For qualitative research, your overall goal should be to hear your participants' perspectives on your research question. There are several considerations about how to pursue that purpose.

One of the most important is how directive you want to be. If you are doing something relatively exploratory, you would use a less directive approach. In that case, you typically want to have just a few relatively broad perspectives, so you can learn what the participants themselves have to say.

In contrast, if you are starting with well-defined research questions, then you would be more directive. In that case, you typically want to have more questions that are narrower in focus, so you can learn about your topics in depth and detail.

My favorite book on interviewing is Rubin & Rubin, "Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data" from SAGE publications.

Hi Mohamed, I do not want to sound evasive, but it will depend on why and how you have 'already selected' the participants.

Further, it will depend on the purpose of the interviews. Are you seeking to confirm or disconfirm a set of ideas or propositions generated from a review of the literature?

To answer this question it would also be necessary to know the reason(s) that it is a 'finite set of participants' also.

It could be, for example, because referral into a program is finished, so there will be no new participants.

It could be that there has been some artificial cap on numbers for evaluation (e.g. a choice to interview 20 people to make it manageable in a given timeframe or with given staffing).

It might be too that numbers are finite because there are a finite number of individuals in a given population - for example, people in wheelchairs attempting to access a specific health service, during January this year, who have requested a ramp be installed - in which case the set might indeed be finite, however you will then need to think about the generalizability of the findings.

Hi Melissa,

Thanks so much for your answer. I realise that I should not have said "finite". What are your thoughts on the interview questions otherwise?

I would call, there is relation of strict inclusion between interview questions and research questions. Interview questions should in general answer simply research questions. If IQ are X and RQ are Y, so imagine that X (has to answer )Y.

For qualitative research, your overall goal should be to hear your participants' perspectives on your research question. There are several considerations about how to pursue that purpose.

One of the most important is how directive you want to be. If you are doing something relatively exploratory, you would use a less directive approach. In that case, you typically want to have just a few relatively broad perspectives, so you can learn what the participants themselves have to say.

In contrast, if you are starting with well-defined research questions, then you would be more directive. In that case, you typically want to have more questions that are narrower in focus, so you can learn about your topics in depth and detail.

My favorite book on interviewing is Rubin & Rubin, "Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data" from SAGE publications.

Hi Mohamed

I agree with David and would also suggest reading Rubin and Rubin.

Research question gives you an idea what and how to know something (your research area) using a set of questions during the interviews. For example, if the research question is general and the aim is to explore the area under investigation from the interviewees perspectives then the interview questions are usually just the 'topics' which help to kick start the conversation followed by 'prompts' to keep the conversation on the right track (knowing about the topic).

However, If the research question is very specific, you prepare your interview questions specifically to make sure you get the answers (from the interviewees during the interviews) that give as much information as you can have to answer that specific research question.

If you are using a more open ended method of interviewing such as in phenomenological methodology for example not only do you ask open ended questions which do not direct the participants response but the interviewer must also cultivate an open attitude and become a 'hunter for meanings' (Dahlberg et al in Reflective Lifeworld Research, 2008), so that within the interview itself you are looking for what the participant means when they are describing something and use prompts and probes to try to elucidate precisely what the participant means and ensure that you are not understanding 'too quickly' and take nothing for-granted. It can be difficult as it requires considerable self awareness of yourself as the research tool and your own 'baggage', and that you are responding to what your participant is saying in real time and don't have a predefined structure.

I agree with David as well. In my department, interviews - aside from being aimed at gathering information from respondents - are often also guided by theory, such as the Theory of Planned Behavior. Other theories are also possible of course, depending on the research question and topic of research.

I always consider it a good idea to have a semi-structure, in your head or on paper, to work with / from. This way you will be more likely to get the information you are looking for and not waste your own and the respondent's valuable time.

Of course, as some before me have also mentioned here, always keep an open mind and really listen to what the respondent is telling you - the focus should never be to merely find evidence for your theory or hypotheses.

Hi Mohamed

All good answers, but I’d suggest one really important extra point: do a pilot.

The first thing to do is to write down a list of the questions you think will help answer the question. Then try this draft out on your friend or house mate: try to record it so you can listen back to the pilot. Discuss with your friend what went well and what they thought you should have asked but didn’t. Take this information and the recording and do a second draft.

Now is the time to try it out on a couple of people like the ones you are going to interview. Do the same as before.

This process of piloting will help you clarify if you are asking the questions you need to ask in order to adequately answer the question and generate useful data.

Does this help?

Nick

PS I just answered a question about validity of interview questions; you might like to look at that one too.