Skip to main content

Online interviews 3: Being there through text

This third instalment in my mini series on performing research interviews online deals with the issue of communicating via text such as emails and chat, rather than speech.

Communicating through text is not trivial since it leaves out the use of facial expressions and intonations that support offline interaction. In general, online communication implies a loss of social cues. For example, the lack of body language means that the interviewer cannot take signs of discomfort or confusion into account as easily. In terms of reactions, the 'interviewer’s repertoire' of tools with which to encourage the respondent includes nonverbal responses. Limiting this repertoire might make it difficult to build rapport effectively.

Seen from the perspective of face-to-face standards of qualitative data validity, there is a risk that the interviewee will find it offensive or unserious that the interviewer is not physically present and listening actively. For the same reasons, one might fear that interviewees will find it easier to lie in an online interaction.

Indeed, Walther (1996) argues that a main feature of computer-mediated communication is that it allows us to manipulate how we come across. This might seem an obvious threat to the credibility of the research. In the case of sensitive topics, however, online interviews might actually make it easier for interviewees to participate. On the other hand, this could lead to an ‘Internet experience bias’, with adept Internet users being extraordinarily direct online, while inexperienced users hold back because they are in an unfamiliar environment.

Avoiding the relatively intimate setting of a face-to-face interview might also have an equalising effect and lower the impact of prejudice. But the loss of conventional characteristics, such as age, gender, race, and dress style, may remove important contextualising information. One way to compensate for this is to establish a bit of context before the actual interview. The researcher can start by posting a picture or bits of personal information online so that the interviewee has an idea of who s/he is interacting with. A short email exchange might help set the scene for a chat interview, maybe even encouraging interviewees to disclose a bit of information about themselves beforehand.

While these measures could compensate for the lack of physical presence, it might be problematic to compare speech and writing in the first place: Spoken language is highly context-sensitive, while a writer is more distanced from both the context and the text that is produced (Slaughter 1985). Using Benjamin’s (1970) terms, Slaughter (1985:117) notes how speech “experience” becomes written “information”. While one might instinctively see face-to-face interviews as the gold standard, the two modes of interviewing might simply not be comparable.

Assessing the overall value of online interviews for research validity, they seem to threaten context-sensitivity and thus credibility from the perspective of qualitative research standards. In a ‘detached information’-oriented paradigm, on the other side, text-based interviewing might actually be cast as an advantage.

In the final post the dimension of time is introduced, drawing up some of the primary differences between synchronous and asynchronous interviewing.

References:
Benjamin, W. (1970). The Story Teller. In W. Benjamin, Illuminations (pp. 84-91). London: Jonathan Cape.

Slaughter, M. M. (1985). Literacy and Society. International Journal of the Sociology of Language , 56, 113-139.

Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-Mediated Communication : Impersonal, Interpersonal, and Hyperpersonal Interaction. Communication Research , 23 (1), 3-43.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Official statistics: 51% of 16-74 year old Danes use Facebook

In making a case for why my MSc dissertation here at the Oxford Internet Institute should be concerned with something as hyped and mundane as Facebook, I've been looking for numbers on the Danish social media landscape.

On the English-language web, the commercial SocialBakers Facebook statistics suggest that 49% of the Danish population are on Facebook.

This rather non-transparent number can now be compared with a recent report by Statistics Denmark, suggesting that 51% of 16-74 year old Danes have a Facebook account. The second-largest online social network service in Denmark, LinkedIn, is trailing far behind at 8%. Most surprisingly perhaps, a mere 3% of the surveyed age cohort use Twitter.

As such, there are compelling quantitative reasons for choosing Facebook over e.g. Twitter for a case study of how social media reflect life in Denmark. Another recent survey produced for a Danish daily confirms this: A tiny elite of the 319 most active Twitter users in Denmark write half of …

Two (used) comments on Gillespie's new chapter "The Relevance of Algorithms"

I'm in Paris this semester, as a visiting doctoral student at the Center for the Sociology of Innovation (CSI) at Ecole des Mines and at the médialab at Sciences Po. 
Apart from finding myself in the middle of two very lively research communities, I've also been so lucky that a series of cross-institutional seminars on Digital Methods are taking place in Paris this spring.
The last seminar was on "Transformative interaction: web effects on social dynamics", for which I volunteered to prepare a brief comment on one of the selected readings, namely Tarleton Gillespie's chapter "The Relevance of Algorithms", forthcoming in an edited volume on "Media Technologies" to be published by MIT Press. (The full chapter has been uploaded by Gillespie here).
Since I prepared the comments in writing, and since they did in fact spark some discussion, I've decided that it might be appropriate to recycle them as a blog post. Here goes:

Introducing: The Twitter-thing!

Context: The Twitter-thing is the (awkward?) translation into English of 'Twittertinget' - a project I worked on last year with two Danish colleagues, Irina Papazu (CBS) and Tobias Bornakke (Uni. of Copenhagen) in collaboration with the Danish newspaper Politiken. The Twitter-thing is a tool that draws on TCAT in order to build a network visualisation of how Danish MPs use hashtags on Twitter. Here follows my abstract for the upcoming Data Publics conference in Lancaster, where I'll be exhibiting the Twitter-thing.


Parliaments could seem to be highly issue-agnostic places. All sorts of problems move in and out of these large and expensive devices (Dányi 2015), while the membership stays more or less the same in-between elections. But as issues are taken up and left behind by parliaments, they also make cuts in the parliament in the sense that specific sets of parliamentarians become attached to specific issues. The aim of the Twitter-thing tool is to trace these cuts and v…