Atkinson P . Ethnography: Principles in Practice . London: Routledge, 1995.

Oltmann S . Qualitative interviews: A methodological discussion of the interviewer and respondent contexts Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research. 2016; 17 : Art. 15.

Patton M . Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2002.

Wang M, Vinall-Collier K, Csikar J, Douglas G . A qualitative study of patients' views of techniques to reduce dental anxiety. J Dent 2017; 66 : 45–51.

Lindenmeyer A, Bowyer V, Roscoe J, Dale J, Sutcliffe P . Oral health awareness and care preferences in patients with diabetes: a qualitative study. Fam Pract 2013; 30 : 113–118.

Gallagher J, Clarke W, Wilson N . Understanding the motivation: a qualitative study of dental students' choice of professional career. Eur J Dent Educ 2008; 12 : 89–98.

Tod A . Interviewing. In Gerrish K, Lacey A (editors) The Research Process in Nursing . Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2006.

Grey E, Harcourt D, O'Sullivan D, Buchanan H, Kipatrick N . A qualitative study of patients' motivations and expectations for dental implants. Br Dent J 2013; 214 : 10.1038/sj.bdj.2012.1178.

Farmer J, Peressini S, Lawrence H . Exploring the role of the dental hygienist in reducing oral health disparities in Canada: A qualitative study. Int J Dent Hygiene 2017; 10.1111/idh.12276.

McElhinney E, Cheater F, Kidd L . Undertaking qualitative health research in social virtual worlds. J Adv Nurs 2013; 70 : 1267–1275.

Health Research Authority. UK Policy Framework for Health and Social Care Research. Available at https://www.hra.nhs.uk/planning-and-improving-research/policies-standards-legislation/uk-policy-framework-health-social-care-research/ (accessed September 2017).

Baillie J, Gill P, Courtenay P . Knowledge, understanding and experiences of peritonitis among patients, and their families, undertaking peritoneal dialysis: A mixed methods study protocol. J Adv Nurs 2017; 10.1111/jan.13400.

Kvale S . Interviews . Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage, 1996.

Spradley J . The Ethnographic Interview . New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1979.

Goodman C, Evans C . Focus Groups. In Gerrish K, Lathlean J (editors) The Research Process in Nursing . pp. 401–412. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell, 2015.

Shaha M, Wenzell J, Hill E . Planning and conducting focus group research with nurses. Nurse Res 2011; 18 : 77–87.

Wang G, Gao X, Edward C . Public perception of dental implants: a qualitative study. J Dent 2015; 43 : 798–805.

Bailey E . Contemporary views of dental practitioners' on patient safety. Br Dent J 2015; 219 : 535–540.

Abrams K, Gaiser T . Online Focus Groups. In Field N, Lee R, Blank G (editors) The Sage Handbook of Online Research Methods . pp. 435–450. London: Sage Publications, 2016.

Poynter R . The Handbook of Online and Social Media Research . West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons, 2010.

Kevern J, Webb C . Focus groups as a tool for critical social research in nurse education. Nurse Educ Today 2001; 21 : 323–333.

Kitzinger J, Barbour R . Introduction: The Challenge and Promise of Focus Groups. In Barbour R S K J (editor) Developing Focus Group Research . pp. 1–20. London: Sage Publications, 1999.

Krueger R, Casey M . Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE; 2009.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Senior Lecturer (Adult Nursing), School of Healthcare Sciences, Cardiff University,

Lecturer (Adult Nursing) and RCBC Wales Postdoctoral Research Fellow, School of Healthcare Sciences, Cardiff University,

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. Gill .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Gill, P., Baillie, J. Interviews and focus groups in qualitative research: an update for the digital age. Br Dent J 225 , 668–672 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2018.815

Download citation

Accepted : 02 July 2018

Published : 05 October 2018

Issue Date : 12 October 2018

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2018.815

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Translating brand reputation into equity from the stakeholder’s theory: an approach to value creation based on consumer’s perception & interactions.

• Olukorede Adewole

International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility (2024)

Perceptions and beliefs of community gatekeepers about genomic risk information in African cleft research

• Abimbola M. Oladayo
• Oluwakemi Odukoya
• Azeez Butali

BMC Public Health (2024)

Assessment of women’s needs, wishes and preferences regarding interprofessional guidance on nutrition in pregnancy – a qualitative study

• Merle Ebinghaus
• Caroline Johanna Agricola
• Birgit-Christiane Zyriax

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth (2024)

‘Baby mamas’ in Urban Ghana: an exploratory qualitative study on the factors influencing serial fathering among men in Accra, Ghana

• Rosemond Akpene Hiadzi
• Jemima Akweley Agyeman
• Godwin Banafo Akrong

Reproductive Health (2023)

Revolutionising dental technologies: a qualitative study on dental technicians’ perceptions of Artificial intelligence integration

• Galvin Sim Siang Lin
• Yook Shiang Ng
• Kah Hoay Chua

BMC Oral Health (2023)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• Types of Interviews in Research | Guide & Examples

Types of Interviews in Research | Guide & Examples

Published on March 10, 2022 by Tegan George . Revised on June 22, 2023.

An interview is a qualitative research method that relies on asking questions in order to collect data . Interviews involve two or more people, one of whom is the interviewer asking the questions.

There are several types of interviews, often differentiated by their level of structure.

• Structured interviews have predetermined questions asked in a predetermined order.
• Unstructured interviews are more free-flowing.
• Semi-structured interviews fall in between.

Interviews are commonly used in market research, social science, and ethnographic research .

Table of contents

What is a structured interview, what is a semi-structured interview, what is an unstructured interview, what is a focus group, examples of interview questions, advantages and disadvantages of interviews, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about types of interviews.

Structured interviews have predetermined questions in a set order. They are often closed-ended, featuring dichotomous (yes/no) or multiple-choice questions. While open-ended structured interviews exist, they are much less common. The types of questions asked make structured interviews a predominantly quantitative tool.

Asking set questions in a set order can help you see patterns among responses, and it allows you to easily compare responses between participants while keeping other factors constant. This can mitigate   research biases and lead to higher reliability and validity. However, structured interviews can be overly formal, as well as limited in scope and flexibility.

• You feel very comfortable with your topic. This will help you formulate your questions most effectively.
• You have limited time or resources. Structured interviews are a bit more straightforward to analyze because of their closed-ended nature, and can be a doable undertaking for an individual.
• Your research question depends on holding environmental conditions between participants constant.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Semi-structured interviews are a blend of structured and unstructured interviews. While the interviewer has a general plan for what they want to ask, the questions do not have to follow a particular phrasing or order.

Semi-structured interviews are often open-ended, allowing for flexibility, but follow a predetermined thematic framework, giving a sense of order. For this reason, they are often considered “the best of both worlds.”

However, if the questions differ substantially between participants, it can be challenging to look for patterns, lessening the generalizability and validity of your results.

• You have prior interview experience. It’s easier than you think to accidentally ask a leading question when coming up with questions on the fly. Overall, spontaneous questions are much more difficult than they may seem.
• Your research question is exploratory in nature. The answers you receive can help guide your future research.

An unstructured interview is the most flexible type of interview. The questions and the order in which they are asked are not set. Instead, the interview can proceed more spontaneously, based on the participant’s previous answers.

Unstructured interviews are by definition open-ended. This flexibility can help you gather detailed information on your topic, while still allowing you to observe patterns between participants.

However, so much flexibility means that they can be very challenging to conduct properly. You must be very careful not to ask leading questions, as biased responses can lead to lower reliability or even invalidate your research.

• You have a solid background in your research topic and have conducted interviews before.
• Your research question is exploratory in nature, and you are seeking descriptive data that will deepen and contextualize your initial hypotheses.
• Your research necessitates forming a deeper connection with your participants, encouraging them to feel comfortable revealing their true opinions and emotions.

A focus group brings together a group of participants to answer questions on a topic of interest in a moderated setting. Focus groups are qualitative in nature and often study the group’s dynamic and body language in addition to their answers. Responses can guide future research on consumer products and services, human behavior, or controversial topics.

Focus groups can provide more nuanced and unfiltered feedback than individual interviews and are easier to organize than experiments or large surveys . However, their small size leads to low external validity and the temptation as a researcher to “cherry-pick” responses that fit your hypotheses.

• Your research focuses on the dynamics of group discussion or real-time responses to your topic.
• Your questions are complex and rooted in feelings, opinions, and perceptions that cannot be answered with a “yes” or “no.”
• Your topic is exploratory in nature, and you are seeking information that will help you uncover new questions or future research ideas.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

Depending on the type of interview you are conducting, your questions will differ in style, phrasing, and intention. Structured interview questions are set and precise, while the other types of interviews allow for more open-endedness and flexibility.

Here are some examples.

• Semi-structured
• Unstructured
• Focus group
• Do you like dogs? Yes/No
• Do you associate dogs with feeling: happy; somewhat happy; neutral; somewhat unhappy; unhappy
• If yes, name one attribute of dogs that you like.
• If no, name one attribute of dogs that you don’t like.
• What feelings do dogs bring out in you?
• When you think more deeply about this, what experiences would you say your feelings are rooted in?

Interviews are a great research tool. They allow you to gather rich information and draw more detailed conclusions than other research methods, taking into consideration nonverbal cues, off-the-cuff reactions, and emotional responses.

However, they can also be time-consuming and deceptively challenging to conduct properly. Smaller sample sizes can cause their validity and reliability to suffer, and there is an inherent risk of interviewer effect arising from accidentally leading questions.

Here are some advantages and disadvantages of each type of interview that can help you decide if you’d like to utilize this research method.

If you want to know more about statistics , methodology , or research bias , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• Student’s  t -distribution
• Normal distribution
• Null and Alternative Hypotheses
• Chi square tests
• Confidence interval
• Quartiles & Quantiles
• Cluster sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Data cleansing
• Reproducibility vs Replicability
• Peer review
• Prospective cohort study

Research bias

• Implicit bias
• Cognitive bias
• Placebo effect
• Hawthorne effect
• Hindsight bias
• Affect heuristic
• Social desirability bias

The four most common types of interviews are:

• Structured interviews : The questions are predetermined in both topic and order. 
• Semi-structured interviews : A few questions are predetermined, but other questions aren’t planned.
• Unstructured interviews : None of the questions are predetermined.
• Focus group interviews : The questions are presented to a group instead of one individual.

The interviewer effect is a type of bias that emerges when a characteristic of an interviewer (race, age, gender identity, etc.) influences the responses given by the interviewee.

There is a risk of an interviewer effect in all types of interviews , but it can be mitigated by writing really high-quality interview questions.

Social desirability bias is the tendency for interview participants to give responses that will be viewed favorably by the interviewer or other participants. It occurs in all types of interviews and surveys , but is most common in semi-structured interviews , unstructured interviews , and focus groups .

Social desirability bias can be mitigated by ensuring participants feel at ease and comfortable sharing their views. Make sure to pay attention to your own body language and any physical or verbal cues, such as nodding or widening your eyes.

This type of bias can also occur in observations if the participants know they’re being observed. They might alter their behavior accordingly.

A focus group is a research method that brings together a small group of people to answer questions in a moderated setting. The group is chosen due to predefined demographic traits, and the questions are designed to shed light on a topic of interest. It is one of 4 types of interviews .

Quantitative research deals with numbers and statistics, while qualitative research deals with words and meanings.

Quantitative methods allow you to systematically measure variables and test hypotheses . Qualitative methods allow you to explore concepts and experiences in more detail.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

George, T. (2023, June 22). Types of Interviews in Research | Guide & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved July 1, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/interviews-research/

Is this article helpful?

Tegan George

Other students also liked, unstructured interview | definition, guide & examples, structured interview | definition, guide & examples, semi-structured interview | definition, guide & examples, what is your plagiarism score.

Log in using your username and password

• Search More Search for this keyword Advanced search
• Latest content
• Call for Papers
• BMJ Journals

You are here

• Volume 7, Issue 2
• Semistructured interviewing in primary care research: a balance of relationship and rigour
• Article Text
• Article info
• Citation Tools
• Rapid Responses
• Article metrics

• http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2660-3358 Melissa DeJonckheere 1 and
• Lisa M Vaughn 2 , 3
• 1 Department of Family Medicine , University of Michigan , Ann Arbor , Michigan , USA
• 2 Department of Pediatrics , University of Cincinnati College of Medicine , Cincinnati , Ohio , USA
• 3 Division of Emergency Medicine , Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center , Cincinnati , Ohio , USA
• Correspondence to Dr Melissa DeJonckheere; mdejonck{at}med.umich.edu

Semistructured in-depth interviews are commonly used in qualitative research and are the most frequent qualitative data source in health services research. This method typically consists of a dialogue between researcher and participant, guided by a flexible interview protocol and supplemented by follow-up questions, probes and comments. The method allows the researcher to collect open-ended data, to explore participant thoughts, feelings and beliefs about a particular topic and to delve deeply into personal and sometimes sensitive issues. The purpose of this article was to identify and describe the essential skills to designing and conducting semistructured interviews in family medicine and primary care research settings. We reviewed the literature on semistructured interviewing to identify key skills and components for using this method in family medicine and primary care research settings. Overall, semistructured interviewing requires both a relational focus and practice in the skills of facilitation. Skills include: (1) determining the purpose and scope of the study; (2) identifying participants; (3) considering ethical issues; (4) planning logistical aspects; (5) developing the interview guide; (6) establishing trust and rapport; (7) conducting the interview; (8) memoing and reflection; (9) analysing the data; (10) demonstrating the trustworthiness of the research; and (11) presenting findings in a paper or report. Semistructured interviews provide an effective and feasible research method for family physicians to conduct in primary care research settings. Researchers using semistructured interviews for data collection should take on a relational focus and consider the skills of interviewing to ensure quality. Semistructured interviewing can be a powerful tool for family physicians, primary care providers and other health services researchers to use to understand the thoughts, beliefs and experiences of individuals. Despite the utility, semistructured interviews can be intimidating and challenging for researchers not familiar with qualitative approaches. In order to elucidate this method, we provide practical guidance for researchers, including novice researchers and those with few resources, to use semistructured interviewing as a data collection strategy. We provide recommendations for the essential steps to follow in order to best implement semistructured interviews in family medicine and primary care research settings.

• qualitative research

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0

https://doi.org/10.1136/fmch-2018-000057

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions.

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Introduction

Semistructured interviews can be used by family medicine researchers in clinical settings or academic settings even with few resources. In contrast to large-scale epidemiological studies, or even surveys, a family medicine researcher can conduct a highly meaningful project with interviews with as few as 8–12 participants. For example, Chang and her colleagues, all family physicians, conducted semistructured interviews with 10 providers to understand their perspectives on weight gain in pregnant patients. 1 The interviewers asked questions about providers’ overall perceptions on weight gain, their clinical approach to weight gain during pregnancy and challenges when managing weight gain among pregnant patients. Additional examples conducted by or with family physicians or in primary care settings are summarised in table 1 . 1–6

• View inline

Examples of research articles using semistructured interviews in primary care research

From our perspective as seasoned qualitative researchers, conducting effective semistructured interviews requires: (1) a relational focus, including active engagement and curiosity, and (2) practice in the skills of interviewing. First, a relational focus emphasises the unique relationship between interviewer and interviewee. To obtain quality data, interviews should not be conducted with a transactional question-answer approach but rather should be unfolding, iterative interactions between the interviewer and interviewee. Second, interview skills can be learnt. Some of us will naturally be more comfortable and skilful at conducting interviews but all aspects of interviews are learnable and through practice and feedback will improve. Throughout this article, we highlight strategies to balance relationship and rigour when conducting semistructured interviews in primary care and the healthcare setting.

Qualitative research interviews are ‘attempts to understand the world from the subjects’ point of view, to unfold the meaning of peoples’ experiences, to uncover their lived world prior to scientific explanations’ (p 1). 7 Qualitative research interviews unfold as an interviewer asks questions of the interviewee in order to gather subjective information about a particular topic or experience. Though the definitions and purposes of qualitative research interviews vary slightly in the literature, there is common emphasis on the experiences of interviewees and the ways in which the interviewee perceives the world (see table 2 for summary of definitions from seminal texts).

Definitions of qualitative interviews

The most common type of interview used in qualitative research and the healthcare context is semistructured interview. 8 Figure 1 highlights the key features of this data collection method, which is guided by a list of topics or questions with follow-up questions, probes and comments. Typically, the sequencing and wording of the questions are modified by the interviewer to best fit the interviewee and interview context. Semistructured interviews can be conducted in multiple ways (ie, face to face, telephone, text/email, individual, group, brief, in-depth), each of which have advantages and disadvantages. We will focus on the most common form of semistructured interviews within qualitative research—individual, face-to-face, in-depth interviews.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab
• Download powerpoint

Key characteristics of semistructured interviews.

Purpose of semistructured interviews

The overall purpose of using semistructured interviews for data collection is to gather information from key informants who have personal experiences, attitudes, perceptions and beliefs related to the topic of interest. Researchers can use semistructured interviews to collect new, exploratory data related to a research topic, triangulate other data sources or validate findings through member checking (respondent feedback about research results). 9 If using a mixed methods approach, semistructured interviews can also be used in a qualitative phase to explore new concepts to generate hypotheses or explain results from a quantitative phase that tests hypotheses. Semistructured interviews are an effective method for data collection when the researcher wants: (1) to collect qualitative, open-ended data; (2) to explore participant thoughts, feelings and beliefs about a particular topic; and (3) to delve deeply into personal and sometimes sensitive issues.

Designing and conducting semistructured interviews

In the following section, we provide recommendations for the steps required to carefully design and conduct semistructured interviews with emphasis on applications in family medicine and primary care research (see table 3 ).

Steps to designing and conducting semistructured interviews

Steps for designing and conducting semistructured interviews

Step 1: determining the purpose and scope of the study.

The purpose of the study is the primary objective of your project and may be based on an anecdotal experience, a review of the literature or previous research finding. The purpose is developed in response to an identified gap or problem that needs to be addressed.

Research questions are the driving force of a study because they are associated with every other aspect of the design. They should be succinct and clearly indicate that you are using a qualitative approach. Qualitative research questions typically start with ‘What’, ‘How’ or ‘Why’ and focus on the exploration of a single concept based on participant perspectives. 10

Step 2: identifying participants

After deciding on the purpose of the study and research question(s), the next step is to determine who will provide the best information to answer the research question. Good interviewees are those who are available, willing to be interviewed and have lived experiences and knowledge about the topic of interest. 11 12 Working with gatekeepers or informants to get access to potential participants can be extremely helpful as they are trusted sources that control access to the target sample.

Sampling strategies are influenced by the research question and the purpose of the study. Unlike quantitative studies, statistical representativeness is not the goal of qualitative research. There is no calculation of statistical power and the goal is not a large sample size. Instead, qualitative approaches seek an in-depth and detailed understanding and typically use purposeful sampling. See the study of Hatch for a summary of various types of purposeful sampling that can be used for interview studies. 12

‘How many participants are needed?’ The most common answer is, ‘it depends’—it depends on the purpose of the study, what kind of study is planned and what questions the study is trying to answer. 12–14 One common standard in qualitative sample sizes is reaching thematic saturation, which refers to the point at which no new thematic information is gathered from participants. Malterud and colleagues discuss the concept of information power , or a qualitative equivalent to statistical power, to determine how many interviews should be collected in a study. They suggest that the size of a sample should depend on the aim, homogeneity of the sample, theory, interview quality and analytic strategy. 14

Step 3: considering ethical issues

An ethical attitude should be present from the very beginning of the research project even before you decide who to interview. 15 This ethical attitude should incorporate respect, sensitivity and tact towards participants throughout the research process. Because semistructured interviewing often requires the participant to reveal sensitive and personal information directly to the interviewer, it is important to consider the power imbalance between the researcher and the participant. In healthcare settings, the interviewer or researcher may be a part of the patient’s healthcare team or have contact with the healthcare team. The researchers should ensure the interviewee that their participation and answers will not influence the care they receive or their relationship with their providers. Other issues to consider include: reducing the risk of harm; protecting the interviewee’s information; adequately informing interviewees about the study purpose and format; and reducing the risk of exploitation. 10

Step 4: planning logistical aspects

Careful planning particularly around the technical aspects of interviews can be the difference between a great interview and a not so great interview. During the preparation phase, the researcher will need to plan and make decisions about the best ways to contact potential interviewees, obtain informed consent, arrange interview times and locations convenient for both participant and researcher, and test recording equipment. Although many experienced researchers have found themselves conducting interviews in less than ideal locations, the interview location should avoid (or at least minimise) interruptions and be appropriate for the interview (quiet, private and able to get a clear recording). 16 For some research projects, the participants’ homes may make sense as the best interview location. 16

Initial contacts can be made through telephone or email and followed up with more details so the individual can make an informed decision about whether they wish to be interviewed. Potential participants should know what to expect in terms of length of time, purpose of the study, why they have been selected and who will be there. In addition, participants should be informed that they can refuse to answer questions or can withdraw from the study at any time, including during the interview itself.

Audio recording the interview is recommended so that the interviewer can concentrate on the interview and build rapport rather than being distracted with extensive note taking 16 (see table 4 for audio-recording tips). Participants should be informed that audio recording is used for data collection and that they can refuse to be audio recorded should they prefer.

Suggestions for successful audio recording of interviews

Most researchers will want to have interviews transcribed verbatim from the audio recording. This allows you to refer to the exact words of participants during the analysis. Although it is possible to conduct analyses from the audio recordings themselves or from notes, it is not ideal. However, transcription can be extremely time consuming and, if not done yourself, can be costly.

In the planning phase of research, you will want to consider whether qualitative research software (eg, NVivo, ATLAS.ti, MAXQDA, Dedoose, and so on) will be used to assist with organising, managing and analysis. While these tools are helpful in the management of qualitative data, it is important to consider your research budget, the cost of the software and the learning curve associated with using a new system.

Step 5: developing the interview guide

Semistructured interviews include a short list of ‘guiding’ questions that are supplemented by follow-up and probing questions that are dependent on the interviewee’s responses. 8 17 All questions should be open ended, neutral, clear and avoid leading language. In addition, questions should use familiar language and avoid jargon.

Most interviews will start with an easy, context-setting question before moving to more difficult or in-depth questions. 17 Table 5 gives details of the types of guiding questions including ‘grand tour’ questions, 18 core questions and planned and unplanned follow-up questions.

Questions and prompts in semistructured interviewing

To illustrate, online supplementary appendix A presents a sample interview guide from our study of weight gain during pregnancy among young women. We start with the prompt, ‘Tell me about how your pregnancy has been so far’ to initiate conversation about their thoughts and feelings during pregnancy. The subsequent questions will elicit responses to help answer our research question about young women’s perspectives related to weight gain during pregnancy.

Supplemental material

After developing the guiding questions, it is important to pilot test the interview. Having a good sense of the guide helps you to pace the interview (and not run out of time), use a conversational tone and make necessary adjustments to the questions.

Like all qualitative research, interviewing is iterative in nature—data collection and analysis occur simultaneously, which may result in changes to the guiding questions as the study progresses. Questions that are not effective may be replaced with other questions and additional probes can be added to explore new topics that are introduced by participants in previous interviews. 10

Step 6: establishing trust and rapport

Interviews are a special form of relationship, where the interviewer and interviewee converse about important and often personal topics. The interviewer must build rapport quickly by listening attentively and respectfully to the information shared by the interviewee. 19 As the interview progresses, the interviewer must continue to demonstrate respect, encourage the interviewee to share their perspectives and acknowledge the sensitive nature of the conversation. 20

To establish rapport, it is important to be authentic and open to the interviewee’s point of view. It is possible that the participants you recruit for your study will have preconceived notions about research, which may include mistrust. As a result, it is important to describe why you are conducting the research and how their participation is meaningful. In an interview relationship, the interviewee is the expert and should be treated as such—you are relying on the interviewee to enhance your understanding and add to your research. Small behaviours that can enhance rapport include: dressing professionally but not overly formal; avoiding jargon or slang; and using a normal conversational tone. Because interviewees will be discussing their experience, having some awareness of contextual or cultural factors that may influence their perspectives may be helpful as background knowledge.

Step 7: conducting the interview

Location and set-up.

The interview should have already been scheduled at a convenient time and location for the interviewee. The location should be private, ideally with a closed door, rather than a public place. It is helpful if there is a room where you can speak privately without interruption, and where it is quiet enough to hear and audio record the interview. Within the interview space, Josselson 15 suggests an arrangement with a comfortable distance between the interviewer and interviewee with a low table in between for the recorder and any materials (consent forms, questionnaires, water, and so on).

Beginning the interview

Many interviewers start with chatting to break the ice and attempt to establish commonalities, rapport and trust. Most interviews will need to begin with a brief explanation of the research study, consent/assent procedures, rationale for talking to that particular interviewee and description of the interview format and agenda. 11 It can also be helpful if the interviewer shares a little about who they are and why they are interested in the topic. The recording equipment should have already been tested thoroughly but interviewers may want to double-check that the audio equipment is working and remind participants about the reason for recording.

Interviewer stance

During the interview, the interviewer should adopt a friendly and non-judgemental attitude. You will want to maintain a warm and conversational tone, rather than a rote, question-answer approach. It is important to recognise the potential power differential as a researcher. Conveying a sense of being in the interview together and that you as the interviewer are a person just like the interviewee can help ease any discomfort. 15

Active listening

During a face-to-face interview, there is an opportunity to observe social and non-verbal cues of the interviewee. These cues may come in the form of voice, body language, gestures and intonation, and can supplement the interviewee’s verbal response and can give clues to the interviewer about the process of the interview. 21 Listening is the key to successful interviewing. 22 Listening should be ‘attentive, empathic, nonjudgmental, listening in order to invite, and engender talk’ 15 15 (p 66). Silence, nods, smiles and utterances can also encourage further elaboration from the interviewee.

Continuing the interview

As the interview progresses, the interviewer can repeat the words used by the interviewee, use planned and unplanned follow-up questions that invite further clarification, exploration or elaboration. As DiCicco-Bloom and Crabtree 10 explain: ‘Throughout the interview, the goal of the interviewer is to encourage the interviewee to share as much information as possible, unselfconsciously and in his or her own words’ (p 317). Some interviewees are more forthcoming and will offer many details of their experiences without much probing required. Others will require prompting and follow-up to elicit sufficient detail.

As a result, follow-up questions are equally important to the core questions in a semistructured interview. Prompts encourage people to continue talking and they can elicit more details needed to understand the topic. Examples of verbal probes are repeating the participant’s words, summarising the main idea or expressing interest with verbal agreement. 8 11 See table 6 for probing techniques and example probes we have used in our own interviewing.

Probing techniques for semistructured interviews (modified from Bernard 30 )

Step 8: memoing and reflection

After an interview, it is essential for the interviewer to begin to reflect on both the process and the content of the interview. During the actual interview, it can be difficult to take notes or begin reflecting. Even if you think you will remember a particular moment, you likely will not be able to recall each moment with sufficient detail. Therefore, interviewers should always record memos —notes about what you are learning from the data. 23 24 There are different approaches to recording memos: you can reflect on several specific ideas, or create a running list of thoughts. Memos are also useful for improving the quality of subsequent interviews.

Step 9: analysing the data

The data analysis strategy should also be developed during planning stages because analysis occurs concurrently with data collection. 25 The researcher will take notes, modify the data collection procedures and write reflective memos throughout the data collection process. This begins the process of data analysis.

The data analysis strategy used in your study will depend on your research question and qualitative design—see the study of Creswell for an overview of major qualitative approaches. 26 The general process for analysing and interpreting most interviews involves reviewing the data (in the form of transcripts, audio recordings or detailed notes), applying descriptive codes to the data and condensing and categorising codes to look for patterns. 24 27 These patterns can exist within a single interview or across multiple interviews depending on the research question and design. Qualitative computer software programs can be used to help organise and manage interview data.

Step 10: demonstrating the trustworthiness of the research

Similar to validity and reliability, qualitative research can be assessed on trustworthiness. 9 28 There are several criteria used to establish trustworthiness: credibility (whether the findings accurately and fairly represent the data), transferability (whether the findings can be applied to other settings and contexts), confirmability (whether the findings are biased by the researcher) and dependability (whether the findings are consistent and sustainable over time).

Step 11: presenting findings in a paper or report

When presenting the results of interview analysis, researchers will often report themes or narratives that describe the broad range of experiences evidenced in the data. This involves providing an in-depth description of participant perspectives and being sure to include multiple perspectives. 12 In interview research, the participant words are your data. Presenting findings in a report requires the integration of quotes into a more traditional written format.

Conclusions

Though semistructured interviews are often an effective way to collect open-ended data, there are some disadvantages as well. One common problem with interviewing is that not all interviewees make great participants. 12 29 Some individuals are hard to engage in conversation or may be reluctant to share about sensitive or personal topics. Difficulty interviewing some participants can affect experienced and novice interviewers. Some common problems include not doing a good job of probing or asking for follow-up questions, failure to actively listen, not having a well-developed interview guide with open-ended questions and asking questions in an insensitive way. Outside of pitfalls during the actual interview, other problems with semistructured interviewing may be underestimating the resources required to recruit participants, interview, transcribe and analyse the data.

Despite their limitations, semistructured interviews can be a productive way to collect open-ended data from participants. In our research, we have interviewed children and adolescents about their stress experiences and coping behaviours, young women about their thoughts and behaviours during pregnancy, practitioners about the care they provide to patients and countless other key informants about health-related topics. Because the intent is to understand participant experiences, the possible research topics are endless.

Due to the close relationships family physicians have with their patients, the unique settings in which they work, and in their advocacy, semistructured interviews are an attractive approach for family medicine researchers, even if working in a setting with limited research resources. When seeking to balance both the relational focus of interviewing and the necessary rigour of research, we recommend: prioritising listening over talking; using clear language and avoiding jargon; and deeply engaging in the interview process by actively listening, expressing empathy, demonstrating openness to the participant’s worldview and thanking the participant for helping you to understand their experience.

Further Reading

Edwards R, & Holland J. (2013). What is qualitative interviewing?: A&C Black.

Josselson R. Interviewing for qualitative inquiry: A relational approach. Guilford Press, 2013.

Kvale S. InterViews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. SAGE, London, 1996.

Pope C, & Mays N. (Eds). (2006). Qualitative research in health care.

• Gold KJ , et al
• Croxson CH ,
• Ashdown HF ,
• DeJonckheere M ,
• Robinson CH ,
• Evans L , et al
• Griffiths F ,
• Boardman F , et al
• Takemura Y ,
• Nishiue T , et al
• Schoenborn NL ,
• Pollack CE , et al
• Pietilä A-M ,
• Johnson M , et al
• Lincoln YS ,
• DiCicco-Bloom B ,
• Crabtree BF
• Malterud K ,
• Siersma VD ,
• Guassora AD
• Josselson R
• Edwards R ,
• Spradley JP
• Opdenakker R
• Anderson K ,
• Huberman AM
• Huberman AM ,
• Creswell JW
• Damschroder L

Contributors Both authors contributed equally to this work.

Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Competing interests None declared.

Patient consent for publication Not required.

Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

Read the full text or download the PDF:

• What is a semi-structured interview?

Last updated

5 February 2023

Reviewed by

Cathy Heath

Short on time? Get an AI generated summary of this article instead

When designed correctly, user interviews go much deeper than surface-level survey responses. They can provide new information about how people interact with your products and services, and shed light on the underlying reasons behind these habits.

Semi-structured user interviews are widely considered one of the most effective tools for doing this kind of qualitative research , depending on your specific goals. As the name suggests, the semi-structured format allows for a more natural, conversational flow, while still being organized enough to collect plenty of actionable data .

Analyze semi-structured interviews

Bring all your semi-structured interviews into one place to analyze and understand

A semi-structured interview is a qualitative research method used to gain an in-depth understanding of the respondent's feelings and beliefs on specific topics. As the interviewer prepares the questions ahead of time, they can adjust the order, skip any that are redundant, or create new ones. Additionally, the interviewer should be prepared to ask follow-up questions and probe for more detail.

Semi-structured interviews typically last between 30 and 60 minutes and are usually conducted either in person or via a video call. Ideally, the interviewer can observe the participant's verbal and non-verbal cues in real-time, allowing them to adjust their approach accordingly. The interviewer aims for a conversational flow that helps the participant talk openly while still focusing on the primary topics being researched.

Once the interview is over, the researcher analyzes the data in detail to draw meaningful results. This involves sorting the data into categories and looking for patterns and trends. This semi-structured interview approach provides an ideal framework for obtaining open-ended data and insights.

• When to use a semi-structured interview?

Semi-structured interviews are considered the "best of both worlds" as they tap into the strengths of structured and unstructured methods. Researchers can gather reliable data while also getting unexpected insights from in-depth user feedback.

Semi-structured interviews can be useful during any stage of the UX product-development process, including exploratory research to better understand a new market or service. Further down the line, this approach is ideal for refining existing designs and discovering areas for improvement. Semi-structured interviews can even be the first step when planning future research projects using another method of data collection.

• Advantages of semi-structured interviews

Flexibility

This style of interview is meant to be adapted according to the answers and reactions of the respondent, which gives a lot of flexibility. Semi-structured interviews encourage two-way communication, allowing themes and ideas to emerge organically.

Respondent comfort

The semi-structured format feels more natural and casual for participants than a formal interview. This can help to build rapport and more meaningful dialogue.

Semi-structured interviews are excellent for user experience research because they provide rich, qualitative data about how people really experience your products and services.

Open-ended questions allow the respondent to provide nuanced answers, with the potential for more valuable insights than other forms of data collection, like structured interviews , surveys , or questionnaires.

• Disadvantages of semi-structured interviews

Can be unpredictable

Less structure brings less control, especially if the respondent goes off tangent or doesn't provide useful information. If the conversation derails, it can take a lot of effort to bring the focus back to the relevant topics.

Lack of standardization

Every semi-structured interview is unique, including potentially different questions, so the responses collected are very subjective. This can make it difficult to draw meaningful conclusions from the data unless your team invests the time in a comprehensive analysis.

Compared to other research methods, unstructured interviews are not as consistent or "ready to use."

• Best practices when preparing for a semi-structured interview

While semi-structured interviews provide a lot of flexibility, they still require thoughtful planning. Maximizing the potential of this research method will depend on having clear goals that help you narrow the focus of the interviews and keep each session on track.

After taking the time to specify these parameters, create an interview guide to serve as a framework for each conversation. This involves crafting a range of questions that can explore the necessary themes and steer the conversation in the right direction. Everything in your interview guide is optional (that's the beauty of being "semi" structured), but it's still an essential tool to help the conversation flow and collect useful data.

Best practices to consider while designing your interview questions include:

Prioritize open-ended questions

Promote a more interactive, meaningful dialogue by avoiding questions that can be answered with a simple yes or no, otherwise known as close-ended questions.

Stick with "what," "when," "who," "where," "why," and "how" questions, which allow the participant to go beyond the superficial to express their ideas and opinions. This approach also helps avoid jargon and needless complexity in your questions.

Open-ended questions help the interviewer uncover richer, qualitative details, which they can build on to get even more valuable insights.

Plan some follow-up questions

When preparing questions for the interview guide, consider the responses you're likely to get and pair them up with some effective, relevant follow-up questions. Factual questions should be followed by ones that ask an opinion.

Planning potential follow-up questions will help you to get the most out of a semi-structured interview. They allow you to delve deeper into the participant's responses or hone in on the most important themes of your research focus.

Follow-up questions are also invaluable when the interviewer feels stuck and needs a meaningful prompt to continue the conversation.

Avoid leading questions

Leading questions are framed toward a predetermined answer. This makes them likely to result in data that is biased, inaccurate, or otherwise unreliable.

For example, asking "Why do you think our services are a good solution?" or "How satisfied have you been with our services?" will leave the interviewee feeling pressured to agree with some baseline assumptions.

Interviewers must take the time to evaluate their questions and make a conscious effort to remove any potential bias that could get in the way of authentic feedback.

Asking neutral questions is key to encouraging honest responses in a semi-structured interview. For example, "What do you consider to be the advantages of using our services?" or simply "What has been your experience with using our services?"

Neutral questions are effective in capturing a broader range of opinions than closed questions, which is ultimately one of the biggest benefits of using semi-structured interviews for research.

Use the critical incident method

The critical incident method is an approach to interviewing that focuses on the past behavior of respondents, as opposed to hypothetical scenarios. One of the challenges of all interview research methods is that people are not great at accurately recalling past experiences, or answering future-facing, abstract questions.

The critical incident method helps avoid these limitations by asking participants to recall extreme situations or 'critical incidents' which stand out in their memory as either particularly positive or negative. Extreme situations are more vivid so they can be recalled more accurately, potentially providing more meaningful insights into the interviewee’s experience with your products or services.

• Best practices while conducting semi-structured interviews

Encouraging interaction is the key to collecting more specific data than is typically possible during a formal interview. Facilitating an effective semi-structured interview is a balancing act between asking prepared questions and creating the space for organic conversation. Here are some guidelines for striking the right tone.

Beginning the interview

Make participants feel comfortable by introducing yourself and your role at the organization and displaying appropriate body language.

Outline the purpose of the interview to give them an idea of what to expect. For example, explain that you want to learn more about how people use your product or service.

It's also important to thank them for their time in advance and emphasize there are no right or wrong answers.

Practice active listening

Build trust and rapport throughout the interview with active listening techniques, focusing on being present and demonstrating that you're paying attention by responding thoughtfully. Engage with the participant by making eye contact, nodding, and giving verbal cues like "Okay, I see," "I understand," and "M-hm."

Avoid the temptation to rush to fill any silences while they're in the middle of responding, even if it feels awkward. Give them time to finish their train of thought before interrupting with feedback or another prompt. Embracing these silences is essential for active listening because it's a sign of a productive interview with meaningful, candid responses.

Practicing these techniques will ensure the respondent feels heard and respected, which is critical for gathering high-quality information.

Ask clarifying questions in real time

In a semi-structured interview, the researcher should always be on the lookout for opportunities to probe into the participant's thoughts and opinions.

Along with preparing follow-up questions, get in the habit of asking clarifying questions whenever possible. Clarifying questions are especially important for user interviews because people often provide vague responses when discussing how they interact with products and services.

Being asked to go deeper will encourage them to give more detail and show them you’re taking their opinions seriously and are genuinely interested in understanding their experiences.

Some clarifying questions that can be asked in real-time include:

"That's interesting. Could you give me some examples of X?"

"What do you mean when you say "X"?"

"Why is that?"

"It sounds like you're saying [rephrase their response], is that correct?"

Minimize note-taking

In a wide-ranging conversation, it's easy to miss out on potentially valuable insights by not staying focused on the user. This is why semi-structured interviews are generally recorded (audio or video), and it's common to have a second researcher present to take notes.

The person conducting the interview should avoid taking notes because it's a distraction from:

Keeping track of the conversation

Engaging with the user

Asking thought-provoking questions

Watching you take notes can also have the unintended effect of making the participant feel pressured to give shallower, shorter responses—the opposite of what you want.

Concluding the interview

Semi-structured interviews don't come with a set number of questions, so it can be tricky to bring them to an end. Give the participant a sense of closure by asking whether they have anything to add before wrapping up, or if they want to ask you any questions, and then give sincere thanks for providing honest feedback.

Don't stop abruptly once all the relevant topics have been discussed or you're nearing the end of the time that was set aside. Make them feel appreciated!

• Analyzing the data from semi-structured interviews

In some ways, the real work of semi-structured interviews begins after all the conversations are over, and it's time to analyze the data you've collected. This process will focus on sorting and coding each interview to identify patterns, often using a mix of qualitative and quantitative methods.

Some of the strategies for making sense of semi-structured interviews include:

Thematic analysis : focuses on the content of the interviews and identifying common themes

Discourse analysis : looks at how people express feelings about themes such as those involving politics, culture, and power

Qualitative data mapping: a visual way to map out the correlations between different elements of the data

Narrative analysis : uses stories and language to unlock perspectives on an issue

Grounded theory : can be applied when there is no existing theory that could explain a new phenomenon

Should you be using a customer insights hub?

Do you want to discover previous research faster?

Do you share your research findings with others?

Do you analyze research data?

Start for free today, add your research, and get to key insights faster

Editor’s picks

Last updated: 18 April 2023

Last updated: 27 February 2023

Last updated: 6 February 2023

Last updated: 6 October 2023

Last updated: 5 February 2023

Last updated: 16 April 2023

Last updated: 7 March 2023

Last updated: 9 March 2023

Last updated: 12 December 2023

Last updated: 11 March 2024

Last updated: 6 March 2024

Last updated: 5 March 2024

Last updated: 13 May 2024

Latest articles

Related topics, .css-je19u9{-webkit-align-items:flex-end;-webkit-box-align:flex-end;-ms-flex-align:flex-end;align-items:flex-end;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:row;-ms-flex-direction:row;flex-direction:row;-webkit-box-flex-wrap:wrap;-webkit-flex-wrap:wrap;-ms-flex-wrap:wrap;flex-wrap:wrap;-webkit-box-pack:center;-ms-flex-pack:center;-webkit-justify-content:center;justify-content:center;row-gap:0;text-align:center;max-width:671px;}@media (max-width: 1079px){.css-je19u9{max-width:400px;}.css-je19u9>span{white-space:pre;}}@media (max-width: 799px){.css-je19u9{max-width:400px;}.css-je19u9>span{white-space:pre;}} decide what to .css-1kiodld{max-height:56px;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}@media (max-width: 1079px){.css-1kiodld{display:none;}} build next, decide what to build next.

Users report unexpectedly high data usage, especially during streaming sessions.

Users find it hard to navigate from the home page to relevant playlists in the app.

It would be great to have a sleep timer feature, especially for bedtime listening.

I need better filters to find the songs or artists I’m looking for.

Log in or sign up

Get started for free

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Glob Qual Nurs Res
• v.2; Jan-Dec 2015

Situating and Constructing Diversity in Semi-Structured Interviews

Michele j. mcintosh.

1 Trent University, Peterborough, Ontario, Canada

Janice M. Morse

2 University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA

Although semi-structured interviews (SSIs) are used extensively in research, scant attention is given to their diversity, underlying assumptions, construction, and broad applications to qualitative and mixed-method research. In this three-part article, we discuss the following: (a) how the SSI is situated historically including its evolution and diversification, (b) the principles of constructing SSIs, and (c) how SSIs are utilized as a stand-alone research method, and as strategy within a mixed-method design.

In this article, we will explore the evolution, proliferation, diversification, and utilization of the semi-structured interview (SSI) as both a data collection strategy and a research method. We suggest that, since the 1990s, the SSI has proliferated, diversified, and evolved from a research strategy to an independent research method, and to one that is increasingly used by a multiplicity of disciplines. It has a unique structure that affords it an affinity with qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-method research. Unfettered by foundational philosophical commitments, the SSI accommodates a multiplicity of philosophical assumptions that may reflect feminist, critical, phenomenological, and neo-positivist aims. The purpose of SSIs is to ascertain participants’ perspectives regarding an experience pertaining to the research topic. Beyond that common denominator, however, SSIs have diversified into different types, each uniquely oriented to assessing, confirming, validating, refuting, or elaborating upon existing knowledge and the discovery of new knowledge. Furthermore, the contemporary SSI may be empathetic and politically engaged. The diverse types of SSIs produce knowledge that may be politically active, taking the stance of the participants and committed to improving their lives.

As a data collection strategy, we examine its fit with various methods. When used as a stand-alone method, we identify four major purposes: descriptive/confirmative, descriptive/corrective, descriptive/interpretative, and descriptive/divergent. SSIs also play important roles in mixed-method research, research involving translation, and as a basis for instrument development.

What Is the SSI?

The SSI is designed to ascertain subjective responses from persons regarding a particular situation or phenomenon they have experienced. It employs a relatively detailed interview guide or schedule, and may be used when there is sufficient objective knowledge about an experience or phenomenon, but the subjective knowledge is lacking ( Merton & Kendall, 1946 ; Morse & Field, 1995 ; Richards & Morse, 2007). Analysis of the objective knowledge constitutes the framework for the development of this guide and foci for the development of the interview question stems. These interview questions focus on the responses of each participant and constitute the structure of the SSI. Participants are free to respond to these open-ended questions as they wish, and the researcher may probe these responses. This framework and flexibility of the responses constitute the semi-structured aspect of this method. It makes it unique among interview methods for the degree of relevancy it provides the topic while remaining responsive to the participant ( Bartholomew, Henderson, & Marcia, 2000 ).

Analytically, the SSI is characterized by comparing participants responses by item. Because all participants are asked the same questions in the same order, data collected are comparable, and may be numerically transformed and quantified.

The type of data derived from SSIs cannot be obtained using structured questionnaires, participant observation, or analysis of the literature, although SSIs may be combined with these other data collection strategies. Also, these data cannot be obtained through unstructured interviews, as unstructured interviews do not control the participant’s response; SSI participants’ responses are directed to specific areas of inquiry.

However, there is apparent confusion among researchers regarding what constitutes an SSI and its distinction from other types of interviews such as the guided interview. The guided interview reflects the structure of the research domain and lists the questions that will be asked of each participant. It does not focus the participants’ responses to any particular aspect of their experience and often begins with a grand tour question. Then, depending on a participant’s response, the researcher follows with a loosely organized list of questions. Responses are neither collected by item, nor does the analysis proceed item by item, but rather by theme or categorization. However, with the SSI, all questions are asked of all participants in the same order, and all data are analyzed systematically item-by-item,

The hybrid term in-depth semi-structured interviews also causes confusion and is unnecessary. While SSIs do provide the participants with the freedom to answer the open-ended questions using as much time as they wish, their responses are not often in-depth. Thus, in-depth, guided, and SSIs are disparate interview types that must not be conflated.

Situating SSIs

The evolution of the ssi.

The historical antecedent of the contemporary SSI was the “focused interview” conceived of, and procedurally advanced by Robert Merton and Patricia Kendall in 1946. The focused interview arose out of studies of the social and psychological effects of mass communications—radio, print, and film ( Merton & Kendall, 1946 ). Its initial purpose was to provide some basis for interpreting statistically significant effects of mass communications.

Merton and Kendall (1946) outline the character of such applications by examining the role of the focused interview at four distinct points: (a) specifying the effective stimulus, (b) interpreting discrepancies between anticipated and actual effects, (c) interpreting discrepancies between prevailing effects and effects among subgroups (i.e., “deviant cases”), and (d) interpreting processes involved in experimentally induced effects. These original roles of the focused interview constitute the antecedents for the contemporary types of SSIs that we will describe later.

The Empathetic Turn of the Interview

The “empathetic” turn of the interview refers to a shift in the interviewer’s perspective from a neutral, objective stance to one of political involvement. Fontana and Frey (2008) write,

Empathetic interviewing takes an ethical stance in favor of the individual or group being studied. The interviewer becomes an advocate and partner in the study, hoping to be able to use the results to advocate social policies and ameliorate the conditions of the interviewee. (p. 696)

Thus, the empathetic turn became a key catalyst in the diversification of SSIs.

Philosophical Foundation of the SSI

Traditionally, a mature method was defined in part by its adherence to a philosophical foundation, as, for instance, cultural theory that underpins ethnography (Richards & Morse, 2007). This requirement now appears to be changing and researchers have greater flexibility and may draw upon various underlying philosophical perspectives for their work. For instance, Charmaz (2009) suggested that grounded theory strategies may be used with other theoretical starting points and states that “few subscribe to symbolic inter-actionist theoretical orthodoxy” (p. 134). Similarly, Kvale (1996) observed that a “phenomenological approach in a general non-philosophical sense” is prevalent in qualitative research (p. 52). This non-adherence of qualitative research methods to a unitary and explicit philosophical foundation, however, does not mean that research practice is uninformed or not influenced by a variety of philosophical perspectives—or that it is underdeveloped ( Avis, 2003 ).

SSIs, as do all qualitative research methods, involve practices that develop, are molded, and mature with use. The emergence of various typologies of SSIs are, in part, distinguished by their unique philosophical influences derived from quantitative and qualitative paradigms—neo-positivism, dialectics, and phenomenology in particular. SSIs involve principles in practice ( Seale, Gobo, Gubrium, & Silverman, 2004 ). Such principles are not de-contextualized or abstracted from the research itself but appear as assumptions, and are reflected in the methodological strategies used. As research practice expands so, too, do the philosophical principles it draws from to guide it. Philosophical issues are similarly informed by research practice. In this way, both method and philosophy advance and mature. Therefore, SSIs as present day practice are informed by assumptions but do not adhere to a unitary, explicit philosophical foundation.

Affinity of SSIs to the Quantitative Paradigm

The focused interview was originally conjoined with experimental science, constituting the interpretive component to the statistical analysis. Contemporarily, the SSI maintains this affinity to the quantitative paradigm. It has the structure, sample size, and suitability for quantification that appeals to quantitative researchers and it is the most frequent qualitative method included in mixed-method research ( Bryman, 2006 ; Povee & Roberts, 2015 ). Similarly, the SSI method is more compatible with research ethic reviews that privilege quantitative research and the unpredictable emergent designs of in-depth interviews. Thus, the SSI has been able to accommodate the current political conditions that threaten other types of qualitative research.

A Typology of SSIs

A diversification of SSIs has paralleled its proliferation. Examination of studies that used the SSI as a method revealed different types of SSIs, differentiated according to purpose, epistemological privilege of established knowledge implicit in the interview guide or the knowledge of the participant(s), the role of the participants, and the outcome of the research. These characteristics enabled the construction of a typology (see Table 1 ).

Heuristic Typology of Semi-Structured Interviews.

Descriptive/confirmative

Historically, the focused interview aimed to augment experimental findings with subjective responses; the analytic component of the findings was augmented by this interpretive component. The descriptive/confirmative contemporary type of SSI most closely approximates this original interview role, with the purpose to obtain subjective responses to the objective knowledge, to test the hypothetical assumptions or theoretical frame. Although participants’ perspectives and experiences are important, they are most relevant for confirming the frame, so that this type of interview epistemologically privileges the known rather than the knower.

Thus, the outcome of the descriptive/confirmative type of SSIs is to confirm the objective knowledge of the interviewer’s frame. In the examples below, instruments or theories derived from prior scientific study are confirmed by the subjective responses of interview participants. These theories or instruments, now confirmed, may themselves be used as modes of clinical or social assessment or program evaluation. From a “pure” qualitative paradigm, this approach is risky, violating the qualitative edict not placing the researcher’s agenda onto the participant—which is a cardinal threat to validity. This research should therefore be evaluated carefully.

Descriptive/confirmative SSIs have been more recently used to assess the following: the usefulness of a research impact framework to capture the impact of health services and policy research ( Kuruvilla, Mays, & Walt, 2007 ), the relevance of “uncertainty reduction” theory to the experience of homeless teen mothers ( Scappaticci & Blay, 2009 ), the suitability of the disease-specific health-related quality of life instrument for use with patients after myocardial infarction ( Roebuck, Furze, & Thompson, 2001 ), and finally, the potential for the Osteoporotic pain program to increase patient’s insight, skills, and motivation to self help and possibly reduce pain ( Jensen & Harder, 2004 ).

Descriptive/corrective

Historically, a primary aim of the focused interview was to interpret discrepancies between anticipated and actual effects ( Merton & Kendall, 1946 ). Similarly, the purpose of the contemporary descriptive/corrective SSI is to evaluate the dominant discursive representation of an experience by comparing it with participants’ actual experiences. This type of interview uniquely juxtaposes what is known about an experience (i.e., established knowledge in the literature), or known only from the privileged perspectives of others (e.g., those persons who represent others, such as researchers reporting on the vulnerable, invisible groups), with the perspectives of those whose views are typically absent or under-represented and who have actual material knowledge of this experience. The word “disjuncture” ( Smith, 1990 ) refers to the discrepancies between the conceptualization and textual mediation of an experience with the actual material experience of participants.

The elucidation of disjuncture is not the intended outcome of this type of research but is, rather, the means to correction. The outcome of this interview research is to confirm, refute, or elaborate upon the assumptions of the frame. The intention is that the participants’ actual experiences of the phenomenon will act as a corrective to the assumptions in the dominant discourse and effect political action for change.

Evidencing a social constructivist approach, this type of interview epistemologically privileges both the knower and the known. Descriptive/corrective SSIs exemplify empathetic interviewing and hence are particularly useful to research with feminist and critical aims such as institutional ethnography, participatory action research and social movement research ( Blee & Taylor, 2002 ). The researcher and the participant collaborate to produce knowledge with which to effect political change.

Descriptive/corrective SSIs have juxtaposed the perspectives of mothers addicted to crack cocaine regarding mothering, with popular assumptions of such mothers ( Kearney, Murphy, & Rosenbaum, 1994 ); general physician’s explanatory models for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) with the explanatory models used by patients afflicted with the condition ( Casiday, Hungin, Cornford, deWit, & Blell, 2009a , 2009b ); and media and scientific representations of the female orgasm with women’s subjective thoughts and feelings regarding it ( Lavie-Ajayi & Joffe, 2009 ). Disjunctures were revealed and pointed to dominant assumptions or practices in need of revision or correction: Mothers addicted to crack uphold as strong commitments to mothering as mothers who are not addicted; physicians do not know the full impact of IBS on sufferers’ lives; women graft the importance of relational and emotive aspects of orgasm onto the scientifically driven representations of it.

Corrective action indicated by these disjunctures included greater sharing between physicians’ and patients such that medical interventions are informed by patient perspectives; the need for woman-centered policies and programs, including safe drug-free housing, health care, child care, education, and job assistance; and the laying bare of cultural and social norms associated with having orgasms such that the set of anxieties they produce might be reduced and this, in turn, may diminish women’s experience of having problems with orgasms ( Casiday et al., 2009a , 2009b ; Kearney et al., 1994 ; Lavie-Ajayi & Joffe, 2009 ).

Descriptive/interpretive

Historically, the aim of the focused interview was to elucidate the subjective response to the stimulus. The descriptive/interpretive contemporary type of SSI is exemplified by research with the aim of discovering the experiential world of the respondent within topical dimensions. SSIs are a viable option for researchers with parsimonious yet phenomenological aims. This type of interview epistemologically privileges the participant as knower. From the outset, the frame is acknowledged to be limited and subjective knowledge is critical to its expansion. Sometimes the limited knowledge of the frame is confirmed and expanded by participants’ perspectives; sometimes the frame is refuted by participants’ perspectives and gives rise to new categories, themes, and hypothesis with which to understand the experience.

Descriptive/interpretive interviews have been used to investigate the long-term impact of sudden infant death ( Dyregrov & Dyregrov, 1999 ), next-of-kin’s perceptions of end-of-life care ( Williams, Woodby, Bailey, & Burgio, 2008 ), maternal infanticides in Fiji ( Adinkrah, 2000 ), and influences on parents’ fever management—beliefs, experiences, and information sources ( Walsh, Edwards, & Fraser, 2007 ).

Discoveries that emerged from these interviews included the discovery that parents who have experienced the sudden death of an infant still view the death of their child as affecting their daily life in important ways 12 to 15 years after it happened ( Dyregrov & Dyregrov, 1999 ). Second, a critical discovery that emerged from the study investigating maternal infanticides in Fiji ( Adinkrah, 2000 ) was that, contrary to the legal definition of infanticide that presupposes postpartum depression in infanticidal behavior, unwanted pregnancies were the major precipitant for maternal neonaticides. Most “offenders” were young, poor, unmarried Fijian women with minimal formal education. This discovery leads to the hypothesis that if unwanted pregnancies were curtailed, the incidence of infanticide would decrease.

Descriptive/divergent

Historically, another application of the focused interview was to “interpret discrepancies between prevailing effects and effects among subgroups—deviant cases” ( Merton & Kendall, 1946 , p. 542). Contemporarily, the descriptive/divergent type of SSI applies the same interview guide to disparate groups of participants to discern differences and similarities in perspectives and experiences among them with respect to the dominant discourse that underpins the interview guide. The purpose of this type of interview is to contrast perspectives of different groups of knowers. This type of interview epistemologically privileges the knowers and seeks to discern their contrasting perspectives and experiences.

Descriptive/divergent SSIs have been used to investigate such topics as women’s attitudes toward technology (resistant versus flexible) and their childbirth experiences ( Kornelson, 2005 ), women’s attitudes toward postmenopausal long-term hormone therapy (five different types of users were identified who differed from each other in terms of their reasons for using hormones, their expectations of this type of therapy, and their personal habits and circumstances; Kolip, Hoefling-Engels, & Schmacke, 2009 ), elite women wrestlers’ muscles (senior wrestlers accepted the “athletic body” and muscularity with its social costs; junior wrestlers were “holding back” giving priority to the “private body”; Sisjord & Kristiansen, 2009 ), and lesbian versus gay activists’ attitudes toward transgender inclusion ( Stone, 2009 ).

The elucidation of divergent perspectives, attitudes, and experiences regarding phenomena enables deeper insight into various ways that people negotiate the personal and social contexts that shape human choices and experiences.

Constructing the SSI

Preparing the interview schedule.

SSIs are semi-standardized, and characterized by the design and utilization of this schedule. They are conducted using an interview questionnaire or schedule comprised of predetermined or scheduled primary questions or question stems, followed by subquestions or “probes.” It is important that these questions are open-ended and formulated to elicit unstructured responses and generate discussion. These questions are typically asked of each interviewee in the same way and in a systematic order, but the questions are semi-structured in that the interviewers are allowed freedom to diverge slightly from the script. There is some variability granted to the researcher within the limits of the intended replicability of the schedule to rephrase questions to elicit the pertinent information or to provide clarification ( Irvine, Drew, & Sainsbury, 2013 ). More important than the exact phrasing of the question is conveying equivalence of meaning to all participants ( Denzin, 1989 ). Furthermore, the interviewers are expected to probe within each participant’s responses ( Berg, 1989 ). These probes are intended to elaborate beyond the participant’s initial response. For example, probes such as “In what way . . . ?” or “Tell me . . . ?” or “Such as . . . ?” These dual qualities of replicability and flexibility yield pertinent as well as rich data.

Probes may be scheduled (scripted) appearing after the question stems on the questionnaire (to be asked after the initial participant response), or unscheduled arising from the dialogue. Unscheduled prompts are improvisational, and some researchers find that respondents more fully express their perspectives in response to the unscheduled prompts ( Berg, 1989 ).

Creating the SSI

To prepare the interview schedule, the researcher must (a) identify the domain of the topic under investigation including its boundaries, (b) identify the categories of the topic, and (c) identify the question stems. Once the questionnaire is drafted, it is critiqued and tested. A previously mentioned descriptive/interpretive SSI study will be used to illustrate this process. The particular study, conducted by Dyregrov and Dyregrov (1999) , sought to ascertain parents’ perspectives and experiences of the sudden death of their infants after the passage of a significant amount of time.

Identifying the domain of the topic

SSIs are used when the researcher knows enough about the topic to be able to identify the domain and the main components of the topics but is unable to anticipate all the possible answers ( Morse & Field, 1995 ). The more extensive the investigator’s knowledge, the more precisely can the aspects to be covered in the interview be outlined in advance and the more significant questions may be posed ( Kvale, 1996 ; Merton & Kendall, 1946 ).

Interviewers know in advance of constructing the interview which topics they wish to include and even some of the questions they wish to ask. This knowledge of the phenomenon may be variously acquired. Researchers may have initially observed or experienced the phenomenon. Spradley (1979) and Patton (1980) suggest that researchers prepare a preliminary outline listing all the broad categories they feel may be relevant to their study. Conducting a literature review is an essential component in ascertaining what is known about the phenomenon, using the literature in an “informed, skeptical, or comparative manner” ( Morse, 2003 , p. 891, Morse 2006 ) to maintain an inductive approach to questionnaire development. Knowledge about the phenomenon may also be derived from the researcher’s “conceptual baggage”—information acquired from clinical practice or prior fieldwork ( Kirby & McKenna, 1989 , p. 21). Thus, familiarity with the phenomenon is not exclusively derived from the literature but also from the researcher’s intuition, experience, and observation. Furthermore, the domain of the research topic is delimited by boundaries so that a specific aspect to be investigated is tightly circumscribed.

• Example : “Long-Term Impact of Sudden Infant Death” ( Dyregrov & Dyregrov, 1999 ): In this study, the domains of inquiry were, first, parents’ experiences and perspectives regarding the death of a child over time and, second, gender differences in parental response to death over time. The following boundaries delimited the topic, that is, indicated what would remain outside of the research domain: (a) Time—parents’ acute response to the recent death of infants; (b) Nature of death—infant death due to accident or intent.

Identifying the categories

Once the domain and its boundaries have been delineated, the researcher can focus within the domain to ascertain its categories. The domain is subdivided into categories established by their particular shared characteristics.

• Example : In the above mentioned study, the domain of parental response to infant death over time was subdivided into categories: (a) the experience of the cot death, (b) parental communication about the lost child over the years, and (c) the subjective meaning regarding the effects the loss of their child had over the 12 to 15 years. These categories were amassed from a literature review that included studies pertaining to the acute crisis reactions following the loss of an infant child, to family responses over time to an older child who dies of cancer, and the different patterns of paternal versus maternal grief response ( Dyregrov & Dyregrov, 1999 ).

Identifying the items

Items are then constructed from each of these conceptual categories. An item is defined as an individual article or unit that is part of a collection or set. These items form the main structure or question stems formulated for the interview schedule.

• Example : The following items were derived from the category pertaining to parental communication about the lost child over the years.

The parents were asked about how they had talked about and memorialized the child over the years (i.e., pictures, the grave, and celebration of birthdays), and if anyone in the family needed or wanted to talk about the dead child more than others and how did the rest of the family meet these demands? ( Dyregrov & Dyregrov, 1999 , p. 641)

When the domain, categories, and question stems are determined, a chart can be constructed that depicts the domain, its categories, and the question stems, as well as the literature from which they were derived. This chart or “aide memoire” can be used as a resource interviewers may consult before or during the interview (depending upon whether the interviews are face-to-face or over the telephone) to remind them of the relevance of the question to the topic and its specific intent ( Irvine, Drew, & Sainsbury, 2013 ). This enables improvisational prompts that maintain congruency with the information intended by the question itself and can optimize the ascertainment of the information sought. This may be particularly useful to a novice researcher or to an experienced researcher in the early interviews of a new project. The chart used in the research example is shown in Table 2 .

Construction of Interview Schedule for Domain of Parental Responses to Sudden Death of Their Infant Over Time.

Writing the question stems

Lazarsfeld (1954) offers three principles to guide the construction of question stems: specification, division, and tacit assumption. These principles have been renamed and elaborated upon but these original principles still constitute the basis of question design ( Berg, 1989 ; Rubin & Rubin, 1995 ).

Specification refers to the focus of each question. This principle is easily achieved in the construction of question stems because they are derived from specific categories of the domain. The principle of division ensures that the questions stems are appropriately worded and sequenced. Questions need to be formulated to ensure they are adequately and clearly communicated. Many researchers choose zero order level of communication—that is, the wording of the questions and ideas conveyed are leveled to the least sophisticated of all potential respondents. Furthermore, affectively worded questions should be neutralized. Instead of asking “ Why did you . . . ?” ask “Can you tell me how you decided to . . . ?” Neutral questions, even when the content is sensitive, improve the likelihood of a full answer. Questions should be presented in a logical, possibly chronological, order ( Leech, 2002 ). Logical order means the interview should move from mild, non-threatening questions to more complex and sensitive questions as the interview proceeds. Questions should not be double-barreled but should address only one aspect of a category ( Berg, 1989 ). Finally, the principle of tacit assumption refers to the process of making explicit what is implicit in participants’ responses. This principle is accomplished via scheduled and unscheduled probes.

Questions collect data in implicit and explicit ways. Explicit data collection is the responses obtained. Implicit data collection is how questions motivate these responses by giving an impression of the interviewer—for example, questions convey the extent of the interviewer’s understanding of the topic area. This instills trust in the participant that he or she will be understood and may inspire fuller responses. The participant must always be kept in mind, therefore, when constructing the questions.

Piloting the interview schedule

Once the content and form of the questionnaire appear satisfactory, it should be subjected to critique or internal testing ( Mann, 1985 ) to ensure its cogency. The following questions may guide this assessment ( Chadwick, Bahr, & Albrecht, 1984 ):

• Has the researcher included all of the questions necessary?
• Do the questions elicit the types of response that were anticipated?
• Is the language of the research instrument meaningful to the respondents?
• Are there other problems with the questions, such as double meaning or multiple issues embedded in a single question?
• Are the questions in logical order?
• Finally, does the interview guide, as developed, help to motivate respondents to participate in the study?

Testing allows the interview schedule to be rehearsed in mock conditions that closely approximate the actual to amend it before main data collection. Pre-testing also allows the prospective interviewers to rehearse their interview performance. How participants respond to questions, whether the questions elicit the intended information, and the interviewers’ capacity to collect data are illuminated by this process such that amendments may be made in advance of actual interviews.

As a Stand Alone Method

The interview schedule can be administered via written questionnaire, electronically (via chat rooms, virtual spaces, electronic mail), face-to-face, over the telephone, and as a component of a quantitative questionnaire ( Fontana & Prokos, 2007 ). The following section identifies the relative advantages and disadvantages of each of these modes of administration.

Face-to-face

The face-to-face administration of the SSI has both advantages and disadvantages ( Shuy, 2001 ). Among the advantages are the following: (a) The presence of the interviewer gives structure to the interview situation. Communication is optimized because both verbal and non-verbal communication is possible. More complex interview schedules are possible as the interviewer may clarify questions if the participant appears confused and unscheduled prompts that elicit clearer and more elaborate responses from participants may be improvised. In addition, visual aids may be presented to respondents to ascertain their perspectives. (b) The physical presence of the interviewer may allow him or her to discern any discomfort or unease on the part of the respondent and offer a break or emotional support, hence face-to-face may be a more ethical way to conduct the research.

Disadvantages may include the following: (a) Participants feel inhibited when asked to respond to sensitive questions face-to-face—more socially desirable answers and conventional answers may be given than when a self-administered questionnaire is utilized. (b) Unwanted interviewer affect is maximized in this type of interview. For example, the physical presence such as the appearance of the interviewer is known to affect respondents and their answers. The face-to-face interview maximizes the influence of the interviewer such that the responses from participants are very similar. (c) Conducting this type of interview is costly in terms of time and money. Fewer face-to-face interviews can be completed in a given time period than via other modalities, for example, Internet or telephone ( de Leeuw, 2008 ).

Telephone interviews

The advantages of telephone administered SSIs include (a) enhanced accessibility to hard-to-reach populations such as those who are elderly, infirm, live in geographically remote locations, and for those who must participate surreptitiously, for example, women experiencing abuse; (b) exclusive auditory communication, that is, absence of visual cues means that any barriers are removed, for example, preconceived ideas about the interviewer caused by their appearance that may impede participants from fully expressing their perspectives; (c) telephone interviews may encompass a large geographic area including countries and continents; (d) they are less costly in terms of time and labor and are therefore more efficient. Furthermore, more interviews may be conducted in a given time period than might not be feasible with face-to-face interviews. Disadvantages include the following: (a) Recruitment may be compromised if prospective participants must pay long distance telephone charges to enroll or find out more information about a study, and (b) recruitment may be compromised if only participants who have access to a telephone or telephone coverage may participate ( Liamputtong, 2007 ).

Using the Internet

The Internet is a medium for self-administered semi-structured questionnaires as well as conducting the interviews themselves (Fontana & Frey, 2005). The advantages of electronic modes of administration include the following: (a) Privacy—Some sensitive topic research suggests that people prefer the anonymity of the computer, than disclosing face-to-face ( DiLillo, DeGue, Kras, Loreto-Colgan, & Nash, 2006 ). Although electronic mail makes identity difficult to protect, participants (including the interviewer) in interviews in virtual worlds such as Second Life may assume an avatar identity. (b) Recruitment—The Internet allows for fast collection of large numbers of questionnaires at low cost, and exploding the potential for global recruitment. The disadvantages may include the following: (a) Distress—Although participants may disclose more information in a self-administered questionnaire, some report feeling more distressed than when answering questions face-to-face with an interviewer ( Halek, Murdoch, & Fortier, 2005 ). As the participant is not immediately accessible, the researcher cannot immediately respond therapeutically. (b) Recruitment—Not all prospective participants have access to the Internet. However, electronic administration provides an opportunity to those participants precluded from more typical modes of participation because of disability, age, or geographic isolation. (c) Data collection—Many people may “lurk” or not give the questionnaire adequate time; Internet questionnaires must be short, with less than 10 to 15 minutes to complete ( de Leeuw, 2008 ). (d) Design of questionnaire—The design and implementation of Internet semi-structured questionnaires require highly skilled personnel who combine technical knowledge as well as knowledge on usability and visual design. This increases the cost of this mode of administration ( de Leeuw, 2008 ).

As components of a quantitative questionnaire

SSIs may also be administered as a component of a quantitative questionnaire. This mixed design may combine the advantages of two administration strategies. The quantitative questionnaire serves as an objective instrument, the findings of which may be triangulated with the perspectives of the respondent in response to the open-ended questions of the interview. The timing of the administration of the questionnaire with respect to the interview may be critical—closed-ended questions posed first may inhibit more complete responses to those posed during the interview.

The data from SSIs have also been used in the creation of quantitative instruments. For example, the content analysis of data derived from qualitative studies yields categories that are useful to the construction of a questionnaire. For example, Morse and Doan (1987) conducted a qualitative study to ascertain adolescent girls’ perspectives regarding menarche. Researchers used the data derived from that study in the construction of the Likert-type scale items for an adolescent menstrual attitude questionnaire ( Morse, Kieren, & Bottorff, 1993 ).

Sample size for data adequacy

Sampling for SSI research must be guided by the following principle to ensure the data collected are adequate. A minimum of 30 participants is recommended for initial recruitment to ensure adequate data collection. Adequacy of data in this type of research is defined in both qualitative (i.e., the depth of data collected) and quantitative terms (i.e., the number of datum collected). 1 SSI data may be thin. Although participants know they are free to respond to questions as they wish, they are also aware that they are to respond to scheduled questions. Hence, participants may respond to categorical questions in kind. The complexity or simplicity of responses is also related to the topic of investigation, the mode of administration of the interview schedule (face-to-face may facilitate more elaborate responses than online or self-completed questionnaires), the participants (whether they are willing, reflective, articulate), the ability of the interviewer to draw people out, and how motivating the questions are for participants’ responses.

The second aspect of adequacy, however, is the sufficiency of the data for quantitative analysis. Because SSI data are collected with an interview schedule in which each participant is asked the same questions, data analysis proceeds by item. Such analysis is amenable to non-parametric statistical analysis ( Morse, 1992 ). A sample size of 30 is the minimum number recommended for such statistical analysis to be meaningful. Finally, in addition to qualitative and quantitative analysis, data derived from SSIs may be used in a mixed-method design, for example, a QUAL-quan sequential mixed-method design in which the qualitative data are transformed for quantitative analysis. In this case, the QUAL sample size needs to be minimally 30 for adequacy of the quantitative analysis ( Morse & Niehaus, 2009 ).

Sampling for appropriate data

The second principle to guide SSI sampling ensures the collection of appropriate data; that is, data that are representative of the phenomenon under investigation. Sampling for SSI research is purposive; therefore, participants for SSIs are selected because of their particular experiences, perspectives, or expertise, and not because they are demographically representative of the larger population ( Blee & Taylor, 2002 ; Rubin & Rubin, 1995 ). Purposive sampling is essential to SSI research to optimize valid findings that may be extended to other arenas. This is contrary to the literature that cites conscious bias as a constant danger with purposive sampling and advises that findings from studies that employ it be regarded with caution ( LoBiondo-Wood & Haber, 2005 ). There are various strategies to purposively sample: convenient (eligibility criteria are posted and the first volunteers who meet it comprise the sample), snowball (people with inside knowledge of eligible participants connect them with the research project), homogeneous (people who are very similar), and variable (participants who represent the full scope of the domain).

• Example : In the study that investigated the long-term impact of sudden infant death ( Dyregrov & Dyregrov, 1999 ), the purposive sample was comprised of participants who had lost a child to SIDS (sudden infant death syndrome) between 1981 and 1984. The participants were people who were married couples at the time of the death of their child and who had previously been interviewed approximately 1 year after their loss. The couples were heterosexual to meet the dimension of gender important to the analysis of grief response.

Data Analysis

As noted, the objective of SSI research is to elicit and ascertain participants’ perspectives to confirm, correct, or discover new knowledge pertaining to the focus of inquiry. Therefore, the analysis of SSI data is designed to provide a comprehensive and accurate descriptive summary of participants’ perspectives. Unlike other research methods such as grounded theory or phenomenology, neither are SSI data usually abstracted into theory, nor are they mined to discern the essence of participants’ experience. Analysis remains close to the data.

Data analysis proceeds by (a) preparing the data for analysis, (b) conducting content analysis, and (c) if desired and the sample size is adequate, transforming the textual data into numerical data.

Preparation of the data for analysis

Preparing the interview data for content analysis involves the transcription of audio files to text, and importing transcripts into Computer Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis (CAQDA) software ( Lewins & Silver, 2007 ).

Transcription

When having an audiotape transcribed, it is crucial that the tape be transcribed exactly (word-for-word) from the tape and not paraphrased. Identifying information that may compromise the privacy of the participants and/or those to whom they refer during the interview can be removed at this time to maintain confidentiality. If the researcher requires, symbols may be utilized to indicate the tone of the voice (e.g., tears, laughter, expletives), with pauses or gaps indicated by dashes or ellipses and emotion indicated by square brackets, for example, [fearfully]. All pages of the transcript are numbered and the participant number is placed before each item number ( Morse & Field, 1995 ). Once the transcript is returned from the typist, the content is checked against the audiotape to ensure accuracy of the data. If qualitative data software is to be used, a program that is capable of categorizing data by item, and then sorting/categorizing according to the research codes, should be selected.

Conducting content analysis 2

The purpose of content analysis is to sort and summarize the informational content of the data, by item and by common characteristics within the data.

Qualitative content analysis

The first task is to derive codes from the data. The researcher works by item, first reading all participants’ responses to the same question. The researcher then uses standard coding procedure, highlighting important words or phrases, and making notes in the margin that emphasize important features in each response.

Once the researcher grasps the commonalities appearing in each response, the sorting process begins. Initially, keeping the categories broad, data are sorted according to similar characteristics and, once these categories become “cluttered” and lengthy, they are subdivided into smaller categories. Ideally, more that one researcher should code data, and inter-rater agreement calculated to determine reliability ( Campbell, Quincey, Osserman, & Pedersen, 2013 ). A definition is developed and assigned to each category and a synthesizing statement about each category and subcategory is written.

Data transformation

Quantification or counting is not incongruous with, but integral to, qualitative research ( Morgan, 1993 ; Morse, 2012; Sandelowski, 2000 ). Because every participant has been asked the same question in the same order, SSIs are amenable to counting by participant ( Morse & Niehaus, 2009 ). The different types of responses to each categorical question stem may be tabulated and the responses expressed as percentages, frequencies, or non-parametric statistics, with the n (the sample size), as the total number of participants. Quantification, or displaying information numerically, allows patterns to emerge from the data with greater clarity ( Sandelowski, 2000 ). Descriptive statistics such as calculating frequencies, relative frequencies, and means may be employed to discern, describe, and summarize such patterns—analytically and ideographically—if they exist, in the qualitative data. Non-parametric statistics may reveal relationship between items.

Mixed-method design

SSIs are the most common qualitative research method to be used in mixed-method designs—those that integrate qualitative and quantitative research ( Bryman, 2006 ; Morse, 2012; Povee & Roberts, 2015 ). Indeed, every SSI study, therefore, may itself constitute a qualitatively driven, mixed-method design through the internal transformation of its data set from qualitatively analyzed textual data into numerical data for quantitative analysis ( Morse & Niehaus, 2009 ).

• Example : The study by Dyregrov and Dyregrov (1999) could have been a QUAL-quan mixed-method design. The interviews were conducted to ascertain participants’ perspectives and experiences regarding the death of their infants over time. Once the content of these responses have been qualitatively analyzed (i.e., coded and sorted for the purpose of describing and summarizing the responses), they could have been transformed from textual data to numerical data for the purpose of supplementary quasi-statistical analysis by non-parametric statistics.

Transforming textual data to numerical data

If researchers want to supplement the core qualitative analysis of the interview data with a quantitative component they must transform the textual interview data into numerical data. This transformation of data occurs after the qualitative content analysis is completed—that is, the supplemental component is conducted as a sequel.

First, however, a codebook must be created. This is accomplished by revisiting the categories that have emerged from the coding of data for each question. These categories as well as the inclusion and exclusion criteria and an example (from the data) of a code that belongs to it are entered as headers in the codebook. These categories are then tested against all the data that belong to each item. The categories must be discrete and comprehensive—all the data must fit into one of the categories. Different coders complete the process of tabulating data within the categories. Inter-rater reliability refers to the degree of confluence that exists among independent raters. Once the codebook is satisfactory, tabulation occurs—This results in frequency of categorical responses per participant. It is the establishment of frequencies that transforms the data from text to numbers. From these frequencies, other descriptive statistics such as relative frequencies may be calculated. With these numbers, non-parametric statistics such as chi-square may be used. The chi-square independence test is useful in determining whether there is an association or statistical dependence between two characteristics of a population.

• Example : While investigating parental responses to the death of their infants over time ( Dyregrov & Dyregrov, 1999 ), a pattern was discerned—marital communication about the death of their infant appeared to be correlated with less intense grieving; conversely, couples who did not communicate about their infant’s death experienced more intense grief. Tabulating the frequencies of categories pertaining to communication as well as those associated with grief reactions would make the data amenable to chi-square statistical analysis to discern whether or not a statistically significant relationship exists between these experiences.

Once the results of the quantitative supplementary component have been calculated, they serve to augment the results of the core component.

Results of SSI research constitute descriptive summaries that are valuable primarily as end-products and, secondarily, as entry points for future study. The end-product is knowledge—either confirmation or correction of that which already exists or discovery of new knowledge. Results of SSI research may seem simple, that is, “mere” concrete description rather than abstract and theoretical. But this is deceptive—such research results are key pivots to the advancement of knowledge. This advancement of knowledge is far-reaching, influencing multiple disciplines and typologies of knowledge. SSIs advance critical, feminist, phenomenological, and mixed methodological aims.

In this article, we have discussed how the SSI has developed from a research strategy to a prevalent and diversified research method. We traced the historical development of the SSI from its inception as a focused interview through its advancement via significant social, cultural, and historical moments. Such moments included the empathetic turn in interviewing, the contemporary privileging of quantitative research, and concomitantly the norming of research ethics review. Contemporary research methods adopt various philosophical assumptions rather than maintaining a tight theory-method commitment to a solitary philosophical foundation. SSI research is epistemologically versatile and compatible with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method approaches. We advance a typology of SSIs that may be used as a strategy in an overall research design, a sequential or simultaneous supplement to the core in mixed- or multiple-method research, or it can constitute a single data set mixed-method design and it can stand alone.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Dr. D. Jean Clandinin for her assistance with this research.

Author Biographies

Michele J. McIntosh is an Assistant Professor at the Trent-Fleming School of Nursing, Trent University, Peterborough, Ontario, Canada. A predominantly interpretive scholar, she is keenly interested in qualitative research methodologies, strategies and ethics.

Janice M. Morse , is a Professor and the Barnes Presidential Chair, College of Nursing, University of Utah, and Professor Emeritus, University of Alberta.

1. If the “free-flow” of information is reduced, as it is in semistructured interviews, the amount of data obtained from each participant is more limited, hence, the number of participants must be increased to obtain data adequacy (Morse, 2000). A sample N = 30 for semi-structured interviews is derived from several sources. In marketing research, Griffin and Hauser (1993) note that an N of 20-30 reduces the possibility of “missing” a minority opinion. Should the researchers wish to transform data and report quantitative results for the interviews, data averages will be more stable, and non-parametric analyses stronger, with a sample size of 30 or more ( Bond & Fox, 2013 ).

2. Some authors conduct thematic analysis (see, for example, Riera et al., 2015 ; Wiley, Cooper, Wood, & Leask, 2015 ). In this case, researchers override the item structure of the semi-structured interview, and look for themes in the participant responses across all items and interviews by analyzing line-by-line. When using a thematic analysis, it is not possible to transform these data quantitatively.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding: The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

• Adinkrah M. (2000). Maternal infanticides in Fiji . Child Abuse & Neglect , 24 , 1543–1555. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Avis M. (2003). Do we need methodological theory to do qualitative research? Qualitative Health Research , 13 , 995–1004. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bartholomew K., Henderson A. J. Z., Marcia J. E. (2000). Coding semi-structured interviews in social psychological research . In Reis H., Judd C. M. (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology (pp. 286–312). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Berg B. L. (1989). Qualitative research methods for the social science (3rd ed.). Toronto: Allyn & Bacon. [ Google Scholar ]
• Blee K. M., Taylor V. (2002). Semi-structured interviewing in social movement research . In Klandermans B., Staggenborg S. (Eds.), Methods of social movement research (pp. 92–117). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bond T.G., Fox C.M. (2013). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences . New York: Psychology Press . [ Google Scholar ]
• Bryman A. (2006). Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: How is it done? Qualitative Research , 6 , 97–113. [ Google Scholar ]
• Campbell J. L., Quincy C., Osserman J., Pedersen O. K. (2013). Coding in-depth semistructured interviews problems of unitization and intercoder reliability and agreement . Sociological Methods & Research , 42 , 294–320. doi: 10.1177/0049124113500475 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Casiday R. E., Hungin A. P. S., Cornford C. S., de Wit N. J., Blell M. T. (2009a). GPs’ explanatory models for irritable bowel syndrome: A mismatch with patient models? Family Practice , 26 , 34–39. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Casiday R. E., Hungin A. P. S., Cornford C. S., de Wit N. J., Blell M. T. (2009b). Patients’ explanatory models for irritable bowel syndrome: Symptoms and treatment more important than explaining aetiology . Family Practice , 26 , 40–47. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chadwick B. A., Bahr H. M., Albrecht S. L. (1984). Social science research methods . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. [ Google Scholar ]
• Charmaz K. (2009). Shifting the grounds: Constructivist grounded theory methods . In Morse J. M., Stern P. N., Corbin J., Bowers B., Charmaz K., Clarke A. (Eds.), Grounded theory: The second generation (pp. 127–154). Walnut Cree, CA: Left Coast Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• de Leeuw E. (2008). Self-administered questionnaires and standardized interviews . In Alasuutari P., Bickman L., Brannan J. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of social research methods (pp. 313–327). Los Angeles: SAGE. [ Google Scholar ]
• Denzin N. K. (1989). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. [ Google Scholar ]
• DiLillo D., DeGue S., Kras A., Loreto-Colgan, Nash C. (2006). Participant responses to retrospective surveys of child maltreatment: Does mode of assessment matter? Violence and Victims , 21 , 410–424. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dyregrov A., Dyregrov K. (1999). Long-term impact of sudden infant death: A 12 to 15 year follow-up . Death Studies , 23 , 635–661. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fontana A., Frey J. H. (2008). The interview: From neutral stance to political involvement . In Alasuutari P., Bickman L., Brannan J. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of social research methods (pp. 695–727). Los Angeles: SAGE. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fontana A., Prokos A. H. (2007). The interview from formal to postmodern . Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Griffin A., Hauser J.R. (1993). The voice of the customer . Marketing science , 12 ( 1 ), 1-27. [ Google Scholar ]
• Halek K., Murdoch M., Fortier L. (2005). Spontaneous reports of emotional upset and health care utilization among veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder after receiving a potentially upsetting survey . American Journal of Orthopsychiatry , 75 , 142–151. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Irvine A., Drew P., Sainsbury R. (2013). “Am I not answering your questions properly?” Clarification, adequacy and responsiveness in semi-structured telephone and face-to-face interviews . Qualitative Research , 13 , 87–106. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jensen A. L., Harder I. (2004). The osteoporotic pain experience . Osteoporosis International , 15 , 201–208. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kearney M. H., Murphy S., Rosenbaum M. (1994). Mothering on crack cocaine: A grounded theory analysis . Social Science & Medicine , 38 , 351–361. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kirby S., McKenna K. (1989). Experience research social change: Methods from the margins . Toronto: Garamond Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kolip P., Hoefling-Engels N., Schmacke N. (2009). Attitudes toward postmenopausal long-term hormonal therapy . Qualitative Health Research , 19 , 207–215. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kornelson J. (2005). Essences and imperatives: An investigation of technology in childbirth . Social Science & Medicine , 61 , 1495–1504. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kuruvilla S., Mays N., Walt G. (2007). Describing the impact of health services and policy research . Journal of Health Services Research Policy , 12 ( Suppl. 1 ), S1:23–S1:31. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kvale S. (1996). Interviews . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lang A., Gottlieb L. (1993). Parental grief reactions and marital intimacy following infant death . Death Studies , 17 , 233–255. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lavie-Ajayi M., Joffe H. (2009). Social representations of female orgasm . Journal of Health Psychology , 14 , 98–107. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lazarsfeld P. F. (1954). The art of asking why three principles underlying the formulation of questionnaires . In Katz D. (Ed.), Public opinion and propaganda . New York: Dryden Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Leech B. L. (2002). Asking questions: Techniques for semistructured interviews . Political Science & Politics , 35 , 665–668. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lewins A., Silver C. (2007). Using software in qualitative research: A step-by-step guide . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. [ Google Scholar ]
• Liamputtong P. (2007). Researching the vulnerable: A guide to sensitive research methods . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. [ Google Scholar ]
• LoBiondo-Wood G., Haber J. (2005). Nursing research in Canada: Methods, critical appraisal and utilization (1st Canadian ed.). Toronto: Elsevier Mosby. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mann P. H. (1985). Methods of social investigation . Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell. [ Google Scholar ]
• Martinson I. M., Daview B., McClowry S. (1991). Parental depression following the death of a child . Death Studies , 15 , 259–267. [ Google Scholar ]
• Martinson I. M., McClowry S. G., Davies B., Kuhlenkamp E. J. (1994). Changes over time: A study of family bereavement following childhood cancer . Journal of Palliative Care , 10 , 19–25. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Merton R. K., Kendall P. L. (1946). The focused interview . American Journal of Sociology , 51 , 541–557. [ Google Scholar ]
• Morgan D. L. (1993). Qualitative content analysis: A guide to paths not taken . Qualitative Health Research , 3 , 112–121. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Morse J. M. (1992). The Semi-Structured Questionnaire . In Morse J. M. (Ed.), Qualitative health research (pp. 361–362). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. [ Google Scholar ]
• Morse J.M. (2000). Determining Sample Size . (Editorial) Qualitative Health Research , 10 ( 1 ), 3-5. [ Google Scholar ]
• Morse J. M. (2006). Biased reflections: Principles of sampling and analysis in qualitative inquiry . In Popay J. (Ed.), Moving beyond effectiveness in evidence synthesis: Methodological issues in the synthesis of diverse sources of evidence (pp. 53–60). London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. [ Google Scholar ]
• Morse J. M. (2003). Editorial: Biasphobia . Qualitative Health Research , 13 , 891–892. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Morse J. M. (2002). The implications of interview type and structure in mixed-method designs . (pps. 194-204). Sage Handbook of Interview Research (2 nd ed). Ed by Gubrium J., Holstein, Marvasti K. Thousand Oaks, Ca: SAGE [ Google Scholar ]
• Morse J. M., Doan H. M. (1987). Growing up at school: Adolescents response to menarche . Journal of School Health , 57 , 385–389. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Morse J. M., Field P. A. (1995). Qualitative research methods for health professionals (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. [ Google Scholar ]
• Morse J. M., Kieren D., Bottorff J. L. (1993). The Adolescent Menstrual Attitude Questionnaire, Part 1: Scale construction . Health Care for Women International , 14 , 39–62. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Morse J. M., Niehaus L. (2009). Mixed-method design: Principles and procedures . Thousand Oaks, CA: Left Coast Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Nunnally J.C. (1967). Psychometric Theory . McGraw-Hill, New York. [ Google Scholar ]
• Patton M. Q. (1980). Qualitative evaluation methods . Beverley Hills, CA: SAGE. [ Google Scholar ]
• Povee K., Roberts L. D. (2015). Attitudes toward mixed methods research in psychology: The best of both worlds? International Journal of Social Research Methodology , 18 , 41–57. [ Google Scholar ]
• Riera A., Ocasio A., Tiyyagura G., Krumeich L., Ragins K., Thomas A., . . . Vaca F. E. (2015). Latino caregiver experiences with asthma health communication . Qualitative Health Research , 25 , 16–26. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Roebuck A., Furze G., Thompson D. R. (2001). Health-related quality of life after myocardial infarction: An interview study . Journal of Advanced Nursing , 34 , 787–794. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rubin H. J., Rubin I. S. (1995). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sandelowski M. (2000). Whatever happened to qualitative description? Research in Nursing & Health , 23 , 334–340. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Scappaticci A. L. S., Blay S. L. (2009). Homeless teen mothers: Social and psychological aspects . Journal of Public Health , 17 , 19–26. [ Google Scholar ]
• Seale C., Gobo G., Gubrium J. F., Silverman D. (2004). Introduction: Inside qualitative research . In Seale C. C., Gobo G., Gubrium F., Silverman D. (Eds.), Qualitative research practice (pp. 1–13). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. [ Google Scholar ]
• Shuy R. W. (2001). In-person versus telephone interviewing . In Gubrium J. F., Holstein J. A. (Eds.), Handbook of interview research: Context and method (pp. 537–557). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sisjord M. K., Kristiansen E. (2009). Elite women wrestlers’ muscles: Physical strength and a social burden . International Review for the Sociology of Sport , 44 , 231–246. [ Google Scholar ]
• Smith D. E. (1990). The conceptual practices of power . Toronto: University of Toronto Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Spradley J. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview . New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. [ Google Scholar ]
• Stone A. L. (2009). More than adding a T: American lesbian and gay activists’ attitudes towards transgender inclusion . Sexualities , 123 , 334–354. [ Google Scholar ]
• Walsh A., Edwards H., Fraser J. (2007). Influences on parents’ fever management: Beliefs, experiences and information sources . Journal of Clinical Nursing , 16 , 233–2340. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wiley K. E., Cooper S. C., Wood N., Leask J. (2015). Understanding pregnant women’s attitudes and behavior toward influenza and pertussis vaccination . Qualitative Health Research , 25 , 360–370. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Williams B. R., Woodby L. L., Bailey F. A., Burgio K. L. (2008). Identifying and responding to ethical and methodological issues in after-death interviews with next-of-kin . Death Studies , 32 , 197–236. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Learning sustainability: post-graduate students’ perceptions on the use of social media platforms to enhance academic writing.

1. Introduction

2. literature review, 2.1. online communication through social media for educational purposes, 2.2. academic writing, 2.3. social media, academic writing, and the fourth goal of sustainable development, 3. research questions.

• How do post-graduate students perceive the role of social media platforms in enhancing their academic writing?
• What are the obstacles to the use of social media platforms that hinder enhancing academic writing?

4. Methodology

4.1. participants, 4.2. research approach, 4.3. research procedure, 4.4. data collection and analysis.

• What social media tools were used by you in writing the research plan?
• Which of these tools do you prefer to use? Why?
• Describe your experience using your favorite tool in some detail.
• What do you think of the use of these tools in terms of their usefulness in improving the quality of your writing of the research plan? Why?
• From your point of view, what are the disadvantages of using these tools that may negatively affect the quality of your writing of the research plan? Why?
• From your point of view, what are the obstacles to using these tools that may reduce their usefulness in improving the quality of your writing of the research plan? Why?
• Do you prefer using social media tools or traditional methods of communicating with the supervisor regarding the development of the research plan? Why?
• Familiarizing yourself with your data: The authors of the study were the interviewers. Therefore, they were very familiar with the data.
• Generating initial codes: The initial interesting codes from the data were identified. The codes were then assessed in a meaningful way regarding the research questions.
• Searching for themes: Here the analysis re-focused on the codes on a broader level, which is generating themes. In this phase, different codes are sorted into potential themes.
• Reviewing themes: The initial list of themes was refined, and some candidate themes that did not have enough data to support them were ignored.
• Defining and naming themes: In this phase, the data were defined by identifying the essence of what each theme was about and were refined by determining what aspect of the data each theme captured. Table 2 illustrates the themes and frequencies of the interview data revealed from the thematic analysis.
• Producing the report: This phase involved the final analysis under the themes and write-up of the final report. The final report of the data analysis and the concluded findings will be reviewed in the following section.

5. Findings and Discussion

6. limitation, 7. conclusions, author contributions, institutional review board statement, informed consent statement, data availability statement, conflicts of interest.

• Graham, L.; Berman, J.; Bellert, A. Sustainable Learning: Inclusive Practices for 21st Century Classrooms ; Cambridge University Press: Sydney, Australia, 2015. [ Google Scholar ]
• UNESCO. Incheon Declaration: Education 2030: Towards Inclusive and Equitable Quality Education and Lifelong Learning for All ; UNESCO: Paris, France, 2015. [ Google Scholar ]
• Al Mulhim, E.N. Technology Fatigue During the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Case of Distance Project-Based Learning Environments. Turk. Online J. Distance Educ. 2023 , 24 , 234–245. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Alshammary, F.M.; Alhalafawy, W.S. Sustaining Enhancement of Learning Outcomes across Digital Platforms during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review. J. Pos. Sch. Psyc. 2022 , 6 , 2279–2301. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ismaeel, D.A.; Al Mulhim, E.N. E-teaching Internships and TPACK during the Covid-19 Crisis: The Case of Saudi Pre-service Teachers. Int. J. Instr. 2022 , 15 , 147–166. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vision 2030. National Transformation Program. Available online: https://www.vision2030.gov.sa/en/vision-2030/vrp/national-transformation-program/ (accessed on 15 April 2023).
• Glazer, H.R.; Breslin, M.; Wanstreet, C.E. Online professional and academic learning communities: Faculty perspectives. Q. Rev. Distance Educ. 2013 , 14 , 123–130. [ Google Scholar ]
• Thormann, J.; Fidalgo, P. Guidelines for online course moderation and community building from a student’s perspective. J. Online Learn. Teach. 2014 , 10 , 374–388. [ Google Scholar ]
• Froment, F.; García González, A.J.; Bohórquez, M.R. The Use of Social Networks as a Communication Tool between Teachers and Students: A Literature Review. Turk. Online J. Educ. Technol. TOJET 2017 , 16 , 126–144. [ Google Scholar ]
• Vlachopoulos, D.; Makri, A. Online communication and interaction in distance higher education: A framework study of good practice. Int. Rev. Educ. 2019 , 65 , 605–632. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Habibi, A.; Mukminin, A.; Riyanto, Y.; Prasojo, L.D.; Sulistiyo, U.; Sofwan, M.; Saudagar, F. Building an online community: Student teachers’ perceptions on the advantages of using social networking services in a teacher education program. Turk. Online J. Distance Educ. 2018 , 19 , 46–61. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chugh, R.; Ruhi, U. Social media in higher education: A literature review of Facebook. Edu. Info. Tech. 2018 , 23 , 605–616. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Faramarzi, S.; Tabrizi, H.H.; Chalak, A. Telegram: An instant messaging application to assist distance language learning. Teach. Engl. Technol. 2019 , 19 , 132–147. [ Google Scholar ]
• Aghajani, M.; Adloo, M. The Effect of Online Cooperative Learning on Students’ Writing Skills and Attitudes through Telegram Application. Int. J. Instr. 2018 , 11 , 433–448. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• VanDoorn, G.; Eklund, A.A. Face to Facebook: Social media and the learning and teaching potential of symmetrical, synchronous communication. J. Univ. Teach. Learn. Pract. 2013 , 10 , 1–14. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Northey, G.; Bucic, T.; Chylinski, M.; Govind, R. Increasing student engagement using asynchronous learning. J. Mark. Educ. 2015 , 37 , 171–180. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dewey, J. How We Think: A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to the Educative Process ; D.C. Heath & Co Publishers: Boston, MA, USA, 1993. [ Google Scholar ]
• Piaget, J. The Psychology of the Child ; Basic Books: New York, NY, USA, 1972. [ Google Scholar ]
• Vygotsky, L. Mind in Society ; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1978. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kelm, O.R. Social media: It’s what students do. Bus. Commun. Q. 2011 , 74 , 505–520. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Churcher, K.; Downs, E.; Tewksbury, D. “Friending” Vygotsky: A Social Constructivist Pedagogy of Knowledge Building through Classroom Social Media Use. J. Eff. Teach. 2014 , 14 , 33–50. [ Google Scholar ]
• Schrader, D.E. Constructivism and Learning in the Age of Social Media: Changing Minds and Learning Communities. New Dir. Teach. Learn. 2015 , 144 , 23–35. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Akpan, V.I.; Igwe, U.A.; Mpamah, I.B.I.; Okoro, C.O. Social constructivism: Implications on teaching and learning. Br. J. Edu. 2020 , 8 , 49–56. [ Google Scholar ]
• Buriro, G.A.; Charan, A.A. Social media tools at developing academic writing skills. UICELL Conf. Proc. 2018 , 2 , 29–37. [ Google Scholar ]
• Scott, C.E.; Ritter, N.L.; Fowler, R.M.; Franks, A.D. Developing a community of academic writers: Using social media to support academic accountability, motivation, and productivity. J. Lit. Technol. 2019 , 20 , 61–96. [ Google Scholar ]
• Seneviratne, L.C. An Intervention Using Digital Social Media to Support Academic Writing of University Students: A case study. Available online: https://research.usq.edu.au/download/18d93bd589ccde0d3b5b95e600ee9d06efbd1d9a943116acbc0a780f5856e943/3486702/Seneviratne_2018_whole.pdf (accessed on 20 March 2023).
• Zheng, B. Social Media and Classroom Writing: Participation, Interaction, and Collaboration. Available online: https://www.proquest.com/openview/f69e557a16831d2576ba1fc607fde189/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750 (accessed on 27 July 2023).
• Sun, Y.C. Extensive writing in foreign-language classrooms: A blogging approach. Innov. Educ. Teach. Int. 2010 , 47 , 327–339. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Alsamadani, H.A. The Effectiveness of Using Online Blogging for Students’ Individual and Group Writing. Int. Educ. Stud. 2018 , 11 , 44–51. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yeboah, J.; Ewur, G.D. The impact of WhatsApp messenger usage on students performance in Tertiary Institutions in Ghana. J. Educ. Pract. 2014 , 5 , 157–164. [ Google Scholar ]
• Abdul Fattah, S.F.E.S.A. The Effectiveness of Using WhatsApp Messenger as One of Mobile Learning Techniques to Develop Students’ Writing Skills. J. Educ. Pract. 2015 , 6 , 115–127. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lin, W.C.; Yang, S.C. Exploring students’ perceptions of integrating Wiki technology and peer feedback into English writing courses. Engl. Teach. Pract. Crit. 2011 , 10 , 88–103. [ Google Scholar ]
• Li, X.; Chu, S.K.; Ki, W.W.; Woo, M.M. Using a wiki-based collaborative process writing pedagogy to facilitate collaborative writing among Chinese primary school students. Australas. J. Educ. Technol. 2012 , 28 , 159–181. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Woo, M.M.; Chu SK, W.; Li, X. Peer-feedback and revision process in a wiki mediated collaborative writing. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 2013 , 61 , 279–309. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Baishya, D.; Maheshwari, S. WhatsApp Groups in Academic Context: Exploring the Academic Uses of WhatsApp Groups among the Students. Contemp. Educ. Technol. 2020 , 11 , 31–46. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Iqbal, M.Z.; Alradhi, H.I.; Alhumaidi, A.A.; Alshaikh, K.H.; AlObaid, A.M.; Alhashim, M.T.; AlSheikh, M.H. Telegram as a tool to supplement online medical education during COVID-19 crisis. Acta Inform. Med. 2020 , 28 , 94. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Suárez-Lantarón, B.; Deocano-Ruíz, Y.; García-Perales, N.; Castillo-Reche, I.S. The Educational Use of WhatsApp. Sustainability 2022 , 14 , 10510. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yılmazsoy, B.; Kahraman, M.; Köse, U. Negative Aspects of Using Social Networks in Education: A Brief Review on WhatsApp Example. J. Educ. Technol. Online Learn. 2020 , 3 , 69–90. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Revere, L.; Kovach, J.V. Online Technologies for Engaged Learning A Meaningful Synthesis for Educators. Q. Rev. Distance Educ. 2011 , 12 , 113–124. [ Google Scholar ]
• González-Padilla, D.A.; Tortolero-Blanco, L. Social media influence in the COVID-19 pandemic. Int. Braz. J. Urol. 2020 , 46 , 120–124. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Global Education Monitoring Report Team (UNESCO). Global Education Monitoring Report 2023: Technology in Education: A Tool on whose Terms? United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization: Paris, France, 2023. [ Google Scholar ]
• Al Mulhim, E.N.; Zaky, Y.A.M. Sustainability in E-Learning: E-Books and Academic Procrastination among Secondary Students. Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 14668. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Fülöp, M.T.; Breaz, T.O.; Topor, I.D.; Ionescu, C.A.; Dragolea, L.L. Challenges and perceptions of e-learning for educational sustainability in the “new normality era”. Front. Psychol. 2023 , 14 , 1104633. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Prasetyanto, D.; Rizki, M.; Sunitiyoso, Y. Online Learning Participation Intention after COVID-19 Pandemic in Indonesia: Do Students Still Make Trips for Online Class? Sustainability 2022 , 14 , 1982. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Geith, C.; Vignare, K. Access to Education with Online Learning and Open Educational Resources: Can they Close the Gap? On. Lear. 2019 , 12 , 105–126. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sobaih, A.E.E.; Moustafa, M.A.; Ghandforoush, P.; Khan, M. To use or not to use? Social media in higher education in developing countries. Com. Hum. Behav. 2016 , 58 , 296–305. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Braun, V.; Clarke, V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 2006 , 3 , 77–101. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Al Mulhim, E.N.; Ismaeel, D.A. Learning Sustainability: Post-Graduate Students’ Perceptions on the Use of Social Media Platforms to Enhance Academic Writing. Sustainability 2024 , 16 , 5587. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16135587

Al Mulhim EN, Ismaeel DA. Learning Sustainability: Post-Graduate Students’ Perceptions on the Use of Social Media Platforms to Enhance Academic Writing. Sustainability . 2024; 16(13):5587. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16135587

Al Mulhim, Ensaf Nasser, and Dina Ahmed Ismaeel. 2024. "Learning Sustainability: Post-Graduate Students’ Perceptions on the Use of Social Media Platforms to Enhance Academic Writing" Sustainability 16, no. 13: 5587. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16135587

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals