The research interview was a new and unique concept to me. I have not had much experience doing research interviews and never really thought about the strategy behind it. It was interesting to me to actually label the different kinds of question asking. Although I know that I utilize primary, secondary, open-ended, closed-ended, neutral, and leading questions, I can't say that I use them on purpose. Typically, I would ask questions just as they pop into my head, not really asking specific questions on purpose or seeking a particular result.
Also, I don't believe that I have previously ever had a particular plan or layout whenever I have interviewed anyone. The concept of having an interview guide is new to me. Of course I always have a purpose when I interview someone, but to actually anticipate an opening, utilize different types of questions, and end with a specific conclusion is something I have never consciously utilized. I can see how putting this layout to use could be beneficial to more efficiently getting the result from an interview that I want.
I couldn't agree more with you. I as well do not have any experience with research interviews. It is amazing to see all the details that go into preparing for an interview. Actually, conducting the interview is the easy part. It is everything else, including the preparation, and research that is the hard part. Having a plan laid out, or having an "interview guide," is essential to a successful presentation. I also think that preparing specific questions prior to a speech is very important. In the past, I have done the same as you when you said, “typically, I would ask questions just as they pop into my head, not really asking specific questions on purpose or seeking a particular result.” I think that going with the flow is very easy to do, but it would definitely make the process easier if we both planned specific questions prior to the interview. This would ensure that we gather the necessary information that we need. Good post.
ReplyDelete