Critical Discussion of the theoretical and practical issues involved with data collection and analysis on interviews
Sociological researches can vary in ways they are conducted, types of results gained by gathering information, lead to different conclusions and may require different amount and type of resources. The reason for these is that they are used for different aims and goals, and all have their pros and cons. In this essay I will be concentrating more on weaknesses rather than on strengths, more precisely I am going to write and analyse limitations of interview as a qualitative research method. The reason for me choosing an interview as my topic is that from my point of view this type of qualitative research involves communication and active involvement, hence I think it would be very valuable experience and also little adventure.
First of all I want to consider what is interview and what characteristics define the interview as a research method. «The term 'qualitative interviewing' is usually intended to refer to in-depth, semi-structured or loosely structured forms of interviewing. Burgess calls them 'conversations with a purpose'». To generalise loosely structured qualitative interview can be characterized by comparatively informal style (for example: the format of the interview is more likely to be rather discussional or conversational, not formal questioning and answering), the main source of data is the interaction itself, the qualitative interviews may also involve one to one interactions, or larger groups and requires active involvement of the researcher in the process. (Manson 2002:38). In the interview a focus group is usually smaller than in any sort of quantitative researches, using each individual as a unique source of information, therefore more in depth information provided, but on the other hand it is less representative because of the size of the group.
There are two types of interview: structured(involves closed questions) and...