Hi Jerome, you might trying using a JIGMO. I've used it to record qualitative interviews before. Very simple to use. Here's the link:

https://www.amazon.com/Activated-Recorder-Digital-Recording-JiGMO/dp/B075JQHX25/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&qid=1521882860&sr=8-8&keywords=JIGMO

I used my mobile phone and it worked for me.

Hi Jerome,

I have found that in one-on-one interviews the mobile phone works well in terms of recording...but is more difficult to use when transcribing. There a dedicated voice recorder is easier to manipulate and to reverse for review and detailed transcription purposes. With groups, it is important to have a good mulit-directional microphone and mobile phones often miss some comments around a large table. So use two phones at different locations on the table for maximum spread or use a recording device with mulit-directional mic.

I agree with Jack's point regarding transcription and also multiple recorders.

Hi Jerome, one more thing -- after you make your recordings, depending upon your available time, you might consider a transcription service. Here's the one I've used before: https://www.rev.com/

Good idea about a service but in training our researchers we also get them to do some transcribing as it contributes to learning how to do really good interviews - eg following up on questions, reflecting on questions with participants, and clarifying information.

I use both in case of failure of one piece of the machinery, which has happened once, so I like my ducks to all line in a row, and not have wasted data opportunities. :-)

Hi all,

Thank's so much! I'm planning for my MSc thesis and all of your insights are really helpful!

Appreciate it! :)

I have an ap for my iPhone that produces a file format which is easily transferred to my computer for transcription.

In general, I would consider a phone to be just fine for one-to-one interviews, but more problematic for group interviews -- especially if you want to keep track of each separate speaker. In that case, I use a stereo digital recorder, such as an Olympus, that should cost around $60 US.

Even though I always ask for the permission to record the interview, the very thought of being recorded may cause the interviewee to hold something back and edit responses before they are verbalized (especially in the beginning of the interview). The recorder is usually a strange device that reminds interviewee he or she is being recorded every time one cateches a glimpse of it. Therefore I prefer the phone as it seems more natural to have it on a table, making it easier to build trust a trust in the researcher rather than fear of recording.

For group interviews you can use stereo recorder or a condenser (capacitor) microphone. The second one requires minimal skill to plug it in and use it but when comparing the quality of sound between cheap recorder and cheap microphone the merit definitely goes to the latter. I use Behringer C1 microphone and Xenyx 502 mixer plugged in to laptop with USB. I can take it anywhere, power it from the laptop battery and the quality of sound make it really easy to understand the plurivocality as it happens. Of course having such an equipment can work in one's merit (taking the interview seriosuly) or disadvantage (taking the interview suspisiously), but anyway the sound is good so at least you can tell if it's one or the other.

The amount and size of the equipment described by Krzysztof Durczak might indeed be intimidating. I for one have never had any problem with the performance of smaller, cheaper recorders that do not require a laptop -- just be sure that you use the "group" setting that they have.

surely, the voice recorder works better than a mobile phone, specially in one-to-one interview.

Jerome, I would suggest you test both devices; you will be the one listening to the recorded data over and over, as you transcribe or engage the first phase of analysis. You then choose the one with which you are more comfortable and which returns the data the more crisp and clear. Consider all the technical issues that can - and could - creep in during or after data capture. Think about data security: Who, other than you, could get access to your mobile phone? Could the data be compromised? It doesn't matter what others have used - it comes down to one thing: Will you have the data, when you are ready to them? Will you have them 3 or so years, later, should you be required to produce them for an audit?

Best wishes in your data collection - and, ultimately, analysis and interpretation of the resultant data.

Hazel Trauffer, PhD.

This is a great answer Kelvin, I always work with students to get comfortable in using digital recorders, learning to transcribe, and doing all of the key aspects of a research project so they become more skilled in all of the research activities. In social work learning to listen and interpret are valuable skills that crossover into research processes.

I usually recommend and also use a dedicated recording device (> 100 €). The reason is that those devices tend to record voices in much better quality than phones which are not delicately build for this purpose. In addition, most professional recording devices have multiple channels and allow you to monitor whether it is recording and how loud the input signal is. At the end, those features makes it (a) more safe to really record in your interview session and (b) easier to transcribe afterwards (because the voices sound much clearer ... especially if you use channels the right way ...).

For focus / group interviews I would indeed suggest to use as many recorder as interviewees. That makes transcribing much easier afterwards because you do not just have to distinguish speakers based on the sound of their voice (which is a pain in the neck ... I had to do this once...).

Concerning the discussion about the intimidation of interviewees because of the technology: I never observed this. Usually people tend to forget that they are being recorded quite quickly. At least this is my experience.

If you do not have any budget of course, a mobile phone is a great alternative. However, I would look into the App and be sure what it is doing with the recording. Is it uploading your interview to a cloud for marketing (or whatever) purposes? That might be illegal in your country. However, apart from this legal issue I guess most people would not like to give their data away anyway :).

A side note: Many universities (at least in Germany) have a stock of recorders that can be rented by scholars and students.

Yes and I always remind students to think of the practical tasks, like ensuring they have built in time before and after the interview to check the devices and then after to check the recording. Learning to record interviewers well is part of the training of a good researcher.

I hope Michael Goller meant < 100 € rather than > 100 €. I certainly agree that digital recorders do a better job than phones, but even the lest expensive ones are optimized for recording voices( the more expensive ones are mostly for recording music). I recommend stereo for focus groups to help distinguish people by which side of the table they are on, but even a stereo recorder shouldn't cost more than 60 €.

Dear David,

No, I definitely mean the more expensive one (> 100 €). The quality differences are huge in my opinion. However, this is written from a perspective where such a device will be used quite often and not only for one study. Again, our university has such devices for rent (free of charge).

I think a digital recorder with a USB port is the way forward. You will have it for life

I use both, but have invested in a dedicated microphone for my phone to ensure good audio quality.

I have also discovered that I can use for free YouTube's closed captions to do an initial transcription which then I tidy up. It saves me hours of work.

I've used phone apps (I recommend immediately storing files on a computer or more secure device) and I have also used devices specifically designated to record audio. I prefer the latter as I do a lot of recording in various settings and there is a greater range of control over audio settings. I personally have enjoyed Zoom products.

I recommend using a softphone with recording capacity to your hard drive.

I really like Audacity. It's easy to use with recording capacity to your hard drive. Quality has been very good.