Literature DB >> 35192659

Audio, video, chat, email, or survey: How much does online interview mode matter?

Maggie Oates1, Kyle Crichton1, Lorrie Cranor1, Storm Budwig1, Erica J L Weston1, Brigette M Bernagozzi1, Julie Pagaduan1.   

Abstract

In the design of qualitative interview studies, researchers are faced with the challenge of choosing between many different methods of interviewing participants. This decision is particularly important when sensitive topics are involved. Even prior to the Covid-19 pandemic, considerations of cost, logistics, and participant anonymity have increasingly pushed more interviews online. While previous work has anecdotally compared the advantages of different online interview methods, no empirical evaluation has been undertaken. To fill this gap, we conducted 154 interviews with sensitive questions across seven randomly assigned conditions, exploring differences arising from the mode (video, audio, email, instant chat, survey), anonymity level, and scheduling requirements. We surveyed interviewers and interviewees after their interview for perceptions on rapport, anonymity, and honesty. In addition, we completed a mock qualitative analysis, using the resulting codes as a measure of data equivalence. We note several qualitative differences across mode related to rapport, disclosure, and anonymity. However, we found little evidence to suggest that interview data was impacted by mode for outcomes related to interview experience or data equivalence. The most substantial differences were related logistics where we found substantially lower eligibility and completion rates, and higher time and monetary costs for audio and video modes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35192659      PMCID: PMC8863281          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0263876

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


  14 in total

Review 1.  Comparing online and offline self-disclosure: a systematic review.

Authors:  Melanie Nguyen; Yu Sun Bin; Andrew Campbell
Journal:  Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw       Date:  2011-10-27

2.  False-positive psychology: undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant.

Authors:  Joseph P Simmons; Leif D Nelson; Uri Simonsohn
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2011-10-17

3.  Using instant messaging for Internet-based interviews.

Authors:  Stefan Stieger; Anja S Göritz
Journal:  Cyberpsychol Behav       Date:  2006-10

Review 4.  Sensitive questions in surveys.

Authors:  Roger Tourangeau; Ting Yan
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 17.737

5.  Educational instruments : Arizona clinical interview medical rating scale.

Authors: 
Journal:  Med Teach       Date:  1980       Impact factor: 3.650

6.  Connecting Through Technology During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: Avoiding "Zoom Fatigue".

Authors:  Brenda K Wiederhold
Journal:  Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw       Date:  2020-06-18

7.  The online disinhibition effect.

Authors:  John Suler
Journal:  Cyberpsychol Behav       Date:  2004-06

8.  Self-reported honesty among middle and high school students responding to a sexual behavior questionnaire.

Authors:  D M Siegel; M J Aten; K J Roghmann
Journal:  J Adolesc Health       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 5.012

9.  Characterising and justifying sample size sufficiency in interview-based studies: systematic analysis of qualitative health research over a 15-year period.

Authors:  Konstantina Vasileiou; Julie Barnett; Susan Thorpe; Terry Young
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2018-11-21       Impact factor: 4.615

10.  A hands-on guide to doing content analysis.

Authors:  Christen Erlingsson; Petra Brysiewicz
Journal:  Afr J Emerg Med       Date:  2017-08-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.