Cited by 823Focus Groups and Qualitative MethodsQualitative Research Methods and ApplicationsQualitative Research Methods and Ethics

Qualitative interviews in psychology: problems and possibilities

Open access
Potter, Jonathan, Hepburn, Alexa·2005·Qualitative Research in Psychology

Abstract

This paper distinguishes a series of contingent and necessary problems that arise in the design, conduct, analysis and reporting of open-ended or conversational qualitative interviews in psychological research. Contingent problems in the reporting of interviews include: (1) the deletion of the interviewer; (2) the conventions for representing interaction; (3) the specificity of analytic observations; (4) the unavailability of the interview set-up; (5) the failure to consider interviews as interaction. Necessary problems include: (1) the flooding of the interview with social science agendas and categories; (2) the complex and varying footing positions of interviewer and interviewee; (3) the orientations to stake and interest on the part of the interviewer and interviewee; (4) the reproduction of cognitivism. The paper ends with two kinds of recommendation. First, we argue that interviews should be studied as an interactional object, and that study should feed back into the design, conduct and analysis of interviews so that they can be used more effectively in cases where they are the most appropriate data gathering tools. Second, these problems with open-ended interviews highlight a range of specific virtues of basing analysis on naturalistic materials. Reasons for moving away from the use of interviews for many research questions are described.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1191/1478088705qp045oa

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Potter, J., & Hepburn, A.
Affiliations
Loughborough University (GB)
Venue
Qualitative Research in Psychology
Published
2005-01
Volume
2
Issue
4
Pages
281-307
ISSN
  • 1478-0887 (ISSN-L)
  • 1478-0895
OpenAlex
W2029750302
Cited by
823
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 41 · 2019: 66 · 2018: 65 · 2017: 65 · 2016: 54 · 2015: 53 · 2014: 60 · 2013: 55 · 2012: 58
FWCI
53.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-nd
Locations
  • Qualitative Research in Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • Loughborough University Institutional Repository (Loughborough University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Loughborough University Research Repository (Loughborough University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Focus Groups and Qualitative Methods
  • Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Keywords
qualitative interviews, open-ended interviews, interview design, interview analysis, interviewer-interviewee interaction, cognitivism, naturalistic data, conversation analysis

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