Interview Types and Choosing Between Them
One slide carries this subject's entire interview taxonomy: three ranges and four types, one line of description each. Here is what each line will actually bear, what the slide leaves unplaced, and where its own terms collide with a slide three places earlier.
The whole taxonomy is one slide
The supplied teaching source gives interview kinds a single slide in its data collection week. That slide carries two things: a statement of how interviews vary, and four named types. Everything else the material says about interviewing concerns conduct rather than kind, and it is treated on Conducting, Recording and Transcribing Interviews.
Three ranges and four types. The source states neither count; both are counts of the list as printed. No type is elaborated beyond the sentence quoted above, in this week or in any other week of the supplied material.
What each of the four lines will actually bear
A one-line description is not nothing. Each of these four lines names a real design property, and if you read it closely it tells you what the type buys you and what it costs. The table separates the source's words from that reading, because only the middle column is source content.
THE FOUR TYPES AND WHAT THE SOURCE ATTACHES TO EACH
| Type | The source's entire description | What that line supports | Not supplied by the source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Structured open-ended interviews | "provide standard questions to give each respondent the same stimulus" | Comparability. Identical wording put to everyone, with the answer left open. | No question count, no sequencing rule, no example question, no procedure for a respondent who answers off-question |
| Interview guide approaches | "identify the topic but not wording of questions" | Topic control with wording freedom. You fix what gets covered, not how you ask it. | No guide is shown, templated or specified anywhere in the supplied material |
| Conversational interviews | "are interactive, creating a sense of conversation" | Responsiveness. The exchange can follow what the respondent raises. | No boundary between an interactive interview and an ordinary conversation, and no record of what was actually asked |
| Focus groups | "occur when the interviewer becomes a facilitator in a group of respondents" | The group as the unit. Shared and contested views surface together. | No group size, no number of groups, no recruitment, no moderation technique, no recording method, no analysis approach |
The second column is quoted exactly and is the whole of what the source says about each type. The third column is this page's reading of what that sentence will bear, and is not source content.
Three ranges that do not classify the four types
THE THREE RANGES, AS STATED
| Range | What the source does with it | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Formal to informal | Named in the lead-in and never mentioned again | No criterion distinguishes a formal interview from an informal one |
| Structured to unstructured | Named here as a range; defined elsewhere in the same deck by who physically writes the reply | Defined twice, incompatibly - see the next section |
| One-on-one or groups | Named; the fourth type is plainly the group end of it | The only range on which any named type can be located, and the slide does not locate it |
One pair of terms, two definitions, three slides apart
The deck defines structured and unstructured earlier, on its slide about types of questions, by who physically writes the answer: structured means the respondent writes the reply, unstructured means the interviewer writes it. That definition is reproduced and examined on Structured and Unstructured Questions.
In every interview the interviewer writes the reply. Under that definition no interview can be structured, so a structured open-ended interview cannot exist - and the interview slide names one, three slides later, and makes structured-to-unstructured a range along which interviews vary.
There is a second reading available on the earlier slide itself. Its unlabelled advantages-and-disadvantages table describes one block as constraining responses to limited information and the other as producing rich, deep information, which is the conventional sense: structured means the response options are fixed in advance, unstructured means they are open. Under that sense the type name is unremarkable.
Focus groups: one sentence against a named objective
The single sentence quoted above is the whole of the deck's treatment of focus groups. It states who the interviewer becomes and nothing else. The week's study notes then recommend focus groups nine times, as a technique for five of the six qualitative approaches they describe, without ever saying how one is run or how its data differ from an interview's - the approaches themselves are set out on Six Approaches to Collecting Qualitative Data.
Choosing a type when the source will not choose for you
Reading the choice off the answer space
Before you commit to a type
Pre-flight on the type decision
- You have written down the type you are claiming and a definition of it in your own words
- You have said which sense of "structured" you are using, because the material carries two
- You have named the unit of analysis - the individual or the group - and it matches the type
- You have decided whether comparability across respondents is required by your research question, since that is the single property that separates the four
- You have settled who records the answer and how, because that decision is the origin of the material's definitional confusion
- You can actually run the type you have chosen: the material describes conduct only for one-on-one interviewing, and nothing for groups
One further check belongs here rather than later. The wording of the questions you will ask is governed by material on a different slide again, treated on The Wording of Questions; the choice of response formats, where you are offering any, is treated on Survey Research and Survey Construction. The type decision constrains both, and the deck never draws the connection.
What to carry forward
- Four types, one sentence each: standard stimulus, topic-not-wording, interactive, and facilitated group. That is the whole taxonomy.
- The three ranges do not classify the four types. Only the group type sits identifiably on a range, and the slide does not say so.
- Structured and unstructured are defined by who writes the reply on one slide and used in the conventional fixed-options sense on another. Say which you mean.
- Focus groups are named in the objective, recommended nine times in the notes, and described in one sentence. Anything you do with them comes from elsewhere.
- No selection rule exists in the material. If you argue a choice, argue it from the property each type actually delivers, and attribute the argument to yourself.
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between a structured open-ended interview and an interview guide approach?
On the source's own wording, the structured open-ended type fixes the questions and leaves the answers open, so every respondent receives the same stimulus. The interview guide approach fixes only the topic and leaves the wording to the interviewer. The first buys comparability; the second buys the freedom to ask the question the moment actually calls for.
Is a conversational interview the same as an unstructured interview?
The material does not say. It names conversational interviews as a type and separately makes structured-to-unstructured a range, without positioning the type on the range. Since the deck also defines unstructured by who writes the reply rather than by how fixed the questions are, treat the two terms as unlinked here and define whichever you use.
How many people should be in a focus group?
The supplied material states no number. It says only that a focus group occurs when the interviewer becomes a facilitator in a group of respondents. Group size, the number of groups, recruitment and moderation are absent from the entire subject, so any figure you use must come from and be credited to a second source.
Can I say my interviews were semi-structured?
You can, but not on this material's authority - the term does not appear in it. The interview guide approach is the closest described type. Define semi-structured in your own words at first use, cite the methods text you took it from, and make sure your schedule matches the definition you gave.
Does the source say which interview type produces better data?
No. The week's stated objective is to evaluate methods of data collection and the week performs no evaluation: no two methods are compared with each other on any criterion, and no advantage, cost, duration or data-quality property is stated for any interview type. Comparative grounds have to come from elsewhere.
Which type should I use for a study of why a project overran?
If you want the same account from a set of people and intend to compare them, the structured open-ended type is the one whose line supports that. If you expect the causes to be contested and want them argued out, the group type does that and the material tells you nothing about running it. State your reasoning either way, since the source supplies none.
References and source attribution
- Bryman, A. 2016, Social Research Methods, 5th ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford.
- O'Leary, Z. 2017, The Essential Guide to Doing Your Research Project, 3rd ed., Sage Publications, London.
- Veal, A. J. 2005, Business Research Methods: A Managerial Approach, Longman.
- Trochim, W. M. K. 2006, Research Methods Knowledge Base - reproduced in the supplied source as the data collection week's only listed reference, a bare address with no content attached to it.
- The supplied teaching source: the week 10 slide deck on collecting data, whose slide on types of interviews is reproduced in full on this page, read together with both copies of the week 10 study notes.
Suggested questions for Ask KEVOS
- Draft a methodology paragraph naming my interview type and defining it in my own words.
- What exactly does this teaching material say about focus groups, and what does it leave out?
- Help me decide between a standard-stimulus schedule and a topic-only interview guide for my project.
- Show me both definitions of structured and unstructured in this material and where they collide.
- What do I need from a second source before I can defend running focus groups?