Relational Interviewing 1

Qualitative Interviewing Using the Relational Approach

Chris Bernardo

Michigan School of Psychology

PSYC 651 Qualitative Research

Dr. Lee Bach

March 7th, 2021

Qualitative Interviewing Using the Relational Approach

The purpose of this paper is to explore the interview I conducted with S, a retired teacher

and professor who was kind enough to volunteer some of his time for this project. The hour long

interview discussed his use of the Zoom platform in facilitating an online Sunday school class he

founded with his church. Through my readings of qualitative methods, I have sought to integrate

many of the lessons and concepts to help me to gain the most from this experience.

Planning the Interview

In seeking to develop a “Big Q” question, I had several ideas I was hoping to combine in

some way. The first idea that came was to discover more about how people are using Zoom

and similar video conferencing apps. Zoom’s sudden rise into the public consciousness makes it

a perfect fit for this study. It is nearly ubiquitously used, and new enough that little research on it

has been completed. The second concept I wanted to research was to somehow study intimate

human connections. I have been recently fascinated by human loneliness and connection, and

desired to study it in some way. Eventually I created the topic, “What is the Experience of a

Baby Boomer in Maintaining Intimate Relationships Over a Video Conferencing App During a

Pandemic.” It was a mouthful, but it satisfied my criteria. The baby boomer aspect was added

for several reasons. The first was that I was hoping for a somewhat fresh perspective on using

video conferencing in this way. Younger generations may not have been as reflective on this

topic, having so much familiarity and experience with video conferencing. Secondly, I wanted to

study a population who would ideally have more experience developing intimate relationships,

and would have had relationships that could already be considered long term. If I were to use

younger people, my thought was that they may not be as considerate of their experiences given

the brevity of their relationships. I was hoping for the maximum amount of reflectiveness.

As I will speak about later, there was a last minute change to my Big Q. However, the

interview subject matter was very parallel to my original question, and couldn’t have turned out
Relational Interviewing 3

better. Upon reflection, my new Big Q is, “What is the Experience of a Baby Boomer Starting an

Online Sunday School During a Pandemic?”

The issues this last minute change created are immediately obvious. I could no longer

use my prepared pocket questions. I would have to develop new ones on the fly. In addition, my

reflexivity preparations were now only somewhat applicable. However, none of these turned out

to be a serious barrier in conducting a good interview.

Choosing the Big Q

Drawing me to the topic was the timeliness of the subject matter, and also, I wanted to

compare other peoples experiences on Zoom to my own. My own experiences range from

extremely satisfying to incredibly frustrating. To make a fresh comparison, I wanted to hear from

an older generation whose eyes would be fresh to this paradigm. It turned out that my original

topic idea got me close enough to answer my original questions.

Addressing Researcher Reflexivity

In trying to discover my own assumptions, I realized I had more than I thought. For one, I

predicted that the technical barriers of using an online platform could possibly create significant

issues for someone of an older generation. This turned out to be only a minor consideration for

S. However, what I discovered later in the interview was that this was a much larger

consideration for the families attending his course. The Detroit-based population he served was

apparently quite “mobile,” to borrow S’s term, which created difficulties obtaining internet

access. In the end, it turns out that the lengths these families went to obtain this access was

enormously rewarding for S to discover. The children attending the class were frequently in the

passenger’s seat of their parents car, parked outside coffee shops or other businesses which

provided Wi-Fi.

I also assumed that there would be a sense of lack during these online communications.

My own experiences vary here, but I predicted that the participant might have lamented having

to use such a platform, which limits certain aspects of human communication, in order to
Relational Interviewing 4

preserve their social bonds. Again, this consideration was for the original topic question, and not

so applicable to the final topic question.

Had I known what my final topic would be before the interview took place, I would have

included in my bracketing process my biases about religion. Josselson (2013) encourages the

researcher to examine their preconceived ideas about the person or narrative that one is to

engage with (p. 27). In the past, I took a reactionary position to my own upbringing and found

religion and the religious nearly intolerable. It has been a long time since I further evolved this

viewpoint. However, it was an important idea to consider beforehand. As Sorsa et al. (2015)

states, there is a hierarchical relationship between interviewer and interviewee (p. 8). As they

further state, this means that it is possible for the interviewer to dominate the interviewee and

contaminate the responses. For me, the religious aspect of the conversation would have had

the highest risk of such contamination. However, judging from S’s responses to my queries, I

believe this did not occur perceptibly.

Metaphor of the “Dance”

In this interview, the metaphor of the researcher and participant “dance” was less

choreographed than I had hoped, at least initially. In the moment, having been caught off guard

by the change in my Big Q, I did the best I could. In the moment, I felt that it went somewhat

smoothly. However, upon relistening and transcribing, the interview felt choppy at certain

moments. I wondered if I was reflecting enough for S to be satisfied that I was listening deeply

(holding the interview over the phone, at his request, may have contributed to this issue). It the

moment, I didn’t have that sense at all. It was only when I listened back that this occurred. I

have a sense that S probably perceived it similarly to how I did in the moment. There is

something about listening to a recording that adds judgment, and removes some of the

appreciation for the in-the-moment creation that is co-occurring between the interviewer and

interviewee. In addition, S’s positive feedback at several points tells me that I was doing a good

enough job of staying in step with him.

Empathetic Attitude of Listening

Summarizing and Paraphrasing

As I mentioned earlier, upon listening to my recording, I found much to criticize in my

interviewing process. As the interview was unfolding, I was listening and participating with 100%

of my attention. However, when I listened back, I felt that during some of S’s longer, more in

depth answers, I could have done a better job of more frequently summarizing and

paraphrasing what I had heard. Without doing this, I was not always signaling how closely I had

been listening. Also, this did not create many opportunities to check out assumptions I may

have made in his responses. In addition, summarizing and paraphrasing adds a sense of

generosity to the conversation on the part of the interviewer. It is rewarding to the participant to

have their responses distilled and spoken back to them. It is not yet natural to me, but I will do

this more frequently, especially in the context of conducting therapy.

However, I was pleased with how I was able to develop new questions on the fly which

tracked with the information he had just given. These questions, I believe, did a lot to signal that

I in fact was fully engaged and thoughtful about his responses. In retrospect, this skill, further

developed, can be a valuable tool for future interviews.

Another skill I would like to develop further is bridging questions after a response. At the

moment I did not realize this, but as I listened to the recording, I felt that after some of his

responses, I could have either summarized or paraphrased, and found a way to bridge to the

next question. This might have helped with a sense of abruptness I noticed. I would like to

check this out with S, because I didn’t notice it in the moment whatsoever. Again, this could be

due to the different mindset that comes with reviewing an interview after the fact.

Saying Goodbye

Concluding the interview was unexpectedly difficult. S was kind enough to allot more

time to the interview than originally requested, and the time was well spent. The last 15-20

minutes of the interview were especially rich. This led to some internal difficulty for me in ending
Relational Interviewing 6

the interview. I was reluctant to end, both because I was enjoying the process, and in case I had

forgotten anything important. I also felt a great amount of gratitude towards S for sharing so

openly and abundantly, and did not want to give him the feeling of cutting him off if he had more

to say.

The Hermeneutic Process

As Coiro (2010) states, “More than any other method, qualitative interviews allow for the

exploration of meaning, especially as meaning is constructed by the research participants” (p.

133). I found that she was correct, and that meaning making was a natural part of the process. It

occurred even without prompting, which made focusing on meaning at later points extremely

organic.

The process of meaning making was interesting to observe. During the interview, I

hardly had the presence of mind to be thinking too deeply about the hermeneutic process.

However, I believe it did make itself known in the moment through my heightened sense of

engagement during the last ~20 minutes of our conversation, when things moved to the more

personal realm and really came alive. As mentioned, very generally speaking, the first ~40

minutes of the interview were more factual in nature. There were moments, however, even early

on, that sparked the meaning making process in specific ways. For instance, take this query and

its response.

Chris:How do you know, how do you convey, you know, some sense of yourself over

this medium in a way that you know kids that age can sort of perceive?

S:Hmm your asking me about this is kind of forcing me to think about that, but it's

definitely something I've been conscious of, we haven't really talked about it as a group,

[hmm] or how we do it. To some extent it'll have it is happening just by familiarity and

frequency of being together even though it's a limited amount of interaction sure but you

know, they're starting to certainly recognize us, know who we are, but from my
Relational Interviewing 7

perspective it's, it's like you wish if you were physically there present, that would be

different…

You can see, as S states, that he has considered this question to some degree.

However, he is now challenged to engage with it on a deeper level. Observe how he is

developing further thoughts as he continues to speak. Later on, due to S’s candor, I made a

minor self disclosure to help illustrate a question of mine, but also as a way to normalize some

of the personal disclosure’s he had made, encourage them further, and also take part in the

sense of reciprocity I felt. As I mentioned, it was a minor disclosure. I mentioned my career and

some of the issues I've encountered while holding therapy online vis a vis clients becoming

distracted by their computers. I felt it might be a good lead up to some of the more personal

questions I was going to ask. I would have to say this and some of my other strategies worked,

because he went to the personal dimension comfortably at my asking.

In addition, through his repetition of the dedication of the mothers of the children in his

class, I became aware of his deep respect for their efforts, and also, just how large the

obstacles they faced were. It gave me some insight into the lives of these families, and gave me

insight into S’s motivations for being so dedicated to his efforts to them. It was an understated,

but powerful theme.

Interviewer Anxiety

My own anxiety certainly played a role in the interview. I was anxious for many, many

reasons. I wanted to come off as professional, yet personal. Given that S was an academic

himself, I hoped that I would leave a positive impression, given he would be in a position to

judge with some authority. I wanted to create a comfortable space for the conversation to occur.

I was conscious of the semi-scripted nature of the conversation and that I would have to make

many decisions in pruning the myriad directions the conversation could take. I wanted it to be a

pleasant experience for S. I hoped that I wouldn’t forget any questions or omit any critical
Relational Interviewing 8

issues. I was going to be divided in my attention, simultaneously giving thought to both content

and process. I was trying to anticipate how the narrative should be shaped in order to turn it into

a coherent paper. I had concerns that there could be a technical issue with my recording. These

and many other vectors of anxiety played into my thinking during the interview.

This anxiety had several effects. It created a heightened focus, for one, but at times

could distract me when I felt overwhelmed. It had the effect of making me speak in a somewhat

tentative manner, uncertain and sort of quickly sketching out my thoughts and questions, rather

than having them arrive concretely. This stood out in contrast to his professorial style;

methodical, precise, and slow. You can see an example of how my anxiety made me a bit

uncertain here.

Chris:Right, you know, one question I'd like to ask I'm still sort of formulating it, and it is

slightly more personal than the other questions but I'll ask it anyway, if you'd like to

respond you know, um, you sound like a person, I don't think it's a big leap to say you're

a person of faith and I wonder how this has, you know in in terms of you know your belief

system and sort of who you want to be in in the spiritual, you know, in terms of your

spiritual character, how is how is this affected you you know, what have you is is that

enough of a question? I'm still sort of working on there, but if you can yeah.

S understood what I was asking, but I would have much rather been able to make that

query into a solid thought that would have been easier to interpret. However, it was a question

that came to me in the moment, so I think room should be left for imperfection. I have doubts

about whether it was a serious issue in this case, though I do hope to improve in this area.

Addressing Bad Interview Techniques

Reading Josselson, I realized that I was utilizing a lot of bad interview techniques in

therapy. Unfortunately, these carried over into the interview, despite my awareness of them.
Relational Interviewing 9

Several times I asked multiple questions at once, or suggested answers to help clarify the

question. An example of my asking multiple questions: “I see. I'm curious to just [sic] about the

relationships that you have with the other teachers. Do you all teach at the same time? Are

these friends of yours?”

I’m still a bit torn as to whether this was a mistake worth regretting. The questions were

related and added an arc for his answer to follow, which he picked up on. Upon scanning the

transcript again, I think I may have performed better than I expected.

The Research Relationship

As Josselson states, “greater personal integration ensues from telling one’s story in an

extended, reflective way” (p. 13). I observed this process occurring during the interview at many

points, and S commented on that process as well several times. Here’s one example from the

transcript

Chris:Hmm, so that's part of the rewarding aspect for you as well yeah.

S:No, yeah, I'm glad you yes [sic] that because as I think about that, that's a very

rewarding, that's a very important aspect. You know, if it was with people that you don't

have anything to talk about or something like that, it wouldn't be as rewarding.

It was very reinforcing to get this feedback from S, and generous of him to point it out. It

became even more interesting for me to hear what followed, due to knowing that it was being

created and processed in real time. It was also satisfying to know that I was helping him to mine

more personal satisfaction out of an activity he had already been involved in for some time. My

inner therapist was excited at seeing this occur!

The content of the interview changed as the questions passed. The beginning of the

conversation was much more oriented to the facts. It set the scene, the characters, the

situations. Later, once we were oriented to one another, there became room for reflection for
Relational Interviewing 10

both of us. Many times, we took moments of silence to think and turn over ideas we were

working on. He even mentioned at several points that he was just now thinking overtly about

some of the experiences due to my questions. These were among the most thrilling moments of

the interview. I perceive that it deepened our bond, got S into a space of self exploration, and it

even felt like we were moving away from a simple interview and into a creative activity. It left me

thinking about Miller and Stiver’s Five Good Things that result from growth oriented

relationships (Jordan, 2018). I had the impression that he felt the same. This was strongly

reinforced by statements he made, such as “That’s right. Thats a good observation, Chris,” and

“I don’t think so, your questions were right on the mark.” These reflections inform me that we

were communicating very well.

Guilt Regarding Writing About Participants

I did not experience guilt per se in concluding the interview with S. As I mentioned, he is

from an academic background, and understood as well as anyone possibly could what I was

attempting to do with our interview. However, I do feel a deep responsibility to represent him as

well as possible. Luckily, he was encouraging about speaking at a later date to review my work

for it’s accuracy. Thus, any concerns about exploitation have been avoided.

Conclusion

The process of preparing for this interview, conducting it, and reviewing and engaging

with it ex post facto was a rich experience. I was able to gain familiarity with the methods of the

qualitative interview, and appreciate the many strengths of this method of research. Having

completed this process, I have a much clearer understanding of how qualitative methods work

and how I may be able to integrate them into my academic career and beyond.
Relational Interviewing 11

References

Coiro, J. (2010). Handbook of research on new literacies. Routledge.

Jordan, J. V. (2018). Relational-cultural therapy. American Psychological Association.

Josselson, R. (2013). Interviewing for qualitative inquiry: A relational approach. Guilford Press.

Sorsa, M. A., Kiikkala, I., & Åstedt-Kurki, P. (2015). Bracketing as a skill in conducting

unstructured qualitative interviews. Nurse Researcher, 22(4), 8-12.

doi:10.7748/nr.22.4.8.e1317