The craft of interviewing in realist evaluation
Abstract
Pawson and Tilley suggest a unique strategy for conducting qualitative interviews within realist evaluation studies. Theories are placed before the interviewee for them to comment on with a view to providing refinement. The subject matter of the interview is the researcher’s theory and interviewees confirm, falsify, and refine this theory. This relationship – described as a teacher–learner cycle – is integral to realist evaluations. This article provides an overview of how interview techniques have been applied in realist evaluations in the last decade as well as suggesting two guiding principles. The first one relates to the design of realist studies and the second one explains how to ask questions like a realist, and proposes three different phases in realist interviews: theory gleaning, theory refining and theory consolidation. The article aims to contribute to a growing understanding of the practical and epistemological challenges presented by primary data collection in realist evaluation.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
How Many Interviews Are Enough?: An Experiment with Data Saturation and Variability
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006) · Field Methods · doi:10.1177/1525822x05279903 · Cited by 20,808 · see citing works
Basics of Qualitative Research (3rd ed.): Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008) · SAGE · doi:10.4135/9781452230153 · Cited by 12,136 · see citing works
The Significance of Saturation
Morse, J. M. (1995) · Qualitative Health Research · doi:10.1177/104973239500500201 · Cited by 2,663 · see citing works
The problem of appraising qualitative research
Dixon-Woods, M. (2004) · Quality and Safety in Health Care · doi:10.1136/qshc.2003.008714 · Cited by 653 · see citing works
Marchal, B., van Belle, S., van Olmen, J., Hoerée, T., & Kegels, G. (2012) · Evaluation · doi:10.1177/1356389012442444 · Cited by 476 · see citing works
Theories of Change and Realistic Evaluation: Peas in a Pod or Apples and Oranges?
Blamey, A., & Mackenzie, M. (2007) · Evaluation · doi:10.1177/1356389007082129 · Cited by 383 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
What works for whom in the management of diabetes in people living with dementia: a realist review
Bunn, F., Goodman, C., Reece Jones, P., Russell, B., Trivedi, D., Sinclair, A., Bayer, A., Rait, G., Rycroft-Malone, J., & Burton, C. (2017) · BMC Medicine · doi:10.1186/s12916-017-0909-2 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Green, F., Preece, C., Allen, K., Manzi, S., Mannes, J., Callaghan, L., Berry, V., de Lima, E. S., Woodburn, A., Hobbs, T., et al. (2026) · Journal of Prevention · doi:10.1007/s10935-025-00888-1 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Simulated patient judgements of medical student performance in OSCEs: A realist evaluation
El-Sherif, A., Lim, J. J., & Roberts, C. (2026) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.1080/0142159x.2026.2641759 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Manzano, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Leeds (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Manzano, Ana
- ORCID
- Manzano, Ana
- Venue
- Evaluation
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2016-04-05
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 342-360
- ISSN
- 1356-3890 (ISSN-L)
- 1461-7153
- OpenAlex
- W2333337175
- Cited by
- 691
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 73 · 2025: 96 · 2024: 120 · 2023: 83 · 2022: 77 · 2021: 83 · 2020: 63 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 30.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Evaluation (publishedVersion)
- White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Evaluation and Performance Assessment
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Focus Groups and Qualitative Methods
- Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
- Keywords
- realist evaluation, qualitative interviews, interview techniques, theory refinement, primary data collection, epistemology of evaluation, interview question design
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review