Interviews and Focus Groups: Gathering and Beginning to Analyze Data Elizabeth Boyd, PhD EPI 240 Spring 2006

Recap: Data Collection Once site and participants are identified, practical matters include: Timing - when to go/how long to stay? Fitting in Establishing relationships - Who? How? How much? Equipment: Recording devices Hand notes Video/digital Impact on participants Cost/transportability

Quality in qualitative research Two ‘phases’ -- data collection and write-up Overall: quality = credibility Credibility is achieved through depth, clarity, nuance, detail

Goal: Rich and sufficient data Enough background to understand and portray full range of persons, processes, settings Detailed description of range of views & actions -- multiple perspectives Beyond superficial Analytic categories Comparisons -- generative or general? Saturation -- stop seeing new cases/instances

Before the Interview Recruiting participants: Expert commentators Reports of lived experience Interview prep: Working out questions - lists or general notes? Tape recorder or notes? One interview or several? Where to hold interview -- comfort level of participants?

Interviews Purpose: Elicit respondent’s descriptions, reflections, interpretations of his/her experience Role of IR: Listen, observe, and encourage

Interviews “Neutral” questions do not produce “neutral” interviews The interview is first and foremost a social situation with two active participants The interviewer is NOT a survey instrument but an active participant in the interaction

Question Design Specify the overall goals of the interview -- what do you want to know? Recipient design: questions must be designed appropriately to who the interviewees are Form of question will largely determine type of response you get (preference organization)

Question design, con’t. Yes/No qs: Are you satisfied with the way your doctor explained that? Framed qs: Would you say that you were surprised by the doctor’s diagnosis or did you expect to hear it? Open qs: Tell me about the last time you saw Dr. X.

Importance of first questions Set the tone for the whole interaction How best to engage the particular participants and their concerns/interests/perspectives? Bureaucratic vs. general qs consistent with overall theme Not too probing but not misleading (I.e., be on topic)

Active Listening How do participants respond? Short or factual responses? Stories/extended narratives Where do they struggle for words? Silences Word searches; glitches Changes in direction, focus, frame of the question

Active Listening, con’t. The interview is a developing conversation Following the participant’s lead requires active listening

Focus Groups Similar to interviews but with several key differences: Group dynamics key Joint narratives Role of moderator People management

Advantages of Focus Groups Quick More naturalistic - range of conversational styles, practices emerge May facilitate personal disclosure Cumulative experiences Participants build on and respond to each other

Key references Interviews: Learning from Strangers: The Are and Method of Qualitative Interview Studies. Robert S. Weiss. The Free Press Focus Groups: Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research. R.A. Krueger and M.A. Casey. Sage Publications

After the Interview You’ve interviewed 10 (or 20, or 30, or 100) people, now what? Transcription Coding Analysis

Transcription Written representation of the interview Types of transcription: “Cleansed” transcript “Just the words” “Jeffersonian” transcript

The “cleansed” transcript Dr. E: I’m deputy editor of Annals of Internal Medicine. I was associate editor from 1978 to 1999, and I was deputy editor from 1999 to My sub-specialty is pulmonary disease which I practice every day at the University of Pennsylvania. Most of the editors at Annals do practice, though not as extensively as I do. …

“Just the words” IR:So today is March seventh. I’m at Annals of Internal Medicine and I’ll be interviewing Dr. P.E. And for the record can you state your name and position? DrE: It’s P.E. I’m deputy editor of Annals of Internal Medicine. IR: Okay. And how long have you been working at Annals? DrE: Since It’s a long time. I was associate editor from 1978 to 1999 and I’ve been deputy editor from 1999 to 2003.

“Jeffersonian” transcript IR: So: today is March seventh, I’m at Annals of Internal Medicine and I’ll be interviewing doctor Pete Ernest. (0.4) A::nd um for the record can you state your name and position? IE: It’s Pete Ernest, I’m deputy editor of Annals of Internal Medicine. IR: Okay. And how long have you been working at Annals? (0.4) IE: Since nineteen seventy eight. It’s a lo::ng time. I was uh:: associate editor from nineteen seventy eight t nineteen ninety ni:ne, …

Which transcription method to use? Speed versus detail and accuracy What are you most interested in learning -- Content? Narrative? Interaction?/Context?

Coding Goal: To link specific quotes to analytic concepts and categories Some categories precede interviews Based on assumptions, literature Others emerge from data itself Unexpected observations, new insights Coding categories evolve through your interactions with the data

Coding: First steps Codes should stick closely to the data Preserve words/phrases of interviewees Preserve events Portray viewpoints Suggest contexts

Coding: Initial phase Naming each line, segment Open-mind; avoid preconceptions Look for ACTIONS as well as topics Allow new ideas to emerge Codes are provisional Use gerunds to characterize -- “reporting” “naming” “complaining” “mourning” etc. “In vivo” codes: retaining the IEs words, phrases

How to avoid imposing preconceptions on data Achieve intimate knowledge of your data Understand how your respondents understand Don’t take for granted that you know/understand what your respondents are telling you Recognize your own preconceptions Specify how your concepts help you understand your data Can you adequately explain your data without extant concepts? If so, what do they add?

Beginning analysis After initial coding, your analysis becomes selective, directed, and more conceptually motivated Select analytic categories of interest Compare across interviewees and observations Elaborate and expand each category Find boundary cases, deviant cases, typical cases