3.8 DATA GENERATION
3.8.2 Qualitative data generation
3.8.2.2 Advantages and limitations of interviews
Although interviewing is the primary mode of data generation in qualitative research and has gained much popularity with researchers (Flick, 2006: 149; Barbour & Schostak, 2005: 41; Greeff, 2005: 287; Atkinson & Silverman, in Henning et al., 2004: 51;
Wilkinson & Birmingham 2003: 43), interviews have their advantages as well as limitations. One of the advantages of interviews is that they are a more natural way of interacting with people than getting them to fill out a questionnaire, take a test, or participate in an experiment. It affords the researcher the opportunity to get to know the participants better so as to gain a deeper understanding of their views and emotions (Terre Blanche & Durrheim, 1999: 128).
Another advantage of interviews is that they can be tape-recorded. Sacks (1992: 26) strongly recommends the use of the tape recorder to record interviews on the grounds that it is impossible to remember every detail such as “pauses, overlaps, and inbreaths”, and that by studying the tape recordings of conversations the researcher is able to focus on
“actual details of actual events”. However, tape recording has its disadvantages in that the participant may feel uncomfortable and may even withdraw from the interview (Greeff, 2005: 298). Fortunately this did not happen in this study as the participants stated that they were comfortable with having the interview audio-taped. Participants were made to feel at ease to enable them to speak freely as the researcher explained the purpose of tape- recording the interviews. Besides, it was made clear at the outset that if the participants were not comfortable with the tape recorder it would be switched off.
141
The advantage of the unstructured interview for the qualitative researcher is that it
“apparently offers the opportunity for an authentic gaze into the soul of another” (Denzin
& Lincoln, 2003: 343). The disadvantage is that it is difficult for the researcher to channel the discussion if the participant steers away from the main subject matter. In addition, the analysis of the unstructured interview can prove extremely difficult (Wilkinson &
Birmingham 2003: 45).
The advantages of the semi-structured face-to-face interview are that the interviewer knows when to use contingency questions to probe further, and can control the sequence of questions. Additionally, the interviewer can also observe the setting and the use of non- verbal communication cues and visual aids such as body language (Neuman, 2006: 301;
McIntyre, 2005: 167). Greeff (2005: 294) adds that the researcher and participant have some degree of flexibility, and the researcher is able to follow up interesting areas that emerge from the responses. Furthermore, participants are able to provide greater detail, thereby furnishing an in-depth account of their life experiences, as questions are open- ended.
A major disadvantage of face-to-face interviews is the high cost factor. It is also the most labour-intensive type of interview because of the time spent travelling and interviewing participants in different places (Greeff, 2005: 299; McIntyre, 2005: 167). In this study the cost factor was something to contend with, as the researcher travelled to schools in three different provinces in South Africa in order to interview participants. This was time- consuming and required much patience.
Field and Morse (1994: 67-73) point out the several limitations of interviews, some of which are listed below:
• Interruptions and competing distractions: The most common interrupter is the telephone. Interruptions distract the participant and break the trend of thought. It takes time to regain the level of intimacy that was established. A high quality interview requires concentration on the part of the researcher and participant.
142
• Stage fright: Participants may feel intimidated by the use of a tape recorder and open-ended questions may make them feel vulnerable.
• Awkward questions: Some questions may make participants feel uncomfortable
• Teaching and preaching: This could occur if participants trap the researcher into this mode by asking questions or by giving responses which reveal misinformation on their part.
• Jumping: This occurs when the researcher asks questions in an illogical sequence.
• Counselling: If this happens early in the interview it leads to premature closure of the topic and inhibits in-depth inquiry.
• Superficial interviews: Often interviews are shallow as the researcher hurries the participant along without giving any attention to non-verbal cues, and not spending enough time getting to know the participant.
• The use of translators: The interview process can be slowed down as the translator first has to translate before the participant and researcher understand each other.
Moreover, the translator may not give an accurate translation of the participants’
affective meaning and expression.
Of these limitations, the one relating to interruptions applied to this study, when the telephone rang twice during the interview in a participant’s office. The interview had to be paused while the participant took the call. However, the rest of the interviews were conducted in designated venues at the schools, where the possibility of interruptions was minimised. There was no need to use translators as all the interviews were conducted in English which participants were familiar with, even though for some, English was not their mother tongue. Two participants (one Afrikaans-speaking and the other Xhosa- speaking) did code-switch very occasionally, but this did not present a problem as I enlisted the help of colleagues to translate these utterances.
In this study, the participants were very willing and happy to participate, and their responses to questions were relevant and insightful. Seidman (1998: 91) raises an interesting point that in-depth interviewing can threaten the limits of intimacy that can develop, causing the participant to become emotionally troubled. In this study, some
143
participants became emotional and wept as they relived their early experiences of the pain and trauma they felt at the time of diagnosis of deafness, and as they recalled the painful experiences and the challenges they faced along the journey of raising their deaf children.
In these cases the interviews were temporarily stopped, participants were comforted, and they were reminded that they need not continue if they did not wish to, or if they felt uncomfortable with any question of a sensitive nature. However, after regaining their composure they chose to continue with the interview, rather than stop. Their willingness to continue was indicative of their need to speak to someone who would listen to them about their unique experiences, however painful those could have been.