Difference between revisions of "Roulston2014"
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) m |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
|Number=3 | |Number=3 | ||
|Pages=277–293 | |Pages=277–293 | ||
| − | |URL= | + | |URL=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1468794112473497 |
|DOI=10.1177/1468794112473497 | |DOI=10.1177/1468794112473497 | ||
|Abstract=This article examines how speakers orient to interactional problems in research interviews. These are marked by disfluencies in talk, with interviewees asking questions of the interviewer, declining invitations to elaborate on questions posed, or providing minimal responses. The article argues that interactions in which interviewees choose not to elaborate or challenge interviewers by asking questions provide valuable insights into research topics that complement the ‘rich’ descriptions that are usually sought by researchers in qualitative studies and evaluation projects. By examining how speakers manage interactional problems, researchers can identify trouble sources and important issues for further exploration. This examination of interviewers’ and interviewees’ talk shows that the accomplishment of both intersubjective understanding and generation of data for topical analysis is sensitive work to which speakers keenly attune on a turn-by-turn basis, underscoring the collaborative work that is necessary to do research interviews. | |Abstract=This article examines how speakers orient to interactional problems in research interviews. These are marked by disfluencies in talk, with interviewees asking questions of the interviewer, declining invitations to elaborate on questions posed, or providing minimal responses. The article argues that interactions in which interviewees choose not to elaborate or challenge interviewers by asking questions provide valuable insights into research topics that complement the ‘rich’ descriptions that are usually sought by researchers in qualitative studies and evaluation projects. By examining how speakers manage interactional problems, researchers can identify trouble sources and important issues for further exploration. This examination of interviewers’ and interviewees’ talk shows that the accomplishment of both intersubjective understanding and generation of data for topical analysis is sensitive work to which speakers keenly attune on a turn-by-turn basis, underscoring the collaborative work that is necessary to do research interviews. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 10:25, 7 December 2019
| Roulston2014 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Roulston2014 |
| Author(s) | Kathryn Roulston |
| Title | Interactional problems in research interviews |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Interviews |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2014 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Qualitative Research |
| Volume | 14 |
| Number | 3 |
| Pages | 277–293 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1177/1468794112473497 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
This article examines how speakers orient to interactional problems in research interviews. These are marked by disfluencies in talk, with interviewees asking questions of the interviewer, declining invitations to elaborate on questions posed, or providing minimal responses. The article argues that interactions in which interviewees choose not to elaborate or challenge interviewers by asking questions provide valuable insights into research topics that complement the ‘rich’ descriptions that are usually sought by researchers in qualitative studies and evaluation projects. By examining how speakers manage interactional problems, researchers can identify trouble sources and important issues for further exploration. This examination of interviewers’ and interviewees’ talk shows that the accomplishment of both intersubjective understanding and generation of data for topical analysis is sensitive work to which speakers keenly attune on a turn-by-turn basis, underscoring the collaborative work that is necessary to do research interviews.
Notes
