The sustained snapshot: Incidental ethnographic encounters in qualitative interview studies
Dina Pinsky
Abstract
Dina Pinsky
Abstract
The literature on qualitative methods assumes that researchers will conduct interviews in the course of a participant-observation study but not that extensive observations of interviewees might happen to take place during an interview study. In this article, I raise questions about interview study methodologies, using the example of a life history interview project in which the interviewer stayed at interviewee’s homes, met with them for meals, encountered them at events, and kept careful field notes on all of these incidental ethnographic encounters. Reflecting on the ambivalent status of such incidental ethnographic encounters, I argue that qualitative interview methods suffer from the limitations of positivism because the interview encounter is privileged as the sole source of knowledge. I call for a more flexible approach to qualitative interviews that can accommodate and derive knowledge from the full range of encounters between the researcher and participant.
OpenAlex reports 42 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
The literature on qualitative methods assumes that researchers will conduct interviews in the course of a participant-observation study but not that extensive observations of interviewees might happen to take place during an interview study. In this article, I raise questions about interview study methodologies, using the example of a life history interview project in which the interviewer stayed at interviewee’s homes, met with them for meals, encountered them at events, and kept careful field notes on all of these incidental ethnographic encounters. Reflecting on the ambivalent status of such incidental ethnographic encounters, I argue that qualitative interview methods suffer from the limitations of positivism because the interview encounter is privileged as the sole source of knowledge. I call for a more flexible approach to qualitative interviews that can accommodate and derive knowledge from the full range of encounters between the researcher and participant.
Key concepts: Ethnography, Interview, Participant observation, Qualitative research, Ambivalence, Semi-structured interview, Psychology, Sociology