Guided Interview and Qualitative Content Analysis as Instruments of Qualitative Research

Table of contents

List of figures

1. Introduction to the topic and structure of the work

2. Qualitative research at a glance
2.1 Qualitative versus quantitative research
2.2 Importance of qualitative research in organisational development

3. The guideline interview as a means of qualitative data collection
3.1 Interviews at a glance
3.2 The guided interview at a glance
3.3 Creation and conduct of guideline interviews

4. Qualitative content analysis according to Mayring
4.1 Qualitative content analysis: Concept and objectives
4.2 Techniques of qualitative content analysis
4.3 Special techniques of qualitative content analysis

5. Quality criteria of content analysis
5.1 Classic quality criteria
5.2 Content-analytical quality criteria

6. Summary and critical appraisal

Appendix

Appendix I: Example guided interview

Bibliography

List of figures

Figure 1: Forms of interviews at a glance (own representation, 2011)

Figure 2: Course of a guided interview

Figure 3: Preparation of a guide (own representation based on Schmidt, C., 2006)

1. Introduction to the topic and structure of the work

Qualitative research methods have become increasingly important in recent years. They are used in particular in communication science, but now also in psychology, educational science or sociology. (Mayring, 2008, p. 9f) Due to the increased response, the present work deals more closely with the topic of qualitative research. The focus here is primarily on the area of guideline interviews and qualitative content analysis according to Mayring.

The following approach is utilized: Point 2 provides an overview of qualitative research and distinguishes it from quantitative research. Subsequently, the qualitative approach is considered in a more targeted manner and the importance of qualitative research for organizational development is worked out. Point 3 of the work deals constructively with the topic of the guideline interview as an instrument of qualitative data collection. For this purpose, the concept of the interview is first explained and guided interviews are presented as a special form with its advantages and disadvantages. In addition to the presentation of typical characteristics, there are hints for the creation and implementation. In order to evaluate the collected data, section 4 describes the Mayring approach. For this purpose, the concept of qualitative content analysis is defined, and properties and objectives are developed. Furthermore, typical techniques of qualitative content analysis are presented. Point 5 refers to the quality criteria, in accordance with the qualitative content analysis. For this purpose, the importance of the classic quality criteria of objectivity, reliability and validity is first recorded and then, in addition, special content-analytical quality criteria are shown. The work concludes with a summary and a critical appraisal of the topic.

2. Qualitative research at a glance

In the following, differences in quantitative and qualitative research will be compared. According to the definitions, the next step will be to examine in particular the significance of qualitative research for organizational development in more detail.

2.1 Qualitative versus quantitative research

Qualitative research is a less clearly defined scientific method than a generic term for various leadership styles and leadership procedures (Ridder/ Hoon, 2009, p. 93; according to Kaune, 2010, p. 136), which are based on an understanding of research in the humanities and cultural studies. Qualitative research is about making experience and behavior understandable through understanding and interpreting. In addition, attempts are made to verbalize experiences and to evaluate them interpretatively. The researcher's perception of the subject of research is very subjective. (Seel, 2004) Typical data collection methods of qualitative research are interviews and surveys, whereby interviews and especially the guideline interview are to be dealt with separately at a later point. Another typical feature of qualitative research is the inductive and exploratory approach. Which means: Not already existing assumptions are tested (deductive approach), but new theories and hypotheses are generated. (Heteren-Frese/ Kaune, 2010) The advantage of qualitative research is that the data collection and data evaluation methods enable a flexible adaptation to the research process (Flick et al., 2004, p. 24f; according to Kaune, 2010, p. 136).

Qualitative research can be understood as "the attempt to find out how people see a fact, what individual significance it has for them and what motives for action occur in this context. From this, theories are constructed and conclusions drawn for practice." (Seel, 2004)

In contrast to this stands quantitative research , which is responsible for an understanding of research in particular in the natural sciences. If qualitative research attempts to understand and interpret experience and behavior, quantitative research is characterized by empirical studies of experience and behavior using systematically developed methods (in representative samples). The starting point is the objectively existing and comprehensible reality and no longer the subjective perception. (Seel, 2004) Typical data collection methods of quantitative research are observations, surveys, judgments and interviews. The data evaluation is - unlike qualitative research - deductive. (Brüsemeister, 2008, p. 19)

Finally, quantitative research can be defined as follows: “ Quantitative empirical research intends to precisely define social and psychological phenomena, to "measure" them as objectively as possible and to test hypotheses on the basis of this data." (Mayr, undated; after Seel, 2004)

Basically, the approaches differ in terms of the question of which forms of experience are considered methodically controllable and in the degree of standardization. Another distinguishing feature is the role of the researcher (Flick et al., 2004, p. 24f; after Kaune, 2010, p. 136).

Which of the two research approaches is ultimately decided on depends on the subject of the investigation, as well as on the questions of the objective. Moreover, a demarcation between the research approaches is hardly possible in practice, rather the qualitative and quantitative approaches are often combined with each other. (Hollenstein/ Ullrich, 2003, p. 29) For example, the qualitative approach to hypothesis generation can be used to apply the quantitative approach to verifying the theses.

2.2 Importance of qualitative research in organisational development

In organizational development, qualitative research is used in particular in the implementation of evaluations. The term evaluation refers to the "verification of the effectiveness of an intervention [...] by means of empirical research." (Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evalatuations/ Sanders, 1999; after Kaune, 2010, p. 138).

In order for organizational development measures to be successfully implemented, it is necessary to take into account the needs of employees. This includes, among other things, their attitudes, behaviors and wishes. If these are ignored, this can lead to a lack of motivation and, if necessary, to resistance in the company. The reasons for the resistance can be based on various aspects. Common causes are, for example, fear, ignorance or prejudices that can hinder change processes in a company. To support organizational development measures, evaluations are used in practice. (Kardoff, 2004; after Kaune, 2010, p. 138) If possible, these should include both the hard and soft facts. Due to the subjective and individual inclusion of various factors, the use of qualitative application methods in the evaluation process seems to make sense at this point. (Mayring, 2002; after Kaune, 2010, p. 138)

According to Kardoff (2004, p. 245), there are various principles of qualitative evaluation research: Among other things, it is assumed that only observation times, but not predetermined measured values, are relevant. For example, resistances, critical moments or turning points are observed. Furthermore, justifications and actions are reconstructed and not attributed to reactive behavior. Another assumption is based on the fact that evaluation research is a process-oriented rather than a result-oriented approach. In particular, this means that dynamics are incorporated into the processes – especially those that are innovative. A special feature of qualitative evaluation research is also the specific approach. Instead of generalizing a fact, evaluations are about including subjective and individual aspects in the consideration. The communicative negotiation of target-oriented success criteria has a supporting effect.

3. The guideline interview as a means of qualitative data collection

In the following, the guideline interview will be considered in more detail as an instrument of qualitative data collection. For this purpose, the concept of "interview" is to be defined and, based on this, presented at a glance. In the next step, the guideline interview is then characterized and reference is made to aspects for the creation and execution of such an interview.

3.1 Interviews at a glance

According to Scheuch (undated; according to Heteren-Frese/ Kaune, 2010), the term of the interview can be defined as follows: "An interview is a planned approach with a scientific objective, in which the subject is to be prompted to verbal reactions by a series of targeted questions or communicated stimuli."

Basically, interviews can be distinguished according to their degree of structuring (Weyer, S., o.J.):

Standardized interviews are characterized by the fact that the type of formulation of the questions, the order of the questions, the interview behavior and the possible answers are precisely defined. On the one hand, this form of interview has the advantage that several interviews can be compared relatively quickly and easily with each other. On the other hand, standardized interviews do not offer room for flexibility, which can mean that important and interesting aspects can be lost. (Stangl, undated)

The counterpart to the standardized interview is the open (unstructured) interview. Here the interviewer is completely free in the design of the questions, formulations, the order of the questions, etc. and the respondent is able to express himself completely freely on a fact (Dell / Korotkaja, 2006, p. 6). Due to the high flexibility, the open interview can go very in depth, which is why the open interview is also referred to in the literature as a deep interview. The advantage of this form of interview is that a lot of information is obtained. However, comparability is complex due to its complexity and sometimes difficult to implement. (Stangl, undated)

A mixed form of standardized and open interview is the semi-structured interview, which makes use of a questionnaire or discussion guide (Raber/ Temmel, 2005, p. 1). The semi-structured interviews - which can be assigned to qualitative social research - include guideline interviews (Heteren-Frese/ Kaune, 2010), which will be presented in more detail in the further course of the work.

The following table shows the interview forms described by Mayring once again at a glance (Mayring, P. in Seel, A., 2004):

- a lot of data can be obtained in a short time
- formulation, order of questions, answers given
- more space for own formulations
- less comparability
- no rigid catalog of questions
- questions and topics are freely formulated depending on the interview situation
- much information
- poor comparability
- free answering
- free formulating

Standardised interview

Semi-structured interview

Open interview

Pros/Cons

Characteristics

Form of the interview

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

Figure 1: Forms of interviews at a glance (own representation, 2011)

In addition to the structure, interviews can be distinguished in the way in which the interview is conducted. In face-to-face interviews, a person is interviewed directly and personally by another person, i.e. by the interviewer. In the case of telephone interviews, the survey is carried out on the phone and in the case of paper and pencil interviews by means of a prepared and printed questionnaire. In addition, online interviews are becoming more and more widespread, which are positioned on company pages on the Internet or are carried out on behalf of market research institutes. Other forms are the CAPI interview and the CATI. CAPI interviews are interviews in which the survey is not carried out with the help of a printed questionnaire, but on the computer. CATIs are a telephone survey in which computers are used to select the subjects and conduct the interview. (SDI-Research, undated)

Widely used qualitative data collection methods are qualitative individual surveys, group surveys/ group discussions, field research methods and non-reactive methods. The guideline interview, which is the main component of the present term paper, can be assigned to the qualitative individual surveys. Other, quite typical forms of interviews and methods of qualitative individual surveys, which will not be discussed further at this point, are, for example, in-depth interviews, narrative interviews, oral history or thinking out loud. (Seel, 2004; Bartnick et al., 2008)

3.2 The guided interview at a glance

First, the concept of the guideline interview will be discussed in more detail:

A guideline interview is an open, semi-structured, oral survey conducted with the help of a guideline (Breckle et al., 2007). The guideline is created on the basis of a preliminary analysis and used by the interviewer during the interview as a "checklist" (Schmidt, 2006a). In addition, the guide serves as a tool for data collection, especially for complex topics (Seel, A., 2004). It is typical for a guideline interview that the order of the questions and exact formulations are optional (Raber /Temmel, 2005, p. 2). Therefore, in the context of such an interview, open, non-standard questions are usually used to narrow down the interview topic and to specify subject areas (Mayer, 2008, p. 37). In addition, there are no prescribed response categories, as respondents should be given the opportunity to report on their experiences in their own words (Raber/ Temmel, 2005, p. 3).

[...]