research design for qualitative research interview

Chapter 11. Interviewing

Introduction.

Interviewing people is at the heart of qualitative research. It is not merely a way to collect data but an intrinsically rewarding activity—an interaction between two people that holds the potential for greater understanding and interpersonal development. Unlike many of our daily interactions with others that are fairly shallow and mundane, sitting down with a person for an hour or two and really listening to what they have to say is a profound and deep enterprise, one that can provide not only “data” for you, the interviewer, but also self-understanding and a feeling of being heard for the interviewee. I always approach interviewing with a deep appreciation for the opportunity it gives me to understand how other people experience the world. That said, there is not one kind of interview but many, and some of these are shallower than others. This chapter will provide you with an overview of interview techniques but with a special focus on the in-depth semistructured interview guide approach, which is the approach most widely used in social science research.

An interview can be variously defined as “a conversation with a purpose” ( Lune and Berg 2018 ) and an attempt to understand the world from the point of view of the person being interviewed: “to unfold the meaning of peoples’ experiences, to uncover their lived world prior to scientific explanations” ( Kvale 2007 ). It is a form of active listening in which the interviewer steers the conversation to subjects and topics of interest to their research but also manages to leave enough space for those interviewed to say surprising things. Achieving that balance is a tricky thing, which is why most practitioners believe interviewing is both an art and a science. In my experience as a teacher, there are some students who are “natural” interviewers (often they are introverts), but anyone can learn to conduct interviews, and everyone, even those of us who have been doing this for years, can improve their interviewing skills. This might be a good time to highlight the fact that the interview is a product between interviewer and interviewee and that this product is only as good as the rapport established between the two participants. Active listening is the key to establishing this necessary rapport.

Patton ( 2002 ) makes the argument that we use interviews because there are certain things that are not observable. In particular, “we cannot observe feelings, thoughts, and intentions. We cannot observe behaviors that took place at some previous point in time. We cannot observe situations that preclude the presence of an observer. We cannot observe how people have organized the world and the meanings they attach to what goes on in the world. We have to ask people questions about those things” ( 341 ).

Types of Interviews

There are several distinct types of interviews. Imagine a continuum (figure 11.1). On one side are unstructured conversations—the kind you have with your friends. No one is in control of those conversations, and what you talk about is often random—whatever pops into your head. There is no secret, underlying purpose to your talking—if anything, the purpose is to talk to and engage with each other, and the words you use and the things you talk about are a little beside the point. An unstructured interview is a little like this informal conversation, except that one of the parties to the conversation (you, the researcher) does have an underlying purpose, and that is to understand the other person. You are not friends speaking for no purpose, but it might feel just as unstructured to the “interviewee” in this scenario. That is one side of the continuum. On the other side are fully structured and standardized survey-type questions asked face-to-face. Here it is very clear who is asking the questions and who is answering them. This doesn’t feel like a conversation at all! A lot of people new to interviewing have this ( erroneously !) in mind when they think about interviews as data collection. Somewhere in the middle of these two extreme cases is the “ semistructured” interview , in which the researcher uses an “interview guide” to gently move the conversation to certain topics and issues. This is the primary form of interviewing for qualitative social scientists and will be what I refer to as interviewing for the rest of this chapter, unless otherwise specified.

Informal (unstructured conversations). This is the most “open-ended” approach to interviewing. It is particularly useful in conjunction with observational methods (see chapters 13 and 14). There are no predetermined questions. Each interview will be different. Imagine you are researching the Oregon Country Fair, an annual event in Veneta, Oregon, that includes live music, artisan craft booths, face painting, and a lot of people walking through forest paths. It’s unlikely that you will be able to get a person to sit down with you and talk intensely about a set of questions for an hour and a half. But you might be able to sidle up to several people and engage with them about their experiences at the fair. You might have a general interest in what attracts people to these events, so you could start a conversation by asking strangers why they are here or why they come back every year. That’s it. Then you have a conversation that may lead you anywhere. Maybe one person tells a long story about how their parents brought them here when they were a kid. A second person talks about how this is better than Burning Man. A third person shares their favorite traveling band. And yet another enthuses about the public library in the woods. During your conversations, you also talk about a lot of other things—the weather, the utilikilts for sale, the fact that a favorite food booth has disappeared. It’s all good. You may not be able to record these conversations. Instead, you might jot down notes on the spot and then, when you have the time, write down as much as you can remember about the conversations in long fieldnotes. Later, you will have to sit down with these fieldnotes and try to make sense of all the information (see chapters 18 and 19).

Interview guide ( semistructured interview ). This is the primary type employed by social science qualitative researchers. The researcher creates an “interview guide” in advance, which she uses in every interview. In theory, every person interviewed is asked the same questions. In practice, every person interviewed is asked mostly the same topics but not always the same questions, as the whole point of a “guide” is that it guides the direction of the conversation but does not command it. The guide is typically between five and ten questions or question areas, sometimes with suggested follow-ups or prompts . For example, one question might be “What was it like growing up in Eastern Oregon?” with prompts such as “Did you live in a rural area? What kind of high school did you attend?” to help the conversation develop. These interviews generally take place in a quiet place (not a busy walkway during a festival) and are recorded. The recordings are transcribed, and those transcriptions then become the “data” that is analyzed (see chapters 18 and 19). The conventional length of one of these types of interviews is between one hour and two hours, optimally ninety minutes. Less than one hour doesn’t allow for much development of questions and thoughts, and two hours (or more) is a lot of time to ask someone to sit still and answer questions. If you have a lot of ground to cover, and the person is willing, I highly recommend two separate interview sessions, with the second session being slightly shorter than the first (e.g., ninety minutes the first day, sixty minutes the second). There are lots of good reasons for this, but the most compelling one is that this allows you to listen to the first day’s recording and catch anything interesting you might have missed in the moment and so develop follow-up questions that can probe further. This also allows the person being interviewed to have some time to think about the issues raised in the interview and go a little deeper with their answers.

Standardized questionnaire with open responses ( structured interview ). This is the type of interview a lot of people have in mind when they hear “interview”: a researcher comes to your door with a clipboard and proceeds to ask you a series of questions. These questions are all the same whoever answers the door; they are “standardized.” Both the wording and the exact order are important, as people’s responses may vary depending on how and when a question is asked. These are qualitative only in that the questions allow for “open-ended responses”: people can say whatever they want rather than select from a predetermined menu of responses. For example, a survey I collaborated on included this open-ended response question: “How does class affect one’s career success in sociology?” Some of the answers were simply one word long (e.g., “debt”), and others were long statements with stories and personal anecdotes. It is possible to be surprised by the responses. Although it’s a stretch to call this kind of questioning a conversation, it does allow the person answering the question some degree of freedom in how they answer.

Survey questionnaire with closed responses (not an interview!). Standardized survey questions with specific answer options (e.g., closed responses) are not really interviews at all, and they do not generate qualitative data. For example, if we included five options for the question “How does class affect one’s career success in sociology?”—(1) debt, (2) social networks, (3) alienation, (4) family doesn’t understand, (5) type of grad program—we leave no room for surprises at all. Instead, we would most likely look at patterns around these responses, thinking quantitatively rather than qualitatively (e.g., using regression analysis techniques, we might find that working-class sociologists were twice as likely to bring up alienation). It can sometimes be confusing for new students because the very same survey can include both closed-ended and open-ended questions. The key is to think about how these will be analyzed and to what level surprises are possible. If your plan is to turn all responses into a number and make predictions about correlations and relationships, you are no longer conducting qualitative research. This is true even if you are conducting this survey face-to-face with a real live human. Closed-response questions are not conversations of any kind, purposeful or not.

In summary, the semistructured interview guide approach is the predominant form of interviewing for social science qualitative researchers because it allows a high degree of freedom of responses from those interviewed (thus allowing for novel discoveries) while still maintaining some connection to a research question area or topic of interest. The rest of the chapter assumes the employment of this form.

Creating an Interview Guide

Your interview guide is the instrument used to bridge your research question(s) and what the people you are interviewing want to tell you. Unlike a standardized questionnaire, the questions actually asked do not need to be exactly what you have written down in your guide. The guide is meant to create space for those you are interviewing to talk about the phenomenon of interest, but sometimes you are not even sure what that phenomenon is until you start asking questions. A priority in creating an interview guide is to ensure it offers space. One of the worst mistakes is to create questions that are so specific that the person answering them will not stray. Relatedly, questions that sound “academic” will shut down a lot of respondents. A good interview guide invites respondents to talk about what is important to them, not feel like they are performing or being evaluated by you.

Good interview questions should not sound like your “research question” at all. For example, let’s say your research question is “How do patriarchal assumptions influence men’s understanding of climate change and responses to climate change?” It would be worse than unhelpful to ask a respondent, “How do your assumptions about the role of men affect your understanding of climate change?” You need to unpack this into manageable nuggets that pull your respondent into the area of interest without leading him anywhere. You could start by asking him what he thinks about climate change in general. Or, even better, whether he has any concerns about heatwaves or increased tornadoes or polar icecaps melting. Once he starts talking about that, you can ask follow-up questions that bring in issues around gendered roles, perhaps asking if he is married (to a woman) and whether his wife shares his thoughts and, if not, how they negotiate that difference. The fact is, you won’t really know the right questions to ask until he starts talking.

There are several distinct types of questions that can be used in your interview guide, either as main questions or as follow-up probes. If you remember that the point is to leave space for the respondent, you will craft a much more effective interview guide! You will also want to think about the place of time in both the questions themselves (past, present, future orientations) and the sequencing of the questions.

Researcher Note

Suggestion : As you read the next three sections (types of questions, temporality, question sequence), have in mind a particular research question, and try to draft questions and sequence them in a way that opens space for a discussion that helps you answer your research question.

Type of Questions

Experience and behavior questions ask about what a respondent does regularly (their behavior) or has done (their experience). These are relatively easy questions for people to answer because they appear more “factual” and less subjective. This makes them good opening questions. For the study on climate change above, you might ask, “Have you ever experienced an unusual weather event? What happened?” Or “You said you work outside? What is a typical summer workday like for you? How do you protect yourself from the heat?”

Opinion and values questions , in contrast, ask questions that get inside the minds of those you are interviewing. “Do you think climate change is real? Who or what is responsible for it?” are two such questions. Note that you don’t have to literally ask, “What is your opinion of X?” but you can find a way to ask the specific question relevant to the conversation you are having. These questions are a bit trickier to ask because the answers you get may depend in part on how your respondent perceives you and whether they want to please you or not. We’ve talked a fair amount about being reflective. Here is another place where this comes into play. You need to be aware of the effect your presence might have on the answers you are receiving and adjust accordingly. If you are a woman who is perceived as liberal asking a man who identifies as conservative about climate change, there is a lot of subtext that can be going on in the interview. There is no one right way to resolve this, but you must at least be aware of it.

Feeling questions are questions that ask respondents to draw on their emotional responses. It’s pretty common for academic researchers to forget that we have bodies and emotions, but people’s understandings of the world often operate at this affective level, sometimes unconsciously or barely consciously. It is a good idea to include questions that leave space for respondents to remember, imagine, or relive emotional responses to particular phenomena. “What was it like when you heard your cousin’s house burned down in that wildfire?” doesn’t explicitly use any emotion words, but it allows your respondent to remember what was probably a pretty emotional day. And if they respond emotionally neutral, that is pretty interesting data too. Note that asking someone “How do you feel about X” is not always going to evoke an emotional response, as they might simply turn around and respond with “I think that…” It is better to craft a question that actually pushes the respondent into the affective category. This might be a specific follow-up to an experience and behavior question —for example, “You just told me about your daily routine during the summer heat. Do you worry it is going to get worse?” or “Have you ever been afraid it will be too hot to get your work accomplished?”

Knowledge questions ask respondents what they actually know about something factual. We have to be careful when we ask these types of questions so that respondents do not feel like we are evaluating them (which would shut them down), but, for example, it is helpful to know when you are having a conversation about climate change that your respondent does in fact know that unusual weather events have increased and that these have been attributed to climate change! Asking these questions can set the stage for deeper questions and can ensure that the conversation makes the same kind of sense to both participants. For example, a conversation about political polarization can be put back on track once you realize that the respondent doesn’t really have a clear understanding that there are two parties in the US. Instead of asking a series of questions about Republicans and Democrats, you might shift your questions to talk more generally about political disagreements (e.g., “people against abortion”). And sometimes what you do want to know is the level of knowledge about a particular program or event (e.g., “Are you aware you can discharge your student loans through the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program?”).

Sensory questions call on all senses of the respondent to capture deeper responses. These are particularly helpful in sparking memory. “Think back to your childhood in Eastern Oregon. Describe the smells, the sounds…” Or you could use these questions to help a person access the full experience of a setting they customarily inhabit: “When you walk through the doors to your office building, what do you see? Hear? Smell?” As with feeling questions , these questions often supplement experience and behavior questions . They are another way of allowing your respondent to report fully and deeply rather than remain on the surface.

Creative questions employ illustrative examples, suggested scenarios, or simulations to get respondents to think more deeply about an issue, topic, or experience. There are many options here. In The Trouble with Passion , Erin Cech ( 2021 ) provides a scenario in which “Joe” is trying to decide whether to stay at his decent but boring computer job or follow his passion by opening a restaurant. She asks respondents, “What should Joe do?” Their answers illuminate the attraction of “passion” in job selection. In my own work, I have used a news story about an upwardly mobile young man who no longer has time to see his mother and sisters to probe respondents’ feelings about the costs of social mobility. Jessi Streib and Betsy Leondar-Wright have used single-page cartoon “scenes” to elicit evaluations of potential racial discrimination, sexual harassment, and classism. Barbara Sutton ( 2010 ) has employed lists of words (“strong,” “mother,” “victim”) on notecards she fans out and asks her female respondents to select and discuss.

Background/Demographic Questions

You most definitely will want to know more about the person you are interviewing in terms of conventional demographic information, such as age, race, gender identity, occupation, and educational attainment. These are not questions that normally open up inquiry. [1] For this reason, my practice has been to include a separate “demographic questionnaire” sheet that I ask each respondent to fill out at the conclusion of the interview. Only include those aspects that are relevant to your study. For example, if you are not exploring religion or religious affiliation, do not include questions about a person’s religion on the demographic sheet. See the example provided at the end of this chapter.

Temporality

Any type of question can have a past, present, or future orientation. For example, if you are asking a behavior question about workplace routine, you might ask the respondent to talk about past work, present work, and ideal (future) work. Similarly, if you want to understand how people cope with natural disasters, you might ask your respondent how they felt then during the wildfire and now in retrospect and whether and to what extent they have concerns for future wildfire disasters. It’s a relatively simple suggestion—don’t forget to ask about past, present, and future—but it can have a big impact on the quality of the responses you receive.

Question Sequence

Having a list of good questions or good question areas is not enough to make a good interview guide. You will want to pay attention to the order in which you ask your questions. Even though any one respondent can derail this order (perhaps by jumping to answer a question you haven’t yet asked), a good advance plan is always helpful. When thinking about sequence, remember that your goal is to get your respondent to open up to you and to say things that might surprise you. To establish rapport, it is best to start with nonthreatening questions. Asking about the present is often the safest place to begin, followed by the past (they have to know you a little bit to get there), and lastly, the future (talking about hopes and fears requires the most rapport). To allow for surprises, it is best to move from very general questions to more particular questions only later in the interview. This ensures that respondents have the freedom to bring up the topics that are relevant to them rather than feel like they are constrained to answer you narrowly. For example, refrain from asking about particular emotions until these have come up previously—don’t lead with them. Often, your more particular questions will emerge only during the course of the interview, tailored to what is emerging in conversation.

Once you have a set of questions, read through them aloud and imagine you are being asked the same questions. Does the set of questions have a natural flow? Would you be willing to answer the very first question to a total stranger? Does your sequence establish facts and experiences before moving on to opinions and values? Did you include prefatory statements, where necessary; transitions; and other announcements? These can be as simple as “Hey, we talked a lot about your experiences as a barista while in college.… Now I am turning to something completely different: how you managed friendships in college.” That is an abrupt transition, but it has been softened by your acknowledgment of that.

Probes and Flexibility

Once you have the interview guide, you will also want to leave room for probes and follow-up questions. As in the sample probe included here, you can write out the obvious probes and follow-up questions in advance. You might not need them, as your respondent might anticipate them and include full responses to the original question. Or you might need to tailor them to how your respondent answered the question. Some common probes and follow-up questions include asking for more details (When did that happen? Who else was there?), asking for elaboration (Could you say more about that?), asking for clarification (Does that mean what I think it means or something else? I understand what you mean, but someone else reading the transcript might not), and asking for contrast or comparison (How did this experience compare with last year’s event?). “Probing is a skill that comes from knowing what to look for in the interview, listening carefully to what is being said and what is not said, and being sensitive to the feedback needs of the person being interviewed” ( Patton 2002:374 ). It takes work! And energy. I and many other interviewers I know report feeling emotionally and even physically drained after conducting an interview. You are tasked with active listening and rearranging your interview guide as needed on the fly. If you only ask the questions written down in your interview guide with no deviations, you are doing it wrong. [2]

The Final Question

Every interview guide should include a very open-ended final question that allows for the respondent to say whatever it is they have been dying to tell you but you’ve forgotten to ask. About half the time they are tired too and will tell you they have nothing else to say. But incredibly, some of the most honest and complete responses take place here, at the end of a long interview. You have to realize that the person being interviewed is often discovering things about themselves as they talk to you and that this process of discovery can lead to new insights for them. Making space at the end is therefore crucial. Be sure you convey that you actually do want them to tell you more, that the offer of “anything else?” is not read as an empty convention where the polite response is no. Here is where you can pull from that active listening and tailor the final question to the particular person. For example, “I’ve asked you a lot of questions about what it was like to live through that wildfire. I’m wondering if there is anything I’ve forgotten to ask, especially because I haven’t had that experience myself” is a much more inviting final question than “Great. Anything you want to add?” It’s also helpful to convey to the person that you have the time to listen to their full answer, even if the allotted time is at the end. After all, there are no more questions to ask, so the respondent knows exactly how much time is left. Do them the courtesy of listening to them!

Conducting the Interview

Once you have your interview guide, you are on your way to conducting your first interview. I always practice my interview guide with a friend or family member. I do this even when the questions don’t make perfect sense for them, as it still helps me realize which questions make no sense, are poorly worded (too academic), or don’t follow sequentially. I also practice the routine I will use for interviewing, which goes something like this:

• Introduce myself and reintroduce the study
• Provide consent form and ask them to sign and retain/return copy
• Ask if they have any questions about the study before we begin
• Ask if I can begin recording
• Ask questions (from interview guide)
• Turn off the recording device
• Ask if they are willing to fill out my demographic questionnaire
• Collect questionnaire and, without looking at the answers, place in same folder as signed consent form
• Thank them and depart

A note on remote interviewing: Interviews have traditionally been conducted face-to-face in a private or quiet public setting. You don’t want a lot of background noise, as this will make transcriptions difficult. During the recent global pandemic, many interviewers, myself included, learned the benefits of interviewing remotely. Although face-to-face is still preferable for many reasons, Zoom interviewing is not a bad alternative, and it does allow more interviews across great distances. Zoom also includes automatic transcription, which significantly cuts down on the time it normally takes to convert our conversations into “data” to be analyzed. These automatic transcriptions are not perfect, however, and you will still need to listen to the recording and clarify and clean up the transcription. Nor do automatic transcriptions include notations of body language or change of tone, which you may want to include. When interviewing remotely, you will want to collect the consent form before you meet: ask them to read, sign, and return it as an email attachment. I think it is better to ask for the demographic questionnaire after the interview, but because some respondents may never return it then, it is probably best to ask for this at the same time as the consent form, in advance of the interview.

What should you bring to the interview? I would recommend bringing two copies of the consent form (one for you and one for the respondent), a demographic questionnaire, a manila folder in which to place the signed consent form and filled-out demographic questionnaire, a printed copy of your interview guide (I print with three-inch right margins so I can jot down notes on the page next to relevant questions), a pen, a recording device, and water.

After the interview, you will want to secure the signed consent form in a locked filing cabinet (if in print) or a password-protected folder on your computer. Using Excel or a similar program that allows tables/spreadsheets, create an identifying number for your interview that links to the consent form without using the name of your respondent. For example, let’s say that I conduct interviews with US politicians, and the first person I meet with is George W. Bush. I will assign the transcription the number “INT#001” and add it to the signed consent form. [3] The signed consent form goes into a locked filing cabinet, and I never use the name “George W. Bush” again. I take the information from the demographic sheet, open my Excel spreadsheet, and add the relevant information in separate columns for the row INT#001: White, male, Republican. When I interview Bill Clinton as my second interview, I include a second row: INT#002: White, male, Democrat. And so on. The only link to the actual name of the respondent and this information is the fact that the consent form (unavailable to anyone but me) has stamped on it the interview number.

Many students get very nervous before their first interview. Actually, many of us are always nervous before the interview! But do not worry—this is normal, and it does pass. Chances are, you will be pleasantly surprised at how comfortable it begins to feel. These “purposeful conversations” are often a delight for both participants. This is not to say that sometimes things go wrong. I often have my students practice several “bad scenarios” (e.g., a respondent that you cannot get to open up; a respondent who is too talkative and dominates the conversation, steering it away from the topics you are interested in; emotions that completely take over; or shocking disclosures you are ill-prepared to handle), but most of the time, things go quite well. Be prepared for the unexpected, but know that the reason interviews are so popular as a technique of data collection is that they are usually richly rewarding for both participants.

One thing that I stress to my methods students and remind myself about is that interviews are still conversations between people. If there’s something you might feel uncomfortable asking someone about in a “normal” conversation, you will likely also feel a bit of discomfort asking it in an interview. Maybe more importantly, your respondent may feel uncomfortable. Social research—especially about inequality—can be uncomfortable. And it’s easy to slip into an abstract, intellectualized, or removed perspective as an interviewer. This is one reason trying out interview questions is important. Another is that sometimes the question sounds good in your head but doesn’t work as well out loud in practice. I learned this the hard way when a respondent asked me how I would answer the question I had just posed, and I realized that not only did I not really know how I would answer it, but I also wasn’t quite as sure I knew what I was asking as I had thought.

—Elizabeth M. Lee, Associate Professor of Sociology at Saint Joseph’s University, author of Class and Campus Life , and co-author of Geographies of Campus Inequality

How Many Interviews?

Your research design has included a targeted number of interviews and a recruitment plan (see chapter 5). Follow your plan, but remember that “ saturation ” is your goal. You interview as many people as you can until you reach a point at which you are no longer surprised by what they tell you. This means not that no one after your first twenty interviews will have surprising, interesting stories to tell you but rather that the picture you are forming about the phenomenon of interest to you from a research perspective has come into focus, and none of the interviews are substantially refocusing that picture. That is when you should stop collecting interviews. Note that to know when you have reached this, you will need to read your transcripts as you go. More about this in chapters 18 and 19.

Your Final Product: The Ideal Interview Transcript

A good interview transcript will demonstrate a subtly controlled conversation by the skillful interviewer. In general, you want to see replies that are about one paragraph long, not short sentences and not running on for several pages. Although it is sometimes necessary to follow respondents down tangents, it is also often necessary to pull them back to the questions that form the basis of your research study. This is not really a free conversation, although it may feel like that to the person you are interviewing.

Final Tips from an Interview Master

Annette Lareau is arguably one of the masters of the trade. In Listening to People , she provides several guidelines for good interviews and then offers a detailed example of an interview gone wrong and how it could be addressed (please see the “Further Readings” at the end of this chapter). Here is an abbreviated version of her set of guidelines: (1) interview respondents who are experts on the subjects of most interest to you (as a corollary, don’t ask people about things they don’t know); (2) listen carefully and talk as little as possible; (3) keep in mind what you want to know and why you want to know it; (4) be a proactive interviewer (subtly guide the conversation); (5) assure respondents that there aren’t any right or wrong answers; (6) use the respondent’s own words to probe further (this both allows you to accurately identify what you heard and pushes the respondent to explain further); (7) reuse effective probes (don’t reinvent the wheel as you go—if repeating the words back works, do it again and again); (8) focus on learning the subjective meanings that events or experiences have for a respondent; (9) don’t be afraid to ask a question that draws on your own knowledge (unlike trial lawyers who are trained never to ask a question for which they don’t already know the answer, sometimes it’s worth it to ask risky questions based on your hypotheses or just plain hunches); (10) keep thinking while you are listening (so difficult…and important); (11) return to a theme raised by a respondent if you want further information; (12) be mindful of power inequalities (and never ever coerce a respondent to continue the interview if they want out); (13) take control with overly talkative respondents; (14) expect overly succinct responses, and develop strategies for probing further; (15) balance digging deep and moving on; (16) develop a plan to deflect questions (e.g., let them know you are happy to answer any questions at the end of the interview, but you don’t want to take time away from them now); and at the end, (17) check to see whether you have asked all your questions. You don’t always have to ask everyone the same set of questions, but if there is a big area you have forgotten to cover, now is the time to recover ( Lareau 2021:93–103 ).

Sample: Demographic Questionnaire

ASA Taskforce on First-Generation and Working-Class Persons in Sociology – Class Effects on Career Success

Supplementary Demographic Questionnaire

Thank you for your participation in this interview project. We would like to collect a few pieces of key demographic information from you to supplement our analyses. Your answers to these questions will be kept confidential and stored by ID number. All of your responses here are entirely voluntary!

What best captures your race/ethnicity? (please check any/all that apply)

• White (Non Hispanic/Latina/o/x)
• Black or African American
• Hispanic, Latino/a/x of Spanish
• Asian or Asian American
• American Indian or Alaska Native
• Middle Eastern or North African
• Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
• Other : (Please write in: ________________)

What is your current position?

• Grad Student
• Full Professor

Please check any and all of the following that apply to you:

• I identify as a working-class academic
• I was the first in my family to graduate from college
• I grew up poor

What best reflects your gender?

• Transgender female/Transgender woman
• Transgender male/Transgender man
• Gender queer/ Gender nonconforming

Anything else you would like us to know about you?

Example: Interview Guide

In this example, follow-up prompts are italicized.  Note the sequence of questions.  That second question often elicits an entire life history , answering several later questions in advance.

Introduction Script/Question

Thank you for participating in our survey of ASA members who identify as first-generation or working-class.  As you may have heard, ASA has sponsored a taskforce on first-generation and working-class persons in sociology and we are interested in hearing from those who so identify.  Your participation in this interview will help advance our knowledge in this area.

• The first thing we would like to as you is why you have volunteered to be part of this study? What does it mean to you be first-gen or working class?  Why were you willing to be interviewed?
• How did you decide to become a sociologist?
• Can you tell me a little bit about where you grew up? ( prompts: what did your parent(s) do for a living?  What kind of high school did you attend?)
• Has this identity been salient to your experience? (how? How much?)
• How welcoming was your grad program? Your first academic employer?
• Why did you decide to pursue sociology at the graduate level?
• Did you experience culture shock in college? In graduate school?
• Has your FGWC status shaped how you’ve thought about where you went to school? debt? etc?
• Were you mentored? How did this work (not work)?  How might it?
• What did you consider when deciding where to go to grad school? Where to apply for your first position?
• What, to you, is a mark of career success? Have you achieved that success?  What has helped or hindered your pursuit of success?
• Do you think sociology, as a field, cares about prestige?
• Let’s talk a little bit about intersectionality. How does being first-gen/working class work alongside other identities that are important to you?
• What do your friends and family think about your career? Have you had any difficulty relating to family members or past friends since becoming highly educated?
• Do you have any debt from college/grad school? Are you concerned about this?  Could you explain more about how you paid for college/grad school?  (here, include assistance from family, fellowships, scholarships, etc.)
• (You’ve mentioned issues or obstacles you had because of your background.) What could have helped?  Or, who or what did? Can you think of fortuitous moments in your career?
• Do you have any regrets about the path you took?
• Is there anything else you would like to add? Anything that the Taskforce should take note of, that we did not ask you about here?

Further Readings

Britten, Nicky. 1995. “Qualitative Interviews in Medical Research.” BMJ: British Medical Journal 31(6999):251–253. A good basic overview of interviewing particularly useful for students of public health and medical research generally.

Corbin, Juliet, and Janice M. Morse. 2003. “The Unstructured Interactive Interview: Issues of Reciprocity and Risks When Dealing with Sensitive Topics.” Qualitative Inquiry 9(3):335–354. Weighs the potential benefits and harms of conducting interviews on topics that may cause emotional distress. Argues that the researcher’s skills and code of ethics should ensure that the interviewing process provides more of a benefit to both participant and researcher than a harm to the former.

Gerson, Kathleen, and Sarah Damaske. 2020. The Science and Art of Interviewing . New York: Oxford University Press. A useful guidebook/textbook for both undergraduates and graduate students, written by sociologists.

Kvale, Steiner. 2007. Doing Interviews . London: SAGE. An easy-to-follow guide to conducting and analyzing interviews by psychologists.

Lamont, Michèle, and Ann Swidler. 2014. “Methodological Pluralism and the Possibilities and Limits of Interviewing.” Qualitative Sociology 37(2):153–171. Written as a response to various debates surrounding the relative value of interview-based studies and ethnographic studies defending the particular strengths of interviewing. This is a must-read article for anyone seriously engaging in qualitative research!

Pugh, Allison J. 2013. “What Good Are Interviews for Thinking about Culture? Demystifying Interpretive Analysis.” American Journal of Cultural Sociology 1(1):42–68. Another defense of interviewing written against those who champion ethnographic methods as superior, particularly in the area of studying culture. A classic.

Rapley, Timothy John. 2001. “The ‘Artfulness’ of Open-Ended Interviewing: Some considerations in analyzing interviews.” Qualitative Research 1(3):303–323. Argues for the importance of “local context” of data production (the relationship built between interviewer and interviewee, for example) in properly analyzing interview data.

Weiss, Robert S. 1995. Learning from Strangers: The Art and Method of Qualitative Interview Studies . New York: Simon and Schuster. A classic and well-regarded textbook on interviewing. Because Weiss has extensive experience conducting surveys, he contrasts the qualitative interview with the survey questionnaire well; particularly useful for those trained in the latter.

• I say “normally” because how people understand their various identities can itself be an expansive topic of inquiry. Here, I am merely talking about collecting otherwise unexamined demographic data, similar to how we ask people to check boxes on surveys. ↵
• Again, this applies to “semistructured in-depth interviewing.” When conducting standardized questionnaires, you will want to ask each question exactly as written, without deviations! ↵
• I always include “INT” in the number because I sometimes have other kinds of data with their own numbering: FG#001 would mean the first focus group, for example. I also always include three-digit spaces, as this allows for up to 999 interviews (or, more realistically, allows for me to interview up to one hundred persons without having to reset my numbering system). ↵

A method of data collection in which the researcher asks the participant questions; the answers to these questions are often recorded and transcribed verbatim. There are many different kinds of interviews - see also semistructured interview , structured interview , and unstructured interview .

A document listing key questions and question areas for use during an interview.  It is used most often for semi-structured interviews.  A good interview guide may have no more than ten primary questions for two hours of interviewing, but these ten questions will be supplemented by probes and relevant follow-ups throughout the interview.  Most IRBs require the inclusion of the interview guide in applications for review.  See also interview and  semi-structured interview .

A data-collection method that relies on casual, conversational, and informal interviewing.  Despite its apparent conversational nature, the researcher usually has a set of particular questions or question areas in mind but allows the interview to unfold spontaneously.  This is a common data-collection technique among ethnographers.  Compare to the semi-structured or in-depth interview .

A form of interview that follows a standard guide of questions asked, although the order of the questions may change to match the particular needs of each individual interview subject, and probing “follow-up” questions are often added during the course of the interview.  The semi-structured interview is the primary form of interviewing used by qualitative researchers in the social sciences.  It is sometimes referred to as an “in-depth” interview.  See also interview and  interview guide .

The cluster of data-collection tools and techniques that involve observing interactions between people, the behaviors, and practices of individuals (sometimes in contrast to what they say about how they act and behave), and cultures in context.  Observational methods are the key tools employed by ethnographers and Grounded Theory .

Follow-up questions used in a semi-structured interview  to elicit further elaboration.  Suggested prompts can be included in the interview guide  to be used/deployed depending on how the initial question was answered or if the topic of the prompt does not emerge spontaneously.

A form of interview that follows a strict set of questions, asked in a particular order, for all interview subjects.  The questions are also the kind that elicits short answers, and the data is more “informative” than probing.  This is often used in mixed-methods studies, accompanying a survey instrument.  Because there is no room for nuance or the exploration of meaning in structured interviews, qualitative researchers tend to employ semi-structured interviews instead.  See also interview.

The point at which you can conclude data collection because every person you are interviewing, the interaction you are observing, or content you are analyzing merely confirms what you have already noted.  Achieving saturation is often used as the justification for the final sample size.

An interview variant in which a person’s life story is elicited in a narrative form.  Turning points and key themes are established by the researcher and used as data points for further analysis.

Introduction to Qualitative Research Methods Copyright © 2023 by Allison Hurst is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Qualitative study design: Interviews

• Qualitative study design
• Phenomenology
• Grounded theory
• Ethnography
• Narrative inquiry
• Action research
• Case Studies
• Field research
• Focus groups
• Observation
• Surveys & questionnaires
• Study Designs Home

Interviews are intended to find out the experiences, understandings, opinions, or motivations of participants. The relationship between the interviewer and interviewee is crucial to the success of the research interview; the interviewer builds an environment of trust with the interviewee/s, guiding the interviewee/s through a set of topics or questions to be discussed in depth.

Interviews are the most commonly used qualitative data gathering technique and are used with grounded theory, focus groups, and case studies.

• Interviews are purposive conversations between the researcher and the interviewee, either alone or as part of a group
• Interviews can be face to face, via telecommunications (Skype, Facetime, or phone), or via email (internet or email interview)
• The length of an interview varies. They may be anywhere from thirty minutes to several hours in length, depending on your research approach
• Structured interviews use a set list of questions which need to be asked in order, increasing the reliability and credibility of the data but decreasing responsiveness to interviewee/s. Structured interviews are like a verbal survey
• Unstructured interviews are where the interviewer has a set list of topics to address but no predetermined questions. This increases the flexibility of the interview but decreases the reliability of the data. Unstructured interviews may be used in long-term field observation research
• Semi-structured interviews are the middle ground. Semi-structured interviews require the interviewer to have a list of questions and topics pre-prepared, which can be asked in different ways with different interviewee/s. Semi-structured interviews increase the flexibility and the responsiveness of the interview while keeping the interview on track, increasing the reliability and credibility of the data. Semi-structured interviews are one of the most common interview techniques.
• Flexible – probing questions can be asked, and the order of questions changed, depending on the participant and how structured or unstructured the interview is
• Quick way to collect data
• Familiarity – most interviewees are familiar with the concept of an interview and are comfortable with this research approach

Limitations

• Not all participants are equally articulate or perceptive
• Questions must be worded carefully to reduce response bias
• Transcription of interviews can be time and labour intensive

Example questions

• What are the experiences of midwives in providing care to high-risk mothers, where there is a history of drug or alcohol use?

Example studies

Sandelin, A., Kalman, S., Gustafsson, B. (2019). Prerequisites for safe intraoperative nursing care and teamwork – operating theatre nurses’ perspectives: a qualitative interview study, Journal of Clinical Nursing, 28, 2635-2643. Doi: 10.1111/jocn.14850  

Babbie, E. (2008). The basics of social research (4th ed). Belmont: Thomson Wadsworth

Creswell, J.W. & Creswell, J.D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (5th ed). Thousand Oaks: SAGE

Jamshed, S. (2014). Qualitative research method-interviewing and observation. Journal of basic and clinical pharmacy, 5(4), 87-88. doi:10.4103/0976-0105.141942

Lindlof, T. & Taylor, B. (2002). Qualitative communication research methods (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks: SAGE .  

• << Previous: Surveys & questionnaires
• Next: Sampling >>
• Last Updated: Jul 3, 2024 11:46 AM
• URL: https://deakin.libguides.com/qualitative-study-designs

Qualitative Research Design: Start

Qualitative Research Design

What is Qualitative research design?

Qualitative research is a type of research that explores and provides deeper insights into real-world problems. Instead of collecting numerical data points or intervening or introducing treatments just like in quantitative research, qualitative research helps generate hypotheses as well as further investigate and understand quantitative data. Qualitative research gathers participants' experiences, perceptions, and behavior. It answers the hows and whys instead of how many or how much . It could be structured as a stand-alone study, purely relying on qualitative data or it could be part of mixed-methods research that combines qualitative and quantitative data.

Qualitative research involves collecting and analyzing non-numerical data (e.g., text, video, or audio) to understand concepts, opinions, or experiences. It can be used to gather in-depth insights into a problem or generate new ideas for research. Qualitative research is the opposite of quantitative research, which involves collecting and analyzing numerical data for statistical analysis. Qualitative research is commonly used in the humanities and social sciences, in subjects such as anthropology, sociology, education, health sciences, history, etc.

While qualitative and quantitative approaches are different, they are not necessarily opposites, and they are certainly not mutually exclusive. For instance, qualitative research can help expand and deepen understanding of data or results obtained from quantitative analysis. For example, say a quantitative analysis has determined that there is a correlation between length of stay and level of patient satisfaction, but why does this correlation exist? This dual-focus scenario shows one way in which qualitative and quantitative research could be integrated together.

Research Paradigms 

• Positivist versus Post-Positivist
• Social Constructivist (this paradigm/ideology mostly birth qualitative studies)

Events Relating to the Qualitative Research and Community Engagement Workshops @ CMU Libraries

CMU Libraries is committed to helping members of our community become data experts. To that end, CMU is offering public facing workshops that discuss Qualitative Research, Coding, and Community Engagement best practices.

The following workshops are a part of a broader series on using data. Please follow the links to register for the events. 

Qualitative Coding

Using Community Data to improve Outcome (Grant Writing)

Survey Design  

Upcoming Event: March 21st, 2024 (12:00pm -1:00 pm)

Community Engagement and Collaboration Event 

Join us for an event to improve, build on and expand the connections between Carnegie Mellon University resources and the Pittsburgh community. CMU resources such as the Libraries and Sustainability Initiative can be leveraged by users not affiliated with the university, but barriers can prevent them from fully engaging.

The conversation features representatives from CMU departments and local organizations about the community engagement efforts currently underway at CMU and opportunities to improve upon them. Speakers will highlight current and ongoing projects and share resources to support future collaboration.

Event Moderators:

Taiwo Lasisi, CLIR Postdoctoral Fellow in Community Data Literacy,  Carnegie Mellon University Libraries

Emma Slayton, Data Curation, Visualization, & GIS Specialist,  Carnegie Mellon University Libraries

Nicky Agate , Associate Dean for Academic Engagement, Carnegie Mellon University Libraries

Chelsea Cohen , The University’s Executive fellow for community engagement, Carnegie Mellon University

Sarah Ceurvorst , Academic Pathways Manager, Program Director, LEAP (Leadership, Excellence, Access, Persistence) Carnegie Mellon University

Julia Poeppibg , Associate Director of Partnership Development, Information Systems, Carnegie Mellon University 

Scott Wolovich , Director of New Sun Rising, Pittsburgh 

Additional workshops and events will be forthcoming. Watch this space for updates. 

Workshop Organizer

Qualitative Research Methods

What are Qualitative Research methods?

Qualitative research adopts numerous methods or techniques including interviews, focus groups, and observation. Interviews may be unstructured, with open-ended questions on a topic and the interviewer adapts to the responses. Structured interviews have a predetermined number of questions that every participant is asked. It is usually one-on-one and is appropriate for sensitive topics or topics needing an in-depth exploration. Focus groups are often held with 8-12 target participants and are used when group dynamics and collective views on a topic are desired. Researchers can be participant observers to share the experiences of the subject or non-participant or detached observers.

What constitutes a good research question? Does the question drive research design choices?

According to Doody and Bailey (2014);

 We can only develop a good research question by consulting relevant literature, colleagues, and supervisors experienced in the area of research. (inductive interactions).

Helps to have a directed research aim and objective.

Researchers should not be “ research trendy” and have enough evidence. This is why research objectives are important. It helps to take time, and resources into consideration.

Research questions can be developed from theoretical knowledge, previous research or experience, or a practical need at work (Parahoo 2014). They have numerous roles, such as identifying the importance of the research and providing clarity of purpose for the research, in terms of what the research intends to achieve in the end.

Qualitative Research Questions

What constitutes a good Qualitative research question?

A good qualitative question answers the hows and whys instead of how many or how much. It could be structured as a stand-alone study, purely relying on qualitative data or it could be part of mixed-methods research that combines qualitative and quantitative data. Qualitative research gathers participants' experiences, perceptions and behavior.

Examples of good Qualitative Research Questions:

What are people's thoughts on the new library? 

How does it feel to be a first-generation student attending college?

Difference example (between Qualitative and Quantitative research questions):

How many college students signed up for the new semester? (Quan) 

How do college students feel about the new semester? What are their experiences so far? (Qual)

• Qualitative Research Design Workshop Powerpoint

Foley G, Timonen V. Using Grounded Theory Method to Capture and Analyze Health Care Experiences. Health Serv Res. 2015 Aug;50(4):1195-210. [ PMC free article: PMC4545354 ] [ PubMed: 25523315 ]

Devers KJ. How will we know "good" qualitative research when we see it? Beginning the dialogue in health services research. Health Serv Res. 1999 Dec;34(5 Pt 2):1153-88. [ PMC free article: PMC1089058 ] [ PubMed: 10591278 ]

Huston P, Rowan M. Qualitative studies. Their role in medical research. Can Fam Physician. 1998 Nov;44:2453-8. [ PMC free article: PMC2277956 ] [ PubMed: 9839063 ]

Corner EJ, Murray EJ, Brett SJ. Qualitative, grounded theory exploration of patients' experience of early mobilisation, rehabilitation and recovery after critical illness. BMJ Open. 2019 Feb 24;9(2):e026348. [ PMC free article: PMC6443050 ] [ PubMed: 30804034 ]

Moser A, Korstjens I. Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 3: Sampling, data collection and analysis. Eur J Gen Pract. 2018 Dec;24(1):9-18. [ PMC free article: PMC5774281 ] [ PubMed: 29199486 ]

Houghton C, Murphy K, Meehan B, Thomas J, Brooker D, Casey D. From screening to synthesis: using nvivo to enhance transparency in qualitative evidence synthesis. J Clin Nurs. 2017 Mar;26(5-6):873-881. [ PubMed: 27324875 ]

Soratto J, Pires DEP, Friese S. Thematic content analysis using ATLAS.ti software: Potentialities for researchs in health. Rev Bras Enferm. 2020;73(3):e20190250. [ PubMed: 32321144 ]

Zamawe FC. The Implication of Using NVivo Software in Qualitative Data Analysis: Evidence-Based Reflections. Malawi Med J. 2015 Mar;27(1):13-5. [ PMC free article: PMC4478399 ] [ PubMed: 26137192 ]

Korstjens I, Moser A. Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 4: Trustworthiness and publishing. Eur J Gen Pract. 2018 Dec;24(1):120-124. [ PMC free article: PMC8816392 ] [ PubMed: 29202616 ]

Saldaña, J. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. The coding manual for qualitative researchers, 1-440.

O'Brien BC, Harris IB, Beckman TJ, Reed DA, Cook DA. Standards for reporting qualitative research: a synthesis of recommendations. Acad Med. 2014 Sep;89(9):1245-51. [ PubMed: 24979285 ]

Palermo C, King O, Brock T, Brown T, Crampton P, Hall H, Macaulay J, Morphet J, Mundy M, Oliaro L, Paynter S, Williams B, Wright C, E Rees C. Setting priorities for health education research: A mixed methods study. Med Teach. 2019 Sep;41(9):1029-1038. [ PubMed: 31141390 ]

• Last Updated: Feb 14, 2024 4:25 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.cmu.edu/c.php?g=1346006

Qualitative Research 101: Interviewing

5 Common Mistakes To Avoid When Undertaking Interviews

By: David Phair (PhD) and Kerryn Warren (PhD) | March 2022

Undertaking interviews is potentially the most important step in the qualitative research process. If you don’t collect useful, useable data in your interviews, you’ll struggle through the rest of your dissertation or thesis.  Having helped numerous students with their research over the years, we’ve noticed some common interviewing mistakes that first-time researchers make. In this post, we’ll discuss five costly interview-related mistakes and outline useful strategies to avoid making these.

Overview: 5 Interviewing Mistakes

• Not having a clear interview strategy /plan
• Not having good interview techniques /skills
• Not securing a suitable location and equipment
• Not having a basic risk management plan
• Not keeping your “ golden thread ” front of mind

1. Not having a clear interview strategy

The first common mistake that we’ll look at is that of starting the interviewing process without having first come up with a clear interview strategy or plan of action. While it’s natural to be keen to get started engaging with your interviewees, a lack of planning can result in a mess of data and inconsistency between interviews.

There are several design choices to decide on and plan for before you start interviewing anyone. Some of the most important questions you need to ask yourself before conducting interviews include:

• What are the guiding research aims and research questions of my study?
• Will I use a structured, semi-structured or unstructured interview approach?
• How will I record the interviews (audio or video)?
• Who will be interviewed and by whom ?
• What ethics and data law considerations do I need to adhere to?
• How will I analyze my data? 

Let’s take a quick look at some of these.

The core objective of the interviewing process is to generate useful data that will help you address your overall research aims. Therefore, your interviews need to be conducted in a way that directly links to your research aims, objectives and research questions (i.e. your “golden thread”). This means that you need to carefully consider the questions you’ll ask to ensure that they align with and feed into your golden thread. If any question doesn’t align with this, you may want to consider scrapping it.

Another important design choice is whether you’ll use an unstructured, semi-structured or structured interview approach . For semi-structured interviews, you will have a list of questions that you plan to ask and these questions will be open-ended in nature. You’ll also allow the discussion to digress from the core question set if something interesting comes up. This means that the type of information generated might differ a fair amount between interviews.

Contrasted to this, a structured approach to interviews is more rigid, where a specific set of closed questions is developed and asked for each interviewee in exactly the same order. Closed questions have a limited set of answers, that are often single-word answers. Therefore, you need to think about what you’re trying to achieve with your research project (i.e. your research aims) and decided on which approach would be best suited in your case.

It is also important to plan ahead with regards to who will be interviewed and how. You need to think about how you will approach the possible interviewees to get their cooperation, who will conduct the interviews, when to conduct the interviews and how to record the interviews. For each of these decisions, it’s also essential to make sure that all ethical considerations and data protection laws are taken into account.

Finally, you should think through how you plan to analyze the data (i.e., your qualitative analysis method) generated by the interviews. Different types of analysis rely on different types of data, so you need to ensure you’re asking the right types of questions and correctly guiding your respondents.

Simply put, you need to have a plan of action regarding the specifics of your interview approach before you start collecting data. If not, you’ll end up drifting in your approach from interview to interview, which will result in inconsistent, unusable data.

2. Not having good interview technique

While you’re generally not expected to become you to be an expert interviewer for a dissertation or thesis, it is important to practice good interview technique and develop basic interviewing skills .

Let’s go through some basics that will help the process along.

Firstly, before the interview , make sure you know your interview questions well and have a clear idea of what you want from the interview. Naturally, the specificity of your questions will depend on whether you’re taking a structured, semi-structured or unstructured approach, but you still need a consistent starting point . Ideally, you should develop an interview guide beforehand (more on this later) that details your core question and links these to the research aims, objectives and research questions.

Before you undertake any interviews, it’s a good idea to do a few mock interviews with friends or family members. This will help you get comfortable with the interviewer role, prepare for potentially unexpected answers and give you a good idea of how long the interview will take to conduct. In the interviewing process, you’re likely to encounter two kinds of challenging interviewees ; the two-word respondent and the respondent who meanders and babbles. Therefore, you should prepare yourself for both and come up with a plan to respond to each in a way that will allow the interview to continue productively.

To begin the formal interview , provide the person you are interviewing with an overview of your research. This will help to calm their nerves (and yours) and contextualize the interaction. Ultimately, you want the interviewee to feel comfortable and be willing to be open and honest with you, so it’s useful to start in a more casual, relaxed fashion and allow them to ask any questions they may have. From there, you can ease them into the rest of the questions.

As the interview progresses , avoid asking leading questions (i.e., questions that assume something about the interviewee or their response). Make sure that you speak clearly and slowly , using plain language and being ready to paraphrase questions if the person you are interviewing misunderstands. Be particularly careful with interviewing English second language speakers to ensure that you’re both on the same page.

Engage with the interviewee by listening to them carefully and acknowledging that you are listening to them by smiling or nodding. Show them that you’re interested in what they’re saying and thank them for their openness as appropriate. This will also encourage your interviewee to respond openly.

Need a helping hand?

3. Not securing a suitable location and quality equipment

Where you conduct your interviews and the equipment you use to record them both play an important role in how the process unfolds. Therefore, you need to think carefully about each of these variables before you start interviewing.

Poor location: A bad location can result in the quality of your interviews being compromised, interrupted, or cancelled. If you are conducting physical interviews, you’ll need a location that is quiet, safe, and welcoming . It’s very important that your location of choice is not prone to interruptions (the workplace office is generally problematic, for example) and has suitable facilities (such as water, a bathroom, and snacks).

If you are conducting online interviews , you need to consider a few other factors. Importantly, you need to make sure that both you and your respondent have access to a good, stable internet connection and electricity. Always check before the time that both of you know how to use the relevant software and it’s accessible (sometimes meeting platforms are blocked by workplace policies or firewalls). It’s also good to have alternatives in place (such as WhatsApp, Zoom, or Teams) to cater for these types of issues.

Poor equipment: Using poor-quality recording equipment or using equipment incorrectly means that you will have trouble transcribing, coding, and analyzing your interviews. This can be a major issue , as some of your interview data may go completely to waste if not recorded well. So, make sure that you use good-quality recording equipment and that you know how to use it correctly.

To avoid issues, you should always conduct test recordings before every interview to ensure that you can use the relevant equipment properly. It’s also a good idea to spot check each recording afterwards, just to make sure it was recorded as planned. If your equipment uses batteries, be sure to always carry a spare set.

4. Not having a basic risk management plan

Many possible issues can arise during the interview process. Not planning for these issues can mean that you are left with compromised data that might not be useful to you. Therefore, it’s important to map out some sort of risk management plan ahead of time, considering the potential risks, how you’ll minimize their probability and how you’ll manage them if they materialize.

Common potential issues related to the actual interview include cancellations (people pulling out), delays (such as getting stuck in traffic), language and accent differences (especially in the case of poor internet connections), issues with internet connections and power supply. Other issues can also occur in the interview itself. For example, the interviewee could drift off-topic, or you might encounter an interviewee who does not say much at all.

You can prepare for these potential issues by considering possible worst-case scenarios and preparing a response for each scenario. For instance, it is important to plan a backup date just in case your interviewee cannot make it to the first meeting you scheduled with them. It’s also a good idea to factor in a 30-minute gap between your interviews for the instances where someone might be late, or an interview runs overtime for other reasons. Make sure that you also plan backup questions that could be used to bring a respondent back on topic if they start rambling, or questions to encourage those who are saying too little.

In general, it’s best practice to plan to conduct more interviews than you think you need (this is called oversampling ). Doing so will allow you some room for error if there are interviews that don’t go as planned, or if some interviewees withdraw. If you need 10 interviews, it is a good idea to plan for 15. Likely, a few will cancel , delay, or not produce useful data.

5. Not keeping your golden thread front of mind

We touched on this a little earlier, but it is a key point that should be central to your entire research process. You don’t want to end up with pages and pages of data after conducting your interviews and realize that it is not useful to your research aims . Your research aims, objectives and research questions – i.e., your golden thread – should influence every design decision and should guide the interview process at all times. 

A useful way to avoid this mistake is by developing an interview guide before you begin interviewing your respondents. An interview guide is a document that contains all of your questions with notes on how each of the interview questions is linked to the research question(s) of your study. You can also include your research aims and objectives here for a more comprehensive linkage. 

You can easily create an interview guide by drawing up a table with one column containing your core interview questions . Then add another column with your research questions , another with expectations that you may have in light of the relevant literature and another with backup or follow-up questions . As mentioned, you can also bring in your research aims and objectives to help you connect them all together. If you’d like, you can download a copy of our free interview guide here .

Recap: Qualitative Interview Mistakes

In this post, we’ve discussed 5 common costly mistakes that are easy to make in the process of planning and conducting qualitative interviews.

To recap, these include:

If you have any questions about these interviewing mistakes, drop a comment below. Alternatively, if you’re interested in getting 1-on-1 help with your thesis or dissertation , check out our dissertation coaching service or book a free initial consultation with one of our friendly Grad Coaches.

Psst... there’s more!

This post was based on one of our popular Research Bootcamps . If you're working on a research project, you'll definitely want to check this out ...

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

9.4 Types of qualitative research designs

Learning objectives.

• Define focus groups and outline how they differ from one-on-one interviews
• Describe how to determine the best size for focus groups
• Identify the important considerations in focus group composition
• Discuss how to moderate focus groups
• Identify the strengths and weaknesses of focus group methodology
• Describe case study research, ethnography, and phenomenology.

There are various types of approaches to qualitative research.  This chapter presents information about focus groups, which are often used in social work research.  It also introduces case studies, ethnography, and phenomenology.

Focus Groups

Focus groups resemble qualitative interviews in that a researcher may prepare a guide in advance and interact with participants by asking them questions. But anyone who has conducted both one-on-one interviews and focus groups knows that each is unique. In an interview, usually one member (the research participant) is most active while the other (the researcher) plays the role of listener, conversation guider, and question-asker. Focus groups , on the other hand, are planned discussions designed to elicit group interaction and “obtain perceptions on a defined area of interest in a permissive, nonthreatening environment” (Krueger & Casey, 2000, p. 5).  In focus groups, the researcher play a different role than in a one-on-one interview. The researcher’s aim is to get participants talking to each other,  to observe interactions among participants, and moderate the discussion.

There are numerous examples of focus group research. In their 2008 study, for example, Amy Slater and Marika Tiggemann (2010) conducted six focus groups with 49 adolescent girls between the ages of 13 and 15 to learn more about girls’ attitudes towards’ participation in sports. In order to get focus group participants to speak with one another rather than with the group facilitator, the focus group interview guide contained just two questions: “Can you tell me some of the reasons that girls stop playing sports or other physical activities?” and “Why do you think girls don’t play as much sport/physical activity as boys?” In another focus group study, Virpi Ylanne and Angie Williams (2009) held nine focus group sessions with adults of different ages to gauge their perceptions of how older characters are represented in television commercials. Among other considerations, the researchers were interested in discovering how focus group participants position themselves and others in terms of age stereotypes and identities during the group discussion. In both examples, the researchers’ core interest in group interaction could not have been assessed had interviews been conducted on a one-on-one basis, making the focus group method an ideal choice.

Who should be in your focus group?

In some ways, focus groups require more planning than other qualitative methods of data collection, such as one-on-one interviews in which a researcher may be better able to the dialogue. Researchers must take care to form focus groups with members who will want to interact with one another and to control the timing of the event so that participants are not asked nor expected to stay for a longer time than they’ve agreed to participate. The researcher should also be prepared to inform focus group participants of their responsibility to maintain the confidentiality of what is said in the group. But while the researcher can and should encourage all focus group members to maintain confidentiality, she should also clarify to participants that the unique nature of the group setting prevents her from being able to promise that confidentiality will be maintained by other participants. Once focus group members leave the research setting, researchers cannot control what they say to other people.

Group size should be determined in part by the topic of the interview and your sense of the likelihood that participants will have much to say without much prompting. If the topic is one about which you think participants feel passionately and will have much to say, a group of 3–5 could make sense. Groups larger than that, especially for heated topics, can easily become unmanageable. Some researchers say that a group of about 6–10 participants is the ideal size for focus group research (Morgan, 1997); others recommend that groups should include 3–12 participants (Adler & Clark, 2008).  The size of the focus group is ultimately the decision of the researcher. When forming groups and deciding how large or small to make them, take into consideration what you know about the topic and participants’ potential interest in, passion for, and feelings about the topic. Also consider your comfort level and experience in conducting focus groups. These factors will help you decide which size is right in your particular case.

It may seem counterintuitive, but in general, it is better to form focus groups consisting of participants who do not know one another than to create groups consisting of friends, relatives, or acquaintances (Agar & MacDonald, 1995).  The reason is that group members who know each other may not share some taken-for-granted knowledge or assumptions. In research, it is precisely the  taken-for-granted knowledge that is often of interest; thus, the focus group researcher should avoid setting up interactions where participants may be discouraged to question or raise issues that they take for granted. However, group members should not be so different from one another that participants will be unlikely to feel comfortable talking with one another.

Focus group researchers must carefully consider the composition of the groups they put together. In his text on conducting focus groups, Morgan (1997) suggests that “homogeneity in background and not homogeneity in attitudes” (p. 36) should be the goal, since participants must feel comfortable speaking up but must also have enough differences to facilitate a productive discussion.  Whatever composition a researcher designs for her focus groups, the important point to keep in mind is that focus group dynamics are shaped by multiple social contexts (Hollander, 2004). Participants’ silences as well as their speech may be shaped by gender, race, class, sexuality, age, or other background characteristics or social dynamics—all of which might be suppressed or exacerbated depending on the composition of the group. Hollander (2004) suggests that researchers must pay careful attention to group composition, must be attentive to group dynamics during the focus group discussion, and should use multiple methods of data collection in order to “untangle participants’ responses and their relationship to the social contexts of the focus group” (p. 632).

The role of the moderator

In addition to the importance of group composition, focus groups also require skillful moderation. A moderator is the researcher tasked with facilitating the conversation in the focus group. Participants may ask each other follow-up questions, agree or disagree with one another, display body language that tells us something about their feelings about the conversation, or even come up with questions not previously conceived of by the researcher. It is just these sorts of interactions and displays that are of interest to the researcher. A researcher conducting focus groups collects data on more than people’s direct responses to her question, as in interviews.

The moderator’s job is not to ask questions to each person individually, but to stimulate conversation between participants. It is important to set ground rules for focus groups at the outset of the discussion. Remind participants you’ve invited them to participate because you want to hear from all of them. Therefore, the group should aim to let just one person speak at a time and avoid letting just a couple of participants dominate the conversation. One way to do this is to begin the discussion by asking participants to briefly introduce themselves or to provide a brief response to an opening question. This will help set the tone of having all group members participate. Also, ask participants to avoid having side conversations; thoughts or reactions to what is said in the group are important and should be shared with everyone.

As the focus group gets rolling, the moderator will play a less active role as participants talk to one another. There may be times when the conversation stagnates or when you, as moderator, wish to guide the conversation in another direction. In these instances, it is important to demonstrate that you’ve been paying attention to what participants have said. Being prepared to interject statements or questions such as “I’d really like to hear more about what Sunil and Joe think about what Dominick and Jae have been saying” or “Several of you have mentioned X. What do others think about this?” will be important for keeping the conversation going. It can also help redirect the conversation, shift the focus to participants who have been less active in the group, and serve as a cue to those who may be dominating the conversation that it is time to allow others to speak. Researchers may choose to use multiple moderators to make managing these various tasks easier.

Moderators are often too busy working with participants to take diligent notes during a focus group. It is helpful to have a note-taker who can record participants’ responses (Liamputtong, 2011). The note-taker creates, in essence, the first draft of interpretation for the data in the study. They note themes in responses, nonverbal cues, and other information to be included in the analysis later on. Focus groups are analyzed in a similar way as interviews; however, the interactive dimension between participants adds another element to the analytical process. Researchers must attend to the group dynamics of each focus group, as “verbal and nonverbal expressions, the tactical use of humour, interruptions in interaction, and disagreement between participants” are all data that are vital to include in analysis (Liamputtong, 2011, p. 175). Note-takers record these elements in field notes, which allows moderators to focus on the conversation.

Strengths and weaknesses of focus groups

Focus groups share many of the strengths and weaknesses of one-on-one qualitative interviews. Both methods can yield very detailed, in-depth information; are excellent for studying social processes; and provide researchers with an opportunity not only to hear what participants say but also to observe what they do in terms of their body language. Focus groups offer the added benefit of giving researchers a chance to collect data on human interaction by observing how group participants respond and react to one another. Like one-on-one qualitative interviews, focus groups can also be quite expensive and time-consuming. However, there may be some savings with focus groups as it takes fewer group events than one-on-one interviews to gather data from the same number of people. Another potential drawback of focus groups, which is not a concern for one-on-one interviews, is that one or two participants might dominate the group, silencing other participants. Careful planning and skillful moderation on the part of the researcher are crucial for avoiding, or at least dealing with, such possibilities. The various strengths and weaknesses of focus group research are summarized in Table 91.

Grounded Theory

Grounded theory has been widely used since its development in the late 1960s (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). Largely derived from schools of sociology, grounded theory involves emersion of the researcher in the field and in the data. Researchers follow a systematic set of procedures and a simultaneous approach to data collection and analysis. Grounded theory is most often used to generate rich explanations of complex actions, processes, and transitions. The primary mode of data collection is one-on-one participant interviews. Sample sizes tend to range from 20 to 30 individuals, sampled purposively (Padgett, 2016). However, sample sizes can be larger or smaller, depending on data saturation. Data saturation is the point in the qualitative research data collection process when no new information is being discovered. Researchers use a constant comparative approach in which previously collected data are analyzed during the same time frame as new data are being collected.  This allows the researchers to determine when new information is no longer being gleaned from data collection and analysis — that data saturation has been reached — in order to conclude the data collection phase.

Rather than apply or test existing grand theories, or “Big T” theories, grounded theory focuses on “small t” theories (Padgett, 2016). Grand theories, or “Big T” theories, are systems of principles, ideas, and concepts used to predict phenomena. These theories are backed up by facts and tested hypotheses. “Small t” theories are speculative and contingent upon specific contexts. In grounded theory, these “small t” theories are grounded in events and experiences and emerge from the analysis of the data collected.

One notable application of grounded theory produced a “small t” theory of acceptance following cancer diagnoses (Jakobsson, Horvath, & Ahlberg, 2005). Using grounded theory, the researchers interviewed nine patients in western Sweden. Data collection and analysis stopped when saturation was reached. The researchers found that action and knowledge, given with respect and continuity led to confidence which led to acceptance. This “small t” theory continues to be applied and further explored in other contexts.

Case study research

Case study research is an intensive longitudinal study of a phenomenon at one or more research sites for the purpose of deriving detailed, contextualized inferences and understanding the dynamic process underlying a phenomenon of interest. Case research is a unique research design in that it can be used in an interpretive manner to build theories or in a positivist manner to test theories. The previous chapter on case research discusses both techniques in depth and provides illustrative exemplars. Furthermore, the case researcher is a neutral observer (direct observation) in the social setting rather than an active participant (participant observation). As with any other interpretive approach, drawing meaningful inferences from case research depends heavily on the observational skills and integrative abilities of the researcher.

Ethnography

The ethnographic research method, derived largely from the field of anthropology, emphasizes studying a phenomenon within the context of its culture. The researcher must be deeply immersed in the social culture over an extended period of time (usually 8 months to 2 years) and should engage, observe, and record the daily life of the studied culture and its social participants within their natural setting. The primary mode of data collection is participant observation, and data analysis involves a “sense-making” approach. In addition, the researcher must take extensive field notes, and narrate her experience in descriptive detail so that readers may experience the same culture as the researcher. In this method, the researcher has two roles: rely on her unique knowledge and engagement to generate insights (theory), and convince the scientific community of the trans-situational nature of the studied phenomenon.

The classic example of ethnographic research is Jane Goodall’s study of primate behaviors, where she lived with chimpanzees in their natural habitat at Gombe National Park in Tanzania, observed their behaviors, interacted with them, and shared their lives. During that process, she learnt and chronicled how chimpanzees seek food and shelter, how they socialize with each other, their communication patterns, their mating behaviors, and so forth. A more contemporary example of ethnographic research is Myra Bluebond-Langer’s (1996)14 study of decision making in families with children suffering from life-threatening illnesses, and the physical, psychological, environmental, ethical, legal, and cultural issues that influence such decision-making. The researcher followed the experiences of approximately 80 children with incurable illnesses and their families for a period of over two years. Data collection involved participant observation and formal/informal conversations with children, their parents and relatives, and health care providers to document their lived experience.

Phenomenology

Phenomenology is a research method that emphasizes the study of conscious experiences as a way of understanding the reality around us. Phenomenology is concerned with the systematic reflection and analysis of phenomena associated with conscious experiences, such as human judgment, perceptions, and actions, with the goal of (1) appreciating and describing social reality from the diverse subjective perspectives of the participants involved, and (2) understanding the symbolic meanings (“deep structure”) underlying these subjective experiences. Phenomenological inquiry requires that researchers eliminate any prior assumptions and personal biases, empathize with the participant’s situation, and tune into existential dimensions of that situation, so that they can fully understand the deep structures that drives the conscious thinking, feeling, and behavior of the studied participants.

Some researchers view phenomenology as a philosophy rather than as a research method. In response to this criticism, Giorgi and Giorgi (2003) developed an existential phenomenological research method to guide studies in this area. This method can be grouped into data collection and data analysis phases. In the data collection phase, participants embedded in a social phenomenon are interviewed to capture their subjective experiences and perspectives regarding the phenomenon under investigation. Examples of questions that may be asked include “can you describe a typical day” or “can you describe that particular incident in more detail?” These interviews are recorded and transcribed for further analysis. During data analysis, the researcher reads the transcripts to: (1) get a sense of the whole, and (2) establish “units of significance” that can faithfully represent participants’ subjective experiences. Examples of such units of significance are concepts such as “felt space” and “felt time,” which are then used to document participants’ psychological experiences. For instance, did participants feel safe, free, trapped, or joyous when experiencing a phenomenon (“felt-space”)? Did they feel that their experience was pressured, slow, or discontinuous (“felt-time”)? Phenomenological analysis should take into account the participants’ temporal landscape (i.e., their sense of past, present, and future), and the researcher must transpose herself in an imaginary sense in the participant’s situation (i.e., temporarily live the participant’s life). The participants’ lived experience is described in form of a narrative or using emergent themes. The analysis then delves into these themes to identify multiple layers of meaning while retaining the fragility and ambiguity of subjects’ lived experiences.

Key Takeaways

• In terms of focus group composition, homogeneity of background among participants is recommended while diverse attitudes within the group are ideal.
• The goal of a focus group is to get participants to talk with one another rather than the researcher.
• Like one-on-one qualitative interviews, focus groups can yield very detailed information, are excellent for studying social processes, and provide researchers with an opportunity to observe participants’ body language; they also allow researchers to observe social interaction.
• Focus groups can be expensive and time-consuming, as are one-on-one interviews; there is also the possibility that a few participants will dominate the group and silence others in the group.
• Other types of qualitative research include case studies, ethnography, and phenomenology.
• Data saturation – the point in the qualitative research data collection process when no new information is being discovered
• Focus groups- planned discussions designed to elicit group interaction and “obtain perceptions on a defined area of interest in a permissive, nonthreatening environment” (Krueger & Casey, 2000, p. 5)
• Moderator- the researcher tasked with facilitating the conversation in the focus group

Image attributions

target group by geralt CC-0

workplace team by Free-Photos CC-0

Foundations of Social Work Research Copyright © 2020 by Rebecca L. Mauldin is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• What Is a Research Design | Types, Guide & Examples

What Is a Research Design | Types, Guide & Examples

Published on June 7, 2021 by Shona McCombes . Revised on November 20, 2023 by Pritha Bhandari.

A research design is a strategy for answering your   research question  using empirical data. Creating a research design means making decisions about:

• Your overall research objectives and approach
• Whether you’ll rely on primary research or secondary research
• Your sampling methods or criteria for selecting subjects
• Your data collection methods
• The procedures you’ll follow to collect data
• Your data analysis methods

A well-planned research design helps ensure that your methods match your research objectives and that you use the right kind of analysis for your data.

Table of contents

Step 1: consider your aims and approach, step 2: choose a type of research design, step 3: identify your population and sampling method, step 4: choose your data collection methods, step 5: plan your data collection procedures, step 6: decide on your data analysis strategies, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about research design.

• Introduction

Before you can start designing your research, you should already have a clear idea of the research question you want to investigate.

There are many different ways you could go about answering this question. Your research design choices should be driven by your aims and priorities—start by thinking carefully about what you want to achieve.

The first choice you need to make is whether you’ll take a qualitative or quantitative approach.

Qualitative research designs tend to be more flexible and inductive , allowing you to adjust your approach based on what you find throughout the research process.

Quantitative research designs tend to be more fixed and deductive , with variables and hypotheses clearly defined in advance of data collection.

It’s also possible to use a mixed-methods design that integrates aspects of both approaches. By combining qualitative and quantitative insights, you can gain a more complete picture of the problem you’re studying and strengthen the credibility of your conclusions.

Practical and ethical considerations when designing research

As well as scientific considerations, you need to think practically when designing your research. If your research involves people or animals, you also need to consider research ethics .

• How much time do you have to collect data and write up the research?
• Will you be able to gain access to the data you need (e.g., by travelling to a specific location or contacting specific people)?
• Do you have the necessary research skills (e.g., statistical analysis or interview techniques)?
• Will you need ethical approval ?

At each stage of the research design process, make sure that your choices are practically feasible.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

Within both qualitative and quantitative approaches, there are several types of research design to choose from. Each type provides a framework for the overall shape of your research.

Types of quantitative research designs

Quantitative designs can be split into four main types.

• Experimental and   quasi-experimental designs allow you to test cause-and-effect relationships
• Descriptive and correlational designs allow you to measure variables and describe relationships between them.

With descriptive and correlational designs, you can get a clear picture of characteristics, trends and relationships as they exist in the real world. However, you can’t draw conclusions about cause and effect (because correlation doesn’t imply causation ).

Experiments are the strongest way to test cause-and-effect relationships without the risk of other variables influencing the results. However, their controlled conditions may not always reflect how things work in the real world. They’re often also more difficult and expensive to implement.

Types of qualitative research designs

Qualitative designs are less strictly defined. This approach is about gaining a rich, detailed understanding of a specific context or phenomenon, and you can often be more creative and flexible in designing your research.

The table below shows some common types of qualitative design. They often have similar approaches in terms of data collection, but focus on different aspects when analyzing the data.

Your research design should clearly define who or what your research will focus on, and how you’ll go about choosing your participants or subjects.

In research, a population is the entire group that you want to draw conclusions about, while a sample is the smaller group of individuals you’ll actually collect data from.

Defining the population

A population can be made up of anything you want to study—plants, animals, organizations, texts, countries, etc. In the social sciences, it most often refers to a group of people.

For example, will you focus on people from a specific demographic, region or background? Are you interested in people with a certain job or medical condition, or users of a particular product?

The more precisely you define your population, the easier it will be to gather a representative sample.

• Sampling methods

Even with a narrowly defined population, it’s rarely possible to collect data from every individual. Instead, you’ll collect data from a sample.

To select a sample, there are two main approaches: probability sampling and non-probability sampling . The sampling method you use affects how confidently you can generalize your results to the population as a whole.

Probability sampling is the most statistically valid option, but it’s often difficult to achieve unless you’re dealing with a very small and accessible population.

For practical reasons, many studies use non-probability sampling, but it’s important to be aware of the limitations and carefully consider potential biases. You should always make an effort to gather a sample that’s as representative as possible of the population.

Case selection in qualitative research

In some types of qualitative designs, sampling may not be relevant.

For example, in an ethnography or a case study , your aim is to deeply understand a specific context, not to generalize to a population. Instead of sampling, you may simply aim to collect as much data as possible about the context you are studying.

In these types of design, you still have to carefully consider your choice of case or community. You should have a clear rationale for why this particular case is suitable for answering your research question .

For example, you might choose a case study that reveals an unusual or neglected aspect of your research problem, or you might choose several very similar or very different cases in order to compare them.

Data collection methods are ways of directly measuring variables and gathering information. They allow you to gain first-hand knowledge and original insights into your research problem.

You can choose just one data collection method, or use several methods in the same study.

Survey methods

Surveys allow you to collect data about opinions, behaviors, experiences, and characteristics by asking people directly. There are two main survey methods to choose from: questionnaires and interviews .

Observation methods

Observational studies allow you to collect data unobtrusively, observing characteristics, behaviors or social interactions without relying on self-reporting.

Observations may be conducted in real time, taking notes as you observe, or you might make audiovisual recordings for later analysis. They can be qualitative or quantitative.

Other methods of data collection

There are many other ways you might collect data depending on your field and topic.

If you’re not sure which methods will work best for your research design, try reading some papers in your field to see what kinds of data collection methods they used.

Secondary data

If you don’t have the time or resources to collect data from the population you’re interested in, you can also choose to use secondary data that other researchers already collected—for example, datasets from government surveys or previous studies on your topic.

With this raw data, you can do your own analysis to answer new research questions that weren’t addressed by the original study.

Using secondary data can expand the scope of your research, as you may be able to access much larger and more varied samples than you could collect yourself.

However, it also means you don’t have any control over which variables to measure or how to measure them, so the conclusions you can draw may be limited.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

As well as deciding on your methods, you need to plan exactly how you’ll use these methods to collect data that’s consistent, accurate, and unbiased.

Planning systematic procedures is especially important in quantitative research, where you need to precisely define your variables and ensure your measurements are high in reliability and validity.

Operationalization

Some variables, like height or age, are easily measured. But often you’ll be dealing with more abstract concepts, like satisfaction, anxiety, or competence. Operationalization means turning these fuzzy ideas into measurable indicators.

If you’re using observations , which events or actions will you count?

If you’re using surveys , which questions will you ask and what range of responses will be offered?

You may also choose to use or adapt existing materials designed to measure the concept you’re interested in—for example, questionnaires or inventories whose reliability and validity has already been established.

Reliability and validity

Reliability means your results can be consistently reproduced, while validity means that you’re actually measuring the concept you’re interested in.

For valid and reliable results, your measurement materials should be thoroughly researched and carefully designed. Plan your procedures to make sure you carry out the same steps in the same way for each participant.

If you’re developing a new questionnaire or other instrument to measure a specific concept, running a pilot study allows you to check its validity and reliability in advance.

Sampling procedures

As well as choosing an appropriate sampling method , you need a concrete plan for how you’ll actually contact and recruit your selected sample.

That means making decisions about things like:

• How many participants do you need for an adequate sample size?
• What inclusion and exclusion criteria will you use to identify eligible participants?
• How will you contact your sample—by mail, online, by phone, or in person?

If you’re using a probability sampling method , it’s important that everyone who is randomly selected actually participates in the study. How will you ensure a high response rate?

If you’re using a non-probability method , how will you avoid research bias and ensure a representative sample?

Data management

It’s also important to create a data management plan for organizing and storing your data.

Will you need to transcribe interviews or perform data entry for observations? You should anonymize and safeguard any sensitive data, and make sure it’s backed up regularly.

Keeping your data well-organized will save time when it comes to analyzing it. It can also help other researchers validate and add to your findings (high replicability ).

On its own, raw data can’t answer your research question. The last step of designing your research is planning how you’ll analyze the data.

Quantitative data analysis

In quantitative research, you’ll most likely use some form of statistical analysis . With statistics, you can summarize your sample data, make estimates, and test hypotheses.

Using descriptive statistics , you can summarize your sample data in terms of:

• The distribution of the data (e.g., the frequency of each score on a test)
• The central tendency of the data (e.g., the mean to describe the average score)
• The variability of the data (e.g., the standard deviation to describe how spread out the scores are)

The specific calculations you can do depend on the level of measurement of your variables.

Using inferential statistics , you can:

• Make estimates about the population based on your sample data.
• Test hypotheses about a relationship between variables.

Regression and correlation tests look for associations between two or more variables, while comparison tests (such as t tests and ANOVAs ) look for differences in the outcomes of different groups.

Your choice of statistical test depends on various aspects of your research design, including the types of variables you’re dealing with and the distribution of your data.

Qualitative data analysis

In qualitative research, your data will usually be very dense with information and ideas. Instead of summing it up in numbers, you’ll need to comb through the data in detail, interpret its meanings, identify patterns, and extract the parts that are most relevant to your research question.

Two of the most common approaches to doing this are thematic analysis and discourse analysis .

There are many other ways of analyzing qualitative data depending on the aims of your research. To get a sense of potential approaches, try reading some qualitative research papers in your field.

If you want to know more about the research process , methodology , research bias , or statistics , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• Simple random sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Cluster sampling
• Likert scales
• Reproducibility

 Statistics

• Null hypothesis
• Statistical power
• Probability distribution
• Effect size
• Poisson distribution

Research bias

• Optimism bias
• Cognitive bias
• Implicit bias
• Hawthorne effect
• Anchoring bias
• Explicit bias

A research design is a strategy for answering your   research question . It defines your overall approach and determines how you will collect and analyze data.

A well-planned research design helps ensure that your methods match your research aims, that you collect high-quality data, and that you use the right kind of analysis to answer your questions, utilizing credible sources . This allows you to draw valid , trustworthy conclusions.

Quantitative research designs can be divided into two main categories:

• Correlational and descriptive designs are used to investigate characteristics, averages, trends, and associations between variables.
• Experimental and quasi-experimental designs are used to test causal relationships .

Qualitative research designs tend to be more flexible. Common types of qualitative design include case study , ethnography , and grounded theory designs.

The priorities of a research design can vary depending on the field, but you usually have to specify:

• Your research questions and/or hypotheses
• Your overall approach (e.g., qualitative or quantitative )
• The type of design you’re using (e.g., a survey , experiment , or case study )
• Your data collection methods (e.g., questionnaires , observations)
• Your data collection procedures (e.g., operationalization , timing and data management)
• Your data analysis methods (e.g., statistical tests  or thematic analysis )

A sample is a subset of individuals from a larger population . Sampling means selecting the group that you will actually collect data from in your research. For example, if you are researching the opinions of students in your university, you could survey a sample of 100 students.

In statistics, sampling allows you to test a hypothesis about the characteristics of a population.

Operationalization means turning abstract conceptual ideas into measurable observations.

For example, the concept of social anxiety isn’t directly observable, but it can be operationally defined in terms of self-rating scores, behavioral avoidance of crowded places, or physical anxiety symptoms in social situations.

Before collecting data , it’s important to consider how you will operationalize the variables that you want to measure.

A research project is an academic, scientific, or professional undertaking to answer a research question . Research projects can take many forms, such as qualitative or quantitative , descriptive , longitudinal , experimental , or correlational . What kind of research approach you choose will depend on your topic.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, November 20). What Is a Research Design | Types, Guide & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved August 12, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/research-design/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, guide to experimental design | overview, steps, & examples, how to write a research proposal | examples & templates, ethical considerations in research | types & examples, what is your plagiarism score.

Interviews can be defined as a qualitative research technique which involves “conducting intensive individual interviews with a small number of respondents to explore their perspectives on a particular idea, program or situation.” [1]

There are three different formats of interviews: structured, semi-structured and unstructured.

Structured interviews consist of a series of pre-determined questions that all interviewees answer in the same order. Data analysis usually tends to be more straightforward because researcher can compare and contrast different answers given to the same questions.

Unstructured interviews are usually the least reliable from research viewpoint, because no questions are prepared prior to the interview and data collection is conducted in an informal manner. Unstructured interviews can be associated with a high level of bias and comparison of answers given by different respondents tends to be difficult due to the differences in formulation of questions.

Semi-structured interviews contain the components of both, structured and unstructured interviews. In semi-structured interviews, interviewer prepares a set of same questions to be answered by all interviewees. At the same time, additional questions might be asked during interviews to clarify and/or further expand certain issues.

Advantages of interviews include possibilities of collecting detailed information about research questions.  Moreover, in in this type of primary data collection researcher has direct control over the flow of process and she has a chance to clarify certain issues during the process if needed. Disadvantages, on the other hand, include longer time requirements and difficulties associated with arranging an appropriate time with perspective sample group members to conduct interviews.

When conducting interviews you should have an open mind and refrain from displaying disagreements in any forms when viewpoints expressed by interviewees contradict your own ideas. Moreover, timing and environment for interviews need to be scheduled effectively. Specifically, interviews need to be conducted in a relaxed environment, free of any forms of pressure for interviewees whatsoever.

Respected scholars warn that “in conducting an interview the interviewer should attempt to create a friendly, non-threatening atmosphere. Much as one does with a cover letter, the interviewer should give a brief, casual introduction to the study; stress the importance of the person’s participation; and assure anonymity, or at least confidentiality, when possible.” [2]

There is a risk of interviewee bias during the primary data collection process and this would seriously compromise the validity of the project findings. Some interviewer bias can be avoided by ensuring that the interviewer does not overreact to responses of the interviewee. Other steps that can be taken to help avoid or reduce interviewer bias include having the interviewer dress inconspicuously and appropriately for the environment and holding the interview in a private setting.  [3]

My e-book, The Ultimate Guide to Writing a Dissertation in Business Studies: a step by step assistance offers practical assistance to complete a dissertation with minimum or no stress. The e-book covers all stages of writing a dissertation starting from the selection to the research area to submitting the completed version of the work within the deadline.John Dudovskiy

[1] Boyce, C. & Neale, P. (2006) “Conducting in-depth Interviews: A Guide for Designing and Conducting In-Depth Interviews”, Pathfinder International Tool Series

[2] Connaway, L.S.& Powell, R.P.(2010) “Basic Research Methods for Librarians” ABC-CLIO

[3] Connaway, L.S.& Powell, R.P.(2010) “Basic Research Methods for Librarians” ABC-CLIO

THE PROCESS OF QUALITATIVE INTERVIEW: PRACTICAL INSIGHTS FOR NOVICE RESEARCHERS

• Dhofar University

• University of Khorfakkan

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations
• Klien Irish P. Maravilla
• Roel P. Villocino

• Aishath Shoozan
• Maslawati Mohamad

• Catriona M Doody

• ARCH SEX BEHAV

• Stacy Jacob
• S. Furgerson
• John W Creswell

• R.A. Krueger
• Daniel W Turner
• Muhammad Faisol Chowdhury
• Patrick Dilley
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

General Inquiries

Call today to schedule an appointment or fill out an online request form. If requested before 2 p.m. you will receive a response today.

713-798-1000

Monday - Friday 8 a.m. - 5 p.m.

Request Now

Request non-urgent appointments

As Houston's premier academic medical practice, Baylor Medicine delivers compassionate, innovative, evidence-based care. Find a Doctor

America's fourth largest city is a great place to live, work and play. Find out why. Get to Know Houston

Give Careers Intranet

• Educational Research Mini-Series
• Major Departmental Events
• Center for Educational Outreach
• Center for Teaching and eLearning
• Master Teachers Fellowship Program 
• Educator Development Portal
• Meet Our Team
• Baylor College of Medicine
• Departments
• Huffington Department of Education, Innovation & Technology
• Topic: Qualitative Research

Qualitative Research

Compare and contrast common study designs used in qualitative/mixed research.

Speaker Information: Kristine McCluskey, EdD

Additional Resources on Objective

• Manuscript: AM Last Page:  Understanding Qualitative and Quantitative Research Paradigms in Academic Medicine
• Manuscript: AM Last Page:  The Delphi Method
• Manuscript: AM Last Page:  Mixed Methods Convergent Study Designs in Health Professions Education Research: Toward Meaningful Integration of Qualitative and Quantitative Data
• Manuscript: AM Last Page:  Common Qualitative Methodologies and Research Designs in Health Professions Education
• Manuscript:  Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research A Synthesis of Recommendations
• Podcast:  Practical Guidance for Designing and Reporting Qualitative Research   Note: Common designs in qualitative research (Timestamp: 12:45)

Identify When a Research Question is Appropriate for Qualitative Study 

Speaker Information: Kevin Gosselin, Ph.D. 

• Podcast:  Podcast: Practical Guidance for Designing and Reporting Qualitative Research
• Manuscript: AM Last Page:  The Tools of the Qualitative Research Trade
• Manuscript: AM Last Page:  Generating Research Questions Appropriate for Qualitative Studies in Health Professions Education
• Manuscript:  Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research

Exhibit essential skills, guidelines, and resources required for conducting interviews and focus groups ​

Speaker Background: Aimee Gardner, Ph.D. 

• Manuscript: AMEE Guide:  Reflexivity in Qualitative Research

Extract insights from customer & stakeholder interviews. At Scale.

A qualitative research design: best practices for 2024.

Home » A Qualitative Research Design: Best Practices for 2024

In the pursuit of 2024 Qualitative Excellence, researchers are urged to refine their approaches to qualitative design. As the world becomes increasingly interconnected, understanding human experiences through robust research design is more critical than ever. This document explores best practices that not only enhance data quality but also foster deeper insights into participant perspectives.

Achieving excellence involves a synergy of innovative methodologies and rigorous ethical considerations. Emphasizing participant trustworthiness while navigating diverse viewpoints is essential. By prioritizing these elements, researchers can create impactful studies that truly reflect the complexities of human experience in a rapidly evolving landscape.

Understanding the Core Principles of Qualitative Research Design

Qualitative research design is rooted in understanding human experiences and behaviors. It emphasizes the exploration of phenomena in their natural settings, capturing the complexity of social contexts. Researchers utilize various methods, such as interviews and focus groups, to gather rich, detailed narratives that reflect participants' perspectives. This approach values depth over breadth, allowing for a nuanced understanding of the topic at hand, which is vital for achieving 2024 Qualitative Excellence.

To achieve qualitative excellence, you should focus on three core principles:

Contextual Understanding : Prioritize understanding the environment in which the participants operate. This helps to identify the influences that shape their experiences.

Participant Involvement : Engage with participants openly, allowing them to share their stories freely. This fosters trust and encourages more comprehensive insights.

Iterative Analysis : Embrace a dynamic process of analysis that evolves as you gather more data. Iteration allows researchers to refine their understanding and adapt their methodologies accordingly.

These principles not only enhance the quality of research but also empower researchers to derive meaningful insights that inform future strategies and decisions.

Exploring Methodologies for 2024 Qualitative Excellence

In 2024, achieving qualitative excellence requires a deeper exploration of innovative methodologies that enhance the research process. Combining technology with traditional techniques allows researchers to collect, analyze, and interpret qualitative data more efficiently. This approach focuses on increasing the reliability and richness of insights by minimizing bias and optimizing workflows.

To attain 2024 qualitative excellence, researchers might consider several key methodologies:

AI-Driven Data Analysis : Utilizing artificial intelligence can streamline the transcription and analysis of qualitative data, saving valuable time and improving accuracy.

In-Depth Interviews : Engaging participants through in-depth interviews creates opportunities for rich narratives, offering deeper insights into their experiences and perceptions.

Focus Groups : Encouraging group discussions helps uncover collective sentiments and various perspectives, enriching the qualitative dataset.

Ethnographic Studies : Observing participants in their natural settings can provide nuanced understanding and context, essential for meaningful analysis.

Mixed Methods : Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches adds depth to research findings, allowing for a comprehensive understanding of complex issues.

By thoughtfully integrating these methodologies, researchers can enhance the credibility and impact of their qualitative studies.

Crafting Effective Research Questions

Crafting effective research questions is a crucial step towards achieving 2024 Qualitative Excellence. Quality research questions not only guide your inquiry but also shape the overall research design. They should be open-ended and exploratory, encouraging participants to share their experiences and insights. Thoughtfully framed questions can reveal patterns and themes that are essential for understanding complex social phenomena.

To create impactful research questions, consider these essential steps: first, clearly identify your research objectives. This clarity will help you formulate questions that resonate with your goals. Second, ensure that your questions are specific yet flexible, allowing room for diverse perspectives. Lastly, seek feedback from peers or mentors during the question development process. This collaboration can refine your questions, making them more precise and relevant to your qualitative study. Embracing these principles will elevate your research practice in 2024.

Strategies for Data Collection: 2024 Qualitative Excellence Guidelines

Effective data collection is vital for achieving 2024 Qualitative Excellence in research. By implementing innovative techniques, researchers can enhance their capacity to gather rich, meaningful insights. One important strategy is to employ diverse methods such as interviews, focus groups, and observation. These approaches encourage participants to share their thoughts in their own words, thereby unveiling deeper understanding of their perspectives.

Additionally, fostering an inclusive environment is crucial. Creating a safe space allows participants to express themselves freely. It helps to build rapport and encourages honest feedback. Researchers should also prioritize maintaining data integrity by using secure and compliant tools. This is particularly important given increasing concerns around privacy. By adhering to these guidelines, researchers can ensure that their qualitative studies yield comprehensive, high-quality outcomes in alignment with the 2024 Qualitative Excellence standards.

Utilizing Interviews and Focus Groups Efficiently

Interviews and focus groups serve as invaluable tools for gathering rich qualitative data. To utilize these methods effectively, it's essential to clearly define your research objectives. Knowing what you aim to uncover will directly influence your question design, participant selection, and overall flow. For 2024 Qualitative Excellence, ensure that your interview questions are open-ended, prompting participants to share detailed insights while keeping the conversation fluid.

Moreover, creating a comfortable environment fosters trust and encourages honest feedback. Consider utilizing trained moderators who can skillfully guide discussions, ensuring that all voices are heard. Additionally, balancing the focus group size is crucial; keeping it between six to ten participants allows for manageable yet diverse perspectives. By organizing and analyzing input thoughtfully and systematically, you’ll be positioned to extract actionable insights that drive impactful decisions and enrich your research outcomes.

Leveraging Technological Tools for Data Gathering

In the realm of 2024 Qualitative Excellence, technological tools have revolutionized the data gathering approach in qualitative research. By employing advanced platforms, researchers can efficiently transcribe interviews, analyze discussions, and visualize data insights. This progression enables a streamlined workflow, allowing researchers to focus more on deriving actionable insights rather than getting bogged down in manual processes.

To effectively gather data in qualitative research, several key tools can be utilized. First, transcription software facilitates the accurate conversion of spoken language into text, which is vital for detailed analysis. Second, data analysis tools like thematic coding software help researchers identify patterns and themes within the gathered data. Lastly, visualization tools can transform complex data sets into comprehensible reports, making findings more accessible to stakeholders. Collectively, these technological solutions not only enhance efficiency but also ensure that the results align with best practices in qualitative research for 2024.

Ensuring Trustworthiness and Credibility in Your Research

Establishing trustworthiness and credibility in research is essential for ensuring the validity of findings. In qualitative research, this involves employing rigorous methodologies, where transparency is a key component. For 2024 Qualitative Excellence, researchers must document their processes thoroughly, explaining how data was collected, analyzed, and interpreted to allow for scrutiny.

One effective approach to enhance trustworthiness is triangulation, where multiple data sources or methods are used to validate findings. Engaging participants in the research process, such as through member checking, can also bolster credibility by ensuring that interpretations align with their views. Additionally, researchers should be mindful of reflecting on their biases and positioning, as awareness of these factors contributes to a more nuanced understanding of the data. By prioritizing these strategies, researchers can foster a culture of integrity in their qualitative work, leading to more credible and reliable outcomes.

Triangulation Methods for 2024 Qualitative Excellence

Triangulation methods play a crucial role in achieving 2024 Qualitative Excellence by enriching data interpretation. By combining different data sources, research methods, and perspectives, researchers can validate findings and gain a more nuanced understanding of subjects. This multifaceted approach minimizes biases and inaccuracies, leading to more reliable conclusions.

To enhance qualitative excellence in 2024, researchers can employ several key triangulation methods. First, data triangulation involves using multiple data sources, such as interviews, focus groups, or surveys, to obtain diverse insights. Next, methodological triangulation incorporates various research techniques, like combining qualitative interviews with quantitative questionnaires. Lastly, theory triangulation involves interpreting data through different theoretical frameworks, enabling a richer analysis. These methods will not only enhance the depth of analysis but also ensure that findings are robust and comprehensive, essential for excellence in qualitative research.

Maintaining Ethical Standards

Maintaining ethical standards is fundamental to achieving 2024 Qualitative Excellence in research. Researchers must prioritize the well-being and autonomy of participants throughout the study process. By obtaining informed consent, researchers ensure participants understand the purpose, risks, and benefits of their involvement. Transparency fosters trust and encourages honest responses, which enhances the integrity of qualitative data.

Moreover, confidentiality is crucial in protecting sensitive information. Researchers must take steps to anonymize data and securely store it to prevent unauthorized access. This commitment not only upholds ethical standards but also promotes a culture of respect and integrity within qualitative research environments. Ultimately, adhering to these principles cultivates a more reliable and impactful research outcome, allowing insights to truly reflect the voices of the participants involved. By consistently maintaining ethical standards, researchers lay the groundwork for meaningful contributions to their fields.

Conclusion: Paving the Way for 2024 Qualitative Excellence in Research

As we look ahead, 2024 Qualitative Excellence in research must center on best practices informed by robust methodologies and rigorous analysis. By embracing a holistic approach, researchers can enhance the reliability and depth of qualitative insights. The focus should be on engaging participants authentically and ensuring that data collection processes are transparent and well-structured.

In doing so, we pave the way for more meaningful engagement with participants, ultimately yielding richer data. This commitment to excellence will empower researchers to uncover nuanced perspectives and drive impactful decision-making in their fields. Emphasizing quality and integrity in research will strengthen the foundations for success in the coming year.

Turn interviews into actionable insights

On this Page

Qualitative Research Use: Applications and Benefits

You may also like, risk sensitivity analysis: ai tools for market research 2024.

Purpose of Grounded Theory in Market Research 2024

Sensitivity risk analysis: how to use ai tools in 2024.

Unlock Insights from Interviews 10x faster

• Request demo
• Get started for free

• Open access
• Published: 07 August 2024

Factors critical for the successful delivery of telehealth to rural populations: a descriptive qualitative study

• Rebecca Barry   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2272-4694 1 ,
• Elyce Green   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-7291-6419 1 ,
• Kristy Robson   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-8046-7940 1 &
• Melissa Nott   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-7088-5826 1  

BMC Health Services Research volume  24 , Article number:  908 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

124 Accesses

Metrics details

The use of telehealth has proliferated to the point of being a common and accepted method of healthcare service delivery. Due to the rapidity of telehealth implementation, the evidence underpinning this approach to healthcare delivery is lagging, particularly when considering the uniqueness of some service users, such as those in rural areas. This research aimed to address the current gap in knowledge related to the factors critical for the successful delivery of telehealth to rural populations.

This research used a qualitative descriptive design to explore telehealth service provision in rural areas from the perspective of clinicians and describe factors critical to the effective delivery of telehealth in rural contexts. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with clinicians from allied health and nursing backgrounds working in child and family nursing, allied health services, and mental health services. A manifest content analysis was undertaken using the Framework approach.

Sixteen health professionals from nursing, clinical psychology, and social work were interviewed. Participants mostly identified as female (88%) and ranged in age from 26 to 65 years with a mean age of 47 years. Three overarching themes were identified: (1) Navigating the role of telehealth to support rural healthcare; (2) Preparing clinicians to engage in telehealth service delivery; and (3) Appreciating the complexities of telehealth implementation across services and environments.

Conclusions

This research suggests that successful delivery of telehealth to rural populations requires consideration of the context in which telehealth services are being delivered, particularly in rural and remote communities where there are challenges with resourcing and training to support health professionals. Rural populations, like all communities, need choice in healthcare service delivery and models to increase accessibility. Preparation and specific, intentional training for health professionals on how to transition to and maintain telehealth services is a critical factor for delivery of telehealth to rural populations. Future research should further investigate the training and supports required for telehealth service provision, including who, when and what training will equip health professionals with the appropriate skill set to deliver rural telehealth services.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Telehealth is a commonly utilised application in rural health settings due to its ability to augment service delivery across wide geographical areas. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of telehealth became prolific as it was rapidly adopted across many new fields of practice to allow for healthcare to continue despite requirements for physical distancing. In Australia, the Medicare Benefits Scheme (MBS) lists health services that are subsidised by the federal government. Telehealth items were extensively added to these services as part of the response to COVID-19 [ 1 ]. Although there are no longer requirements for physical distancing in Australia, many health providers have continued to offer services via telehealth, particularly in rural areas [ 2 , 3 ]. For the purpose of this research, telehealth was defined as a consultation with a healthcare provider by phone or video call [ 4 ]. Telehealth service provision in rural areas requires consideration of contextual factors such as access to reliable internet, community members’ means to finance this access [ 5 ], and the requirement for health professionals to function across a broad range of specialty skills. These factors present a case for considering the delivery of telehealth in rural areas as a unique approach, rather than one portion of the broader use of telehealth.

Research focused on rural telehealth has proliferated alongside the rapid implementation of this service mode. To date, there has been a focus on the impact of telehealth on areas such as client access and outcomes [ 2 ], client and health professional satisfaction with services and technology [ 6 ], direct and indirect costs to the patient (travel cost and time), healthcare service provider staffing, lower onsite healthcare resource utilisation, improved physician recruitment and retention, and improved client access to care and education [ 7 , 8 ]. In terms of service implementation, these elements are important but do not outline the broader implementation factors critical to the success of telehealth delivery in rural areas. One study by Sutarsa et al. explored the implications of telehealth as a replacement for face-to-face services from the perspectives of general practitioners and clients [ 9 ] and articulated that telehealth services are not a like-for-like service compared to face-to-face modes. Research has also highlighted the importance of understanding the experience of telehealth in rural Australia across different population groups, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, and the need to consider culturally appropriate services [ 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 ].

Research is now required to determine what the critical implementation factors are for telehealth delivery in rural areas. This type of research would move towards answering calls for interdisciplinary, qualitative, place-based research [ 12 ] that explores factors required for the sustainability and usability of telehealth in rural areas. It would also contribute to the currently limited understanding of implementation factors required for telehealth delivery to rural populations [ 14 ]. There is a reasonable expectation that there is consistency in the way health services are delivered, particularly across geographical locations. Due to the rapid implementation of telehealth services, there was limited opportunity to proactively identify factors critical for successful telehealth delivery in rural areas and this has created a lag in policy, process, and training. This research aimed to address this gap in the literature by exploring and describing rural health professionals’ experiences providing telehealth services. For the purpose of this research, rural is inclusive of locations classified as rural or remote (MM3-6) using the Modified Monash Model which considers remoteness and population size in its categorisation [ 15 ].

This research study adopted a qualitative descriptive design as described by Sandelowski [ 16 ]. The purpose of a descriptive study is to document and describe a phenomenon of interest [ 17 ] and this method is useful when researchers seek to understand who was involved, what occurred, and the location of the phenomena of interest [ 18 ]. The phenomenon of interest for this research was the provision of telehealth services to rural communities by health professionals. In line with this, a purposive sampling technique was used to identify participants who have experience of this phenomenon [ 19 ]. This research is reported in line with the consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research [ 20 ] to enhance transparency and trustworthiness of the research process and results [ 21 ].

Research aims

This research aimed to:

Explore telehealth service provision in rural areas from the perspective of clinicians.

Describe factors critical to the successful delivery of telehealth in rural contexts.

Participant recruitment and data collection

People eligible to participate in the research were allied health (using the definition provided by Allied Health Professions Australia [ 22 ]) or nursing staff who delivered telehealth services to people living in the geographical area covered by two rural local health districts in New South Wales, Australia (encompassing rural areas MM3-6). Health organisations providing telehealth service delivery in the southwestern and central western regions of New South Wales were identified through the research teams’ networks and invited to be part of the research.

Telehealth adoption in these organisations was intentionally variable to capture different experiences and ranged from newly established (prompted by COVID-19) to well established (> 10 years of telehealth use). Organisations included government, non-government, and not-for-profit health service providers offering child and family nursing, allied health services, and mental health services. Child and family nursing services were delivered by a government health service and a not-for-profit specialist service, providing health professional advice, education, and guidance to families with a baby or toddler. Child and family nurses were in the same geographical region as the families receiving telehealth. Transition to telehealth services was prompted by the COVID-19 pandemic. The participating allied health service was a large, non-government provider of allied health services to regional New South Wales. Allied health professionals were in the same region as the client receiving telehealth services. Use of telehealth in this organisation had commenced prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Telehealth mental health services were delivered by an emergency mental health team, located at a large regional hospital to clients in another healthcare facility or location to which the health professional could not be physically present (typically a lower acuity health service in a rural location).

Once organisations agreed to disseminate the research invitation, a key contact person employed at each health organisation invited staff to participate via email. Staff were provided with contact details of the research team in the email invitation. All recruitment and consent processes were managed by the research team to minimise risk of real or perceived coercion between staff and the key contact person, who was often in a supervisory or managerial position within the organisation. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews using an online platform with only the interviewer and participant present. Interviews were conducted by a research team member with training in qualitative data collection during November and December 2021 and were transcribed verbatim by a professional transcribing service. All participants were offered the opportunity to review their transcript and provide feedback, however none opted to do so. Data saturation was not used as guidance for participant numbers, taking the view of Braun and Clarke [ 23 ] that meaning is generated through the analysis rather than reaching a point of saturation.

Data analysis

Researchers undertook a manifest content analysis of the data using the Framework approach developed by Ritchie and Spencer [ 24 ]. All four co-authors were involved in the data analysis process. Framework uses five stages for analysis including (1) familiarisation (2) identifying a thematic framework based on emergent overarching themes, (3) application of the coding framework to the interview transcripts [indexing], (4) reviewing and charting of themes and subthemes, and (5) mapping and interpretation [ 24 , p. 178]. The research team analysed a common interview initially, identified codes and themes, then independently applied these to the remaining interviews. Themes were centrally recorded, reviewed, and discussed by the research team prior to inclusion into the thematic framework. Final themes were confirmed via collaborative discussion and consensus. The iterative process used to review and code data was recorded into an Excel spreadsheet to ensure auditability and credibility, and to enhance the trustworthiness of the analysis process.

This study was approved by the Greater Western NSW Human Research Ethics Committee and Charles Sturt University Human Research Ethics Committee (approval numbers: 2021/ETH00088 and H21215). All participants provided written consent.

Eighteen health professionals consented to be interviewed. Two were lost to follow-up, therefore semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 of these health professionals, the majority of which were from the discipline of nursing ( n  = 13, 81.3%). Participant demographics and their pseudonyms are shown in Table  1 .

Participants mostly identified as female ( n  = 14, 88%) and ranged in age from 26 to 65 years with a mean age of 47 years. Participants all delivered services to rural communities in the identified local health districts and resided within the geographical area they serviced. The participants resided in areas classified as MM3-6 but were most likely to reside in an area classified MM3 (81%). Average interview time was 38 min, and all interviews were conducted online via Zoom.

Three overarching themes were identified through the analysis of interview transcripts with health professionals. These themes were: (1) Navigating the role of telehealth to support rural healthcare; (2) Preparing clinicians to engage in telehealth service delivery; and (3) Appreciating the complexities of telehealth implementation across services and environments.

Theme 1: navigating the role of telehealth to support rural healthcare

The first theme described clinicians’ experiences of using telehealth to deliver healthcare to rural communities, including perceived benefits and challenges to acceptance, choice, and access. Interview participants identified several factors that impacted on or influenced the way they could deliver telehealth, and these were common across the different organisational structures. Clinicians highlighted the need to consider how to effectively navigate the role of telehealth in supporting their practice, including when it would enhance their practice, and when it might create barriers. The ability to improve rural service provision through greater access was commonly discussed by participants. In terms of factors important for telehealth delivery in rural contexts, the participants demonstrated that knowledge of why and how telehealth was used were important, including the broadened opportunity for healthcare access and an understanding of the benefits and challenges of providing these services.

Access to timely and specialist healthcare for rural communities

Participants described a range of benefits using telehealth to contact small, rural locations and facilitate greater access to services closer to home. This was particularly evident when there was lack of specialist support in these areas. These opportunities meant that rural people could receive timely care that they required, without the burden of travelling significant distances to access health services.

The obvious thing in an area like this, is that years ago, people were being transported three hours just to see us face to face. It’s obviously giving better, more timely access to services. (Patrick)

Staff access to specialist support was seen as an important aspect for rural healthcare by participants, because of the challenges associated with lack of staffing and resources within these areas which potentially increased the risks for staff in these locations, particularly when managing clients with acute mental illnesses.

Within the metro areas they’ve got so many staff and so many hospitals and they can manage mental health patients quite well within those facilities, but with us some of these hospitals will have one RN on overnight and it’s just crappy for them, and so having us able to do video link, it kind of takes the pressure off and we’re happy to make the decisions and the risky decisions for what that person needs. (Tracey)

Participants described how the option to use telehealth to provide specialised knowledge and expertise to support local health staff in rural hospitals likely led to more appropriate outcomes for clients wanting to be able to remain in their community. Conversely, Amber described the implications if telehealth was not available.

If there was some reason why the telehealth wasn’t available… quite often, I suppose the general process be down to putting the pressure on the nursing and the medical staff there to make a decision around that person, which is not a fair or appropriate thing for them to do. (Amber)

Benefits and challenges to providing telehealth in rural communities

Complementing the advantage of reduced travel time to access services, was the ability for clients to access additional support via telehealth, which was perceived as a benefit. For example, one participant described how telehealth was useful for troubleshooting client’s problems rather than waiting for their next scheduled appointment.

If a mum rings you with an issue, you can always say to them “are you happy to jump onto My Virtual Care with me now?” We can do that, do a consult over My Virtual Care. Then I can actually gauge how mum is. (Jade)

While accessibility was a benefit, participants highlighted that rural communities need to be provided with choice, rather than the assumption that telehealth be the preferred option for everyone, as many rural clients want face-to-face services.

They’d all prefer, I think, to be able to see someone in person. I think that’s generally what NSW rural [want] —’cause I’m from country towns as well—there’s no substitute, like I said, for face-to-face assessment. (Adam)

Other, more practical limitations of broad adoption of telehealth raised by the participants included issues with managing technology and variability in internet connectivity.

For many people in the rural areas, it’s still an issue having that regular [internet] connection that works all the time. I think it’s a great option but I still think it’s something that some rural people will always have some challenges with because it’s not—there’s so many black spots and so many issues still with the internet connection in rural areas. Even in town, there’s certain areas that are still having lots of problems. (Chloe)

Participants also identified barriers related to assumptions that all clients will have access to technology and have the necessary data to undertake a telehealth consultation, which wasn’t always the case, particularly with individuals experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage.

A lot of [Aboriginal] families don’t actually have access to telehealth services. Unless they use their phone. If they have the technology on their phones. I found that was a little bit of an issue to try and help those particular clients to get access to the internet, to have enough data on their phone to make that call. There was a lot of issues and a lot of things that we were putting in complaints about as they were going “we’re using up a lot of these peoples’ data and they don’t have internet in their home.” (Evelyn).

Other challenges identified by the participants were related to use of telehealth for clients that required additional support. Many participants talked about the complexities of using an interpreter during a telehealth consultation for culturally and linguistically diverse clients.

Having interpreters, that’s another element that’s really, really difficult because you’re doing video link, but then you’ve also got the phone on speaker and you’re having this three-way conversation. Even that, in itself, that added element on video link is really, really tough. It’s a really long process. (Tracey)

In summary, this theme described some of the benefits and constraints when using telehealth for the delivery of rural health services. The participants demonstrated the importance of understanding the needs and contexts of individual clients, and accounting for this when making decisions to incorporate telehealth into their service provision. Understanding how and why telehealth can be implemented in rural contexts was an important foundation for the delivery of these services.

Theme 2: preparing clinicians to engage in telehealth service delivery

The preparation required for clinicians to engage with telehealth service delivery was highlighted and the participants described the unique set of skills required to effectively build rapport, engage, and carry out assessments with clients. For many participants who had not routinely used telehealth prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the transition to using telehealth had been rapid. The participants reflected on the implications of rapidly adopting these new practices and the skills they required to effectively deliver care using telehealth. These skills were critical for effective delivery of telehealth to rural communities.

Rapid adoption of new skills and ways of working

The rapid and often unsupported implementation of telehealth in response to the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in clinicians needing to learn and adapt to telehealth, often without being taught or with minimal instruction.

We had to do virtual, virtually overnight we were changed to, “Here you go. Do it this way,” without any real education. It was learned as we went because everybody was in the same boat. Everyone was scrabbling to try and work out how to do it. (Chloe)

In addition to telehealth services starting quickly, telehealth provision requires clinicians to use a unique set of skills. Therapeutic interventions and approaches were identified as being more challenging when seeing a client through a screen, compared to being physically present together in a room.

The body language is hidden a little bit when you’re on teleconference, whereas when you’re standing up face to face with someone, or standing side by side, the person can see the whole picture. When you’re on the video link, the patient actually can’t—you both can’t see each other wholly. That’s one big barrier. (Adam)

There was an emphasis on communication skills such as active listening and body language that were required when engaging with telehealth. These skills were seen as integral to building rapport and connection. The importance of language in an environment with limited visualisation of body language, is further demonstrated by one participant describing how they tuned into the timing and flow of the conversation to avoid interrupting and how these skills were pertinent for using telehealth.

In the beginning especially, we might do this thing where I think they’ve finished or there’s a bit of silence, so I go to speak and then they go to speak at the same time, and that’s different because normally in person you can really gauge that quite well if they’ve got more to say. I think those little things mean that you’ve got to work a bit harder and you’ve got to bring those things to the attention of the client often. (Robyn)

Preparing clinicians to engage in telehealth also required skills in sharing clear and consistent information with clients about the process of interacting via telehealth. This included information to reassure the client that the telehealth appointment was private as well as prepare them for potential interruptions due to connection issues.

I think being really explicitly clear about the fact that with our setups we have here, no one can dial in, no one else is in my room even watching you. We’re not recording, and there’s a lot of extra information, I think around that we could be doing better in terms of delivering to the person. (Amber)

Becoming accustomed to working through the ‘window’

Telehealth was often described as a window and not a view of the whole person which presented limitations for clinicians, such as seeing nuance of expression. Participants described the difficulties of assessing a client using telehealth when you cannot see the whole picture such as facial expressions, movement, behaviour, interactions with others, dress, and hygiene.

I found it was quite difficult because you couldn’t always see the actual child or the baby, especially if they just had their phone. You couldn’t pick up the body language. You couldn’t always see the facial expressions. You couldn’t see the child and how the child was responding. It did inhibit a lot of that side of our assessing. Quite often you’d have to just write, “Unable to view child.” You might be able to hear them but you couldn’t see them. (Chloe)

Due to the window view, the participants described how they needed to pay even greater attention to eye contact and tone of voice when engaging with clients via telehealth.

I think the eye contact is still a really important thing. Getting the flow of what they’re comfortable with a little bit too. It’s being really careful around the tone of voice as well too, because—again, that’s the same for face-to-face, but be particularly careful of it over telehealth. (Amber)

This theme demonstrates that there are unique and nuanced skills required by clinicians to effectively engage in provision of rural healthcare services via telehealth. Many clinicians described how the rapid uptake of telehealth required them to quickly adapt to providing telehealth services, and they had to modify their approach rather than replicate what they would do in face-to-face contexts. Appreciating the different skills sets required for telehealth practice was perceived as an important element in supporting clinicians to deliver quality healthcare.

Theme 3: appreciating the complexities of telehealth implementation across services and environments

It was commonly acknowledged that there needed to be an appreciation by clinicians of the multiple different environments that telehealth was being delivered in, as well as the types of consultations being undertaken. This was particularly important when well-resourced large regional settings were engaging with small rural services or when clinicians were undertaking consultations within a client’s home.

Working from a different location and context

One of the factors identified as important for the successful delivery of services via telehealth was an understanding of the location and context that was being linked into. Participants regularly talked about the challenges when undertaking a telehealth consultation with clients at home, which impacted the quality of the consultation as it was easy to “ lose focus” (Kelsey) and become distracted.

Instead of just coming in with one child, they had all the kids, all wanting their attention. I also found that babies and kids kept pressing the screen and would actually disconnect us regularly. (Chloe)

For participants located in larger regional locations delivering telehealth services to smaller rural hospitals, it was acknowledged that not all services had equivalent resources, skills, and experience with this type of healthcare approach.

They shouldn’t have to do—they’ve gotta double-click here, login there. They’re relying on speakers that don’t work. Sometimes they can’t get the cameras working. I think telehealth works as long as it’s really user friendly. I think nurses—as a nurse, we’re not supposed to be—I know IT’s in our job criteria, but not to the level where you’ve got to have a degree in technology to use it. (Adam)

Participants also recognised that supporting a client through a telehealth consultation adds workload stress as rural clinicians are often having pressures with caseloads and are juggling multiple other tasks while trying to trouble shoot technology issues associated with a telehealth consultation.

Most people are like me, not great with computers. Sometimes the nurse has got other things in the Emergency Department she’s trying to juggle. (Eleanor)

Considerations for safety, privacy, and confidentiality

Participants talked about the challenges that arose due to inconsistencies in where and how the telehealth consultation would be conducted. Concerns about online safety and information privacy were identified by participants.

There’s the privacy issue, particularly when we might see someone and they might be in a bed and they’ve got a laptop there, and they’re not given headphones, and we’re blaring through the speaker at them, and someone’s three meters away in another bed. That’s not good. That’s a bit of a problem. (Patrick)

When telehealth was offered as an option to clients at a remote healthcare site, clinicians noted that some clients were not provided with adequate support and were left to undertake the consultation by themselves which could cause safety risks for the client and an inability for the telehealth clinician to control the situation.

There were some issues with patients’ safety though. Where the telehealth was located was just in a standard consult room and there was actually a situation where somebody self-harmed with a needle that was in a used syringe box in that room. Then it was like, you just can’t see high risk—environment. (Eleanor)

Additionally, participants noted that they were often using their own office space to conduct telehealth consultations rather than a clinical room which meant there were other considerations to think about.

Now I always lock my room so nobody can enter. That’s a nice little lesson learnt. I had a consult with a mum and some other clinicians came into my room and I thought “oh my goodness. I forgot to lock.” I’m very mindful now that I lock. (Jade)

This theme highlights the complexities that exist when implementing telehealth across a range of rural healthcare settings and environments. It was noted by participants that there were variable skills and experience in using telehealth across staff located in smaller rural areas, which could impact on how effective the consultation was. Participants identified the importance of purposely considering the environment in which the telehealth consultation was being held, ensuring that privacy, safety, and distractibility concerns have been adequately addressed before the consultation begins. These factors were considered important for the successful implementation of telehealth in rural areas.

This study explored telehealth service delivery in various rural health contexts, with 16 allied health and nursing clinicians who had provided telehealth services to people living in rural communities prior to, and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Reflections gained from clinicians were analysed and reported thematically. Major themes identified were clinicians navigating the role of telehealth to support rural healthcare, the need to prepare clinicians to engage in telehealth service delivery and appreciating the complexities of telehealth implementation across services and environments.

The utilisation of telehealth for health service delivery has been promoted as a solution to resolve access and equity issues, particularly for rural communities who are often impacted by limited health services due to distance and isolation [ 6 ]. This study identified a range of perceived benefits for both clients and clinicians, such as improved access to services across large geographic distances, including specialist care, and reduced travel time to engage with a range of health services. These findings are largely supported by the broader literature, such as the systematic review undertaken by Tsou et al. [ 25 ] which found that telehealth can improve clinical outcomes and increase the timeliness to access services, including specialist knowledge. Clinicians in our study also noted the benefits of using telehealth for ad hoc clinical support outside of regular appointment times, which to date has not been commonly reported in the literature as a benefit. Further investigation into this aspect may be warranted.

The findings from this study identify a range of challenges that exist when delivering health services within a virtual context. It was common for participants to highlight that personal preference for face-to-face sessions could not always be accommodated when implementing telehealth services in rural areas. The perceived technological possibilities to improve access can have unintended consequences for community members which may contribute to lack of responsiveness to community needs [ 12 ]. It is therefore important to understand the client and their preferences for using telehealth rather than making assumptions on the appropriateness of this type of health service delivery [ 26 ]. As such, telehealth is likely to function best when there is a pre-established relationship between the client and clinician, with clients who have a good knowledge of their personal health and have access to and familiarity with digital technology [ 13 ]. Alternatively, it is appropriate to consider how telehealth can be a supplementary tool rather than a stand-alone service model replacing face-to-face interactions [ 13 ].

As identified in this study, managing technology and internet connectivity are commonly reported issues for rural communities engaging in telehealth services [ 27 , 28 ]. Additionally, it was highlighted that within some rural communities with higher socioeconomic disadvantage, limited access to an appropriate level of technology and the required data to undertake a telehealth consult was a deterrent to engage in these types of services. Mathew et al. [ 13 ] found in their study that bandwidth impacted video consultations, which was further compromised by weather conditions, and clients without smartphones had difficulty accessing relevant virtual consultation software.

The findings presented here indicate that while telehealth can be a useful model, it may not be suitable for all clients or client groups. For example, the use of interpreters in telehealth to support clients was a key challenge identified in this study. This is supported by Mathew et al. [ 13 ] who identified that language barriers affected the quality of telehealth consultations and accessing appropriate interpreters was often difficult. Consideration of health and digital literacy, access and availability of technology and internet, appropriate client selection, and facilitating client choice are all important drivers to enhance telehealth experiences [ 29 ]. Nelson et al. [ 6 ] acknowledged the barriers that exist with telehealth, suggesting that ‘it is not the groups that have difficulty engaging, it is that telehealth and digital services are hard to engage with’ (p. 8). There is a need for telehealth services to be delivered in a way that is inclusive of different groups, and this becomes more pertinent in rural areas where resources are not the same as metropolitan areas.

The findings of this research highlight the unique set of skills required for health professionals to translate their practice across a virtual medium. The participants described these modifications in relation to communication skills, the ability to build rapport, conduct healthcare assessments, and provide treatment while looking at a ‘window view’ of a person. Several other studies have reported similar skillsets that are required to effectively use telehealth. Uscher-Pines et al. [ 30 ] conducted research on the experiences of psychiatrists moving to telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic and noted challenges affecting the quality of provider-patient interactions and difficulty conducting assessment through the window of a screen. Henry et al. [ 31 ] documented a list of interpersonal skills considered essential for the use of telehealth encompassing attributes related to set-up, verbal and non-verbal communication, relationship building, and environmental considerations.

Despite the literature uniformly agreeing that telehealth requires a unique skill set there is no agreement on how, when and for whom education related to these skills should be provided. The skills required for health professionals to use telehealth have been treated as an add-on to health practice rather than as a specialty skill set requiring learning and assessment. This is reflected in research such as that by Nelson et al. [ 6 ] who found that 58% of mental health professionals using telehealth in rural areas were not trained to use it. This gap between training and practice is likely to have arisen from the rapid and widespread implementation of telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic (i.e. the change in MBS item numbers [ 1 ]) but has not been addressed in subsequent years. For practice to remain in step with policy and funding changes, the factors required for successful implementation of telehealth in rural practice must be addressed.

The lack of clarity around who must undertake training in telehealth and how regularly, presents a challenge for rural health professionals whose skill set has been described as a specialist-generalist that covers a significant breadth of knowledge [ 32 ]. Maintaining knowledge currency across this breadth is integral and requires significant resources (time, travel, money) in an environment where access to education can be limited [ 33 ]. There is risk associated with continually adding skills on to the workload of rural health professionals without adequate guidance and provision for time to develop and maintain these skills.

While the education required to equip rural health professionals with the skills needed to effectively use telehealth in their practice is developing, until education requirements are uniformly understood and made accessible this is likely to continue to pose risk for rural health professionals and the community members accessing their services. Major investment in the education of all health professionals in telehealth service delivery, no matter the context, has been identified as critical [ 6 ].

This research highlights that the experience of using telehealth in rural communities is unique and thus a ‘one size fits all’ approach is not helpful and can overlook the individual needs of a community. Participants described experiences of using telehealth that were different between rural communities, particularly for smaller, more remote rural locations where resources and staff support and experience using telehealth were not always equivalent to larger rural locations. Research has indicated the need to invest in resourcing and education to support expansion of telehealth, noting this is particularly important in rural, regional, and remote areas [ 34 ]. Our study recognises that this is an ongoing need as rural communities continue to have diverse experiences of using telehealth services. Careful consideration of the context of individual rural health services, including the community needs, location, and resource availability on both ends of the consultation is required. Use of telehealth cannot have the same outcomes in every area. It is imperative that service providers and clinicians delivering telehealth from metropolitan areas to rural communities appreciate and understand the uniqueness of every community, so their approach is tailored and is helpful rather than hindering the experience for people in rural communities.

Limitations

There are a number of limitations inherent to the design of this study. Participants were recruited via their workplace and thus although steps were taken to ensure they understood the research would not affect their employment, it is possible some employees perceived an association between the research and their employment. Health professionals who had either very positive or very negative experiences with telehealth may have been more likely to participate, as they may be more likely to want to discuss their experiences. In addition to this, only health services that were already connected with the researchers’ networks were invited to participate. Other limitations include purposive sampling, noting that the opinions of the participants are not generalisable. The participant group also represented mostly nursing professionals whose experiences with telehealth may differ from other health disciplines. Finally, it is important to acknowledge that the opinions of the health professionals who participated in the study, may not represent, or align with the experience and opinions of service users.

This study illustrates that while telehealth has provided increased access to services for many rural communities, others have experienced barriers related to variability in connectivity and managing technology. The results demonstrated that telehealth may not be the preferred or appropriate option for some individuals in rural communities and it is important to provide choice. Consideration of the context in which telehealth services are being delivered, particularly in rural and remote communities where there are challenges with resourcing and training to support health professionals, is critical to the success of telehealth service provision. Another critical factor is preparation and specific, intentional training for health professionals on how to transition to manage and maintain telehealth services effectively. Telehealth interventions require a unique skill set and guidance pertaining to who, when and what training will equip health professionals with the appropriate skill set to deliver telehealth services is still to be determined.

Data availability

The qualitative data collected for this study was de-identified before analysis. Consent was not obtained to use or publish individual level identified data from the participants and hence cannot be shared publicly. The de-identified data can be obtained from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Commonwealth of Australia. COVID-19 Temporary MBS Telehealth Services: Department of Health and Aged Care, Australian Government; 2022 [ https://www.mbsonline.gov.au/internet/mbsonline/publishing.nsf/Content/Factsheet-TempBB .

Caffery LA, Muurlink OT, Taylor-Robinson AW. Survival of rural telehealth services post‐pandemic in Australia: a call to retain the gains in the ‘new normal’. Aust J Rural Health. 2022;30(4):544–9.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Shaver J. The state of telehealth before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Prim Care: Clin Office Pract. 2022;49(4):517–30.

Article   Google Scholar  

Australian Digital Health Agency. What is telehealth? 2024 [ https://www.digitalhealth.gov.au/initiatives-and-programs/telehealth .

Hirko KA, Kerver JM, Ford S, Szafranski C, Beckett J, Kitchen C, et al. Telehealth in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: implications for rural health disparities. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2020;27(11):1816–8.

Nelson D, Inghels M, Kenny A, Skinner S, McCranor T, Wyatt S, et al. Mental health professionals and telehealth in a rural setting: a cross sectional survey. BMC Health Serv Res. 2023;23(1):200.

Butzner M, Cuffee Y. Telehealth interventions and Outcomes Across Rural Communities in the United States: Narrative Review. J Med Internet Res. 2021;23(8):NPAG–NPAG.

Calleja Z, Job J, Jackson C. Offsite primary care providers using telehealth to support a sustainable workforce in rural and remote general practice: a rapid review of the literature. Aust J Rural Health. 2023;31(1):5–18.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Sutarsa IN, Kasim R, Steward B, Bain-Donohue S, Slimings C, Hall Dykgraaf S, et al. Implications of telehealth services for healthcare delivery and access in rural and remote communities: perceptions of patients and general practitioners. Aust J Prim Health. 2022;28(6):522–8.

Bradford NK, Caffery LJ, Smith AC. Telehealth services in rural and remote Australia: a systematic review of models of care and factors influencing success and sustainability. Rural Remote Health. 2016;16(4):1–23.

Google Scholar  

Caffery LJ, Bradford NK, Wickramasinghe SI, Hayman N, Smith AC. Outcomes of using telehealth for the provision of healthcare to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people: a systematic review. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2017;41(1):48–53.

Warr D, Luscombe G, Couch D. Hype, evidence gaps and digital divides: Telehealth blind spots in rural Australia. Health. 2023;27(4):588–606.

Mathew S, Fitts MS, Liddle Z, Bourke L, Campbell N, Murakami-Gold L, et al. Telehealth in remote Australia: a supplementary tool or an alternative model of care replacing face-to-face consultations? BMC Health Serv Res. 2023;23(1):1–10.

Campbell J, Theodoros D, Hartley N, Russell T, Gillespie N. Implementation factors are neglected in research investigating telehealth delivery of allied health services to rural children: a scoping review. J Telemedicine Telecare. 2020;26(10):590–606.

Commonwealth of Australia. Modified Monash Model: Department of Health and Aged Care Commonwealth of Australia; 2021 [updated 14 December 2021. https://www.health.gov.au/topics/rural-health-workforce/classifications/mmm .

Sandelowski M. Whatever happened to qualitative description? Research in nursing & health. 2000;23(4):334 – 40.

Marshall C, Rossman GB. Designing qualitative research: Sage; 2014.

Caelli K, Ray L, Mill J. Clear as mud’: toward greater clarity in generic qualitative research. Int J Qualitative Methods. 2003;2(2):1–13.

Tolley EE. Qualitative methods in public health: a field guide for applied research. Second edition. ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass & Pfeiffer Imprints, Wiley; 2016.

Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349–57.

Levitt HM, Motulsky SL, Wertz FJ, Morrow SL, Ponterotto JG. Recommendations for designing and reviewing qualitative research in psychology: promoting methodological integrity. Qualitative Psychol. 2017;4(1):2.

Allied Health Professions Australia. Allied health professions 2024 [ https://ahpa.com.au/allied-health-professions/ .

Braun V, Clarke V. To saturate or not to saturate? Questioning data saturation as a useful concept for thematic analysis and sample-size rationales. Qualitative Res Sport Exerc Health. 2021;13(2):201–16.

Ritchie J, Spencer L. In: Alan B, Burgess RG, editors. Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. Analyzing qualitative data: Routledge; 1994. pp. 173–94.

Tsou C, Robinson S, Boyd J, Jamieson A, Blakeman R, Yeung J, et al. Effectiveness of telehealth in rural and remote emergency departments: systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2021;23(11):e30632.

Pullyblank K. A scoping literature review of rural beliefs and attitudes toward telehealth utilization. West J Nurs Res. 2023;45(4):375–84.

Jonnagaddala J, Godinho MA, Liaw S-T. From telehealth to virtual primary care in Australia? A Rapid scoping review. Int J Med Informatics. 2021;151:104470.

Jonasdottir SK, Thordardottir I, Jonsdottir T. Health professionals’ perspective towards challenges and opportunities of telehealth service provision: a scoping review. Int J Med Informatics. 2022;167:104862.

Clay-Williams R, Hibbert P, Carrigan A, Roberts N, Austin E, Fajardo Pulido D, et al. The diversity of providers’ and consumers’ views of virtual versus inpatient care provision: a qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2023;23(1):724.

Uscher-Pines L, Sousa J, Raja P, Mehrotra A, Barnett ML, Huskamp HA. Suddenly becoming a virtual doctor: experiences of psychiatrists transitioning to telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychiatric Serv. 2020;71(11):1143–50.

Henry BW, Ames LJ, Block DE, Vozenilek JA. Experienced practitioners’ views on interpersonal skills in telehealth delivery. Internet J Allied Health Sci Pract. 2018;16(2):2.

McCullough K, Bayes S, Whitehead L, Williams A, Cope V. Nursing in a different world: remote area nursing as a specialist–generalist practice area. Aust J Rural Health. 2022;30(5):570–81.

Reeve C, Johnston K, Young L. Health profession education in remote or geographically isolated settings: a scoping review. J Med Educ Curric Dev. 2020;7:2382120520943595.

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Cummings E, Merolli M, Schaper L, editors. Barriers to telehealth uptake in rural, regional, remote Australia: what can be done to expand telehealth access in remote areas. Digital Health: Changing the Way Healthcare is Conceptualised and Delivered: Selected Papers from the 27th Australian National Health Informatics Conference (HIC 2019); 2019: IOS Press.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge Georgina Luscombe, Julian Grant, Claire Seaman, Jennifer Cox, Sarah Redshaw and Jennifer Schwarz who contributed to various elements of the project.

The study authors are employed by Three Rivers Department of Rural Health. Three Rivers Department of Rural Health is funded by the Australian Government under the Rural Health Multidisciplinary Training (RHMT) Program.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Three Rivers Department of Rural Health, Charles Sturt University, Locked Bag 588, Tooma Way, Wagga Wagga, NSW, 2678, Australia

Rebecca Barry, Elyce Green, Kristy Robson & Melissa Nott

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

RB & EG contributed to the conceptualisation of the study and methodological design. RB & MN collected the research data. RB, EG, MN, KR contributed to analysis and interpretation of the research data. RB, EG, MN, KR drafted the manuscript. All authors provided feedback on the manuscript and approved the final submitted manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rebecca Barry .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Ethics approvals were obtained from the Greater Western NSW Human Research Ethics Committee and Charles Sturt University Human Research Ethics Committee (approval numbers: 2021/ETH00088 and H21215). Informed written consent was obtained from all participants. All methods were carried out in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Barry, R., Green, E., Robson, K. et al. Factors critical for the successful delivery of telehealth to rural populations: a descriptive qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res 24 , 908 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-11233-3

Download citation

Received : 19 March 2024

Accepted : 23 June 2024

Published : 07 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-11233-3

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Service provision
• Rural health
• Allied health
• Rural workforce

BMC Health Services Research

ISSN: 1472-6963

• General enquiries: [email protected]

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• My Bibliography
• Collections
• Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

• Create a new collection
• Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

• Search in PubMed
• Search in NLM Catalog
• Add to Search

Challenges in the evaluation of suicide prevention measures and quality of suicide data in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland: findings from qualitative expert interviews

Affiliations.

• 1 Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Allschwil, Switzerland. [email protected].
• 2 University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland. [email protected].
• 3 Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Allschwil, Switzerland.
• 4 University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
• PMID: 39138493
• PMCID: PMC11323587
• DOI: 10.1186/s12889-024-19726-w

Background: Suicide prevention requires diverse, integrated, and evidence-based measures. Comprehensive evaluation of interventions and reliable suicide data are crucial for guiding policy-making and advancing suicide prevention efforts. This study aimed to analyze current issues and gaps in the evaluation of suicide prevention measures and the quality of suicide data in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland to derive specific recommendations for improvement.

Methods: Online, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 36 experts in suicide prevention from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, covering insights from policy, science, and practice. The interviews took place between September 2022 and February 2023, were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using the Framework method.

Results: While solid evidence supports the effectiveness of some suicide prevention interventions, experts indicated that the evaluation of many other measures is weak. Conducting effectiveness studies in suicide prevention presents a range of methodological and practical challenges, including recruitment difficulties, choosing adequate outcome criteria, ethical considerations, and trade-offs in allocating resources to evaluation efforts. Many interviewees rated the quality of national suicide statistics in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland as comparatively high. However, they noted limitations in the scope, timeliness, and reliability of these data, prompting some regions to implement their own suicide monitoring systems. None of the three countries has national routine data on suicide attempts.

Conclusion: While some challenges in evaluating suicide prevention measures are inevitable, others can potentially be mitigated. Evaluations could be enhanced by combining traditional and innovative research designs, including intermediate outcomes and factors concerning the implementation process, and employing participatory and transdisciplinary research to engage different stakeholders. Reliable suicide data are essential for identifying trends, supporting research, and designing targeted prevention measures. To improve the quality of suicide data, a standardized monitoring approach, including uniform definitions, trained professionals, and cross-sector agreement on leadership and financing, should be pursued. This study provides actionable recommendations and highlights existing good practice approaches, thereby supporting decision-makers and providing guidance for advancing suicide prevention on a broader scale.

Keywords: Data quality; Epidemiological monitoring; Europe; Evaluation research; Mental health; Qualitative research; Stakeholder participation; Suicide prevention.

© 2024. The Author(s).

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Similar articles

• Advancing suicide prevention in Germany, Austria and Switzerland: a qualitative study. Werdin S, Wyss K. Werdin S, et al. Front Public Health. 2024 May 30;12:1378481. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1378481. eCollection 2024. Front Public Health. 2024. PMID: 38873323 Free PMC article.
• The future of Cochrane Neonatal. Soll RF, Ovelman C, McGuire W. Soll RF, et al. Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12. Early Hum Dev. 2020. PMID: 33036834
• Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas. Crider K, Williams J, Qi YP, Gutman J, Yeung L, Mai C, Finkelstain J, Mehta S, Pons-Duran C, Menéndez C, Moraleda C, Rogers L, Daniels K, Green P. Crider K, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022. PMID: 36321557 Free PMC article.
• Online Newspaper Reports on Ambulance Accidents in Austria, Germany, and Switzerland: Retrospective Cross-sectional Review. Boldt J, Steinfort F, Müller M, Exadaktylos AK, Klukowska-Roetzler J. Boldt J, et al. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2021 Nov 12;7(11):e25897. doi: 10.2196/25897. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2021. PMID: 34766915 Free PMC article. Review.
• Prevention of suicide and attempted suicide in Denmark. Epidemiological studies of suicide and intervention studies in selected risk groups. Nordentoft M. Nordentoft M. Dan Med Bull. 2007 Nov;54(4):306-69. Dan Med Bull. 2007. PMID: 18208680 Review.
• World Health Organization. Suicide worldwide in 2019: global health estimates. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2021.
• World Health Organization. Preventing suicide: a global imperative. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2014.
• Eurostat. Death due to suicide, by sex. 2024 [cited 2024 May 14]. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/tps00122/default/table?la...
• Mann JJ, Apter A, Bertolote J, Beautrais A, Currier D, Haas A, et al. Suicide prevention strategies: a systematic review. JAMA. 2005;294(16):2064–74. 10.1001/jama.294.16.2064 - DOI - PubMed
• Krishnamoorthy S, Mathieu S, Ross V, Armstrong G, Kõlves K. What are complex interventions in suicide research? Definitions, challenges, opportunities, and the Way Forward. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(14):8591. 10.3390/ijerph19148591 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
• Search in MeSH
• Citation Manager

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.