I posted a similar question earlier but want to post it as separate question since the angle of this question is different.
I am doing my doctorate research in finding training strategies that has worked in corporate world in shortening the time-to-expertise of employees. I am trying to tap the experts who are believed to have applied training strategies in their jobs. I am using purposive sampling and experts are pre-filtered using certain criteria. I have close to 30-40 worldwide experts (mostly well known) who are known to have done work in this domain. These are busy corporate executives and hard to get them for extended amount of time.
I am using case study methodology and wanted to use semi-structured in-depth interview as the method to collect data from these handful participants.
My participants are geographically distributed and I have some challenges:-
a) I most likely may be able to get less than 10% for in-person face to face interview which I can do audio or video recording to transcribe
b) Probably half of the remaining are available for interviews through various medias like
- Phone conference (audio),
- Video conference (Face to face)
- Skype Video call (face to face)
- Google Hangouts (Face to face)
- iPhone Face time (face to face)
- Tango video call (face to face)
etc. Some of these are hard to record though. Maybe audio part can be recorded using other recorders.
c) Some are not very comfortable with interviews and need time to think through before responding. I am planning to use online questionnaires for them with same set of questions I would ask in semi-structured interviews. The busy executives could possibly fill this while on the move.
d) Some probably would prefer to get questions in e-mail and reply through e-mail (rather than going to a link and replying). This could be the participants who are still remote from online technologies are more e-mail kind of guys.
e) I have not anticipated if I will come across a situation to use paper based questionnaire interview but it cannot be overruled. This possibility exist with some veterans who I could not find even on LinkedIn.
Since my sample size is pretty small, I cannot afford to lose any expert just because they are either not available or do not prefer certain method of participation.
Note that I have only 1 touch point with each participant. That means one participant respond through one media only based on his convenience and preferred method.
With such different varieties of technological media involved, data output might not be exactly same. For example phone, video and F2F interview questions may be changed dynamically based on how conversation goes about whereas the open-ended questionnaire (online or e-mail) has fixed questions.
As a research I have few questions I want to ask:
1. How can I merge the data obtained from interviews conducted using various medias?
2. Fundamental question is - Can the data obtained from interviews conducted using different modes or media be merged? Is it acceptable?
3. If I am not wrong on a methodological level I am still using ONE method of data collection called in-depth interviews - no matter I am using different modes of interviews. Is that a fair statement?
4. Should I merge the data first and then analyze or it is recommend to analyze data collected from each media separately and then cross validate with findings of other method (this might be cumbersome and huge)?
I am looking for some literature support, example papers or some reference which support such multimode interview method of data collection.
Thank you very much for this brilliant question. You answer lies in simplifying the question a little bit. For example, interviews are about asking questions and getting responses from the interviewees (respondents); while multiple media refer to more than one means or channels of communication such as: oral means, telephone, email, Skype, taping, or video recording. Make sure that your questions or interviews are directly related to your specific objectives of the study or research. One of the main reasons for deciding to use multiple media is to strengthen your case for validity and reliability of the data that will emerge from the interviews. One of the things you will be expected to do is to identify any variations in responses to the same questions by medium (singular) and the circumstances in which the specific responses were sought and obtained accordingly. Each variation is appreciated in its own context and psychology.
In regards to your first question MAXQDA works well when converting multiple data sources into one research framework through the use of interpretative coding. A framework that includes grounded theory. MAXQDA allows you to code data from audio visual sources and written sources.
It's a real sign to your commitment that you will be so flexible! I agree with your statement that "I am still using ONE method of data collection called in-depth interviews - no matter I am using different modes of interviews". I agree with this 100%.
I have no references that could help you, but I do have a little personal experience. I once conducted a focus group that had some people in the room with me, one joining by teleconference and another by videoconference. It was unorthodox, but it worked. That study is in press at the moment and the reviewers made no comment about the mixed-technology focus group at all.
As it is all interview data I believe you can treat it all the same regardless of the kind of interview undertaken. Your method of analysis is then up to you- content, thematic, framework, rapid analysis... the options abound!
Good luck with it- sounds interesting.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Social Science
- Media