Robert K. Merton: The Focused Interview

"A tedious interview (for both interviewer and respondent) is a profitless one!"

For the most part, a focused interview is used when a researcher is attempting to understand the meaning(s) of situations that respondents have experienced. They are sometimes referred to as contextual or situational analysis, where there is an offered stimulus (question) and an anticipated response. Merton characterizes the nature of a focused interview as one where:

· All respondents involved in a particular situation

· Prior analysis of relevant issues by researcher
· Construction of issues- interview guide
· Subjective experiences are sought out – respondents definitions of issues (in their own words)

Merton et al. believe that regardless of the type of focused interview, i.e. not only marketing, there are four points that are vital to every focused interview:

1. Specification of stimulus response: (which is quite difficult for sociology since discipline is not engaged in ‘true’ experimental design). Proxy is that interviews are focused on a problem or set of problems and it is up to the researcher to come up with plausible hypotheses concerning significance of responses.

2. Discrepancies: anticipated versus actual: an exercise in interpretation where discrepancies are noted and then plausibility/importance is examined. Difficulty exists in range of interpretations and speculations.

3. Defining ‘deviant cases’: an exercise in identifying cases and continuing with supplementary interviews based on deviant responses.

4. Identification of experimentally induced effects: identification/interpretation of processes and meanings that emerge from the data

Four criteria must be met for the focused interview to be effective:

1. Range- allows for give and take throughout the interview (breadth and range). Key here is Merton’s concept of ‘retrospection’: perception after the fact

2. Specificity- responses are to be confined to the topic of interest (exactness and specifics of concepts under examination). Difficulty lies I keeping respondent on target with his/her responses in an effort to maintain a flow throughout interview

3. Depth- interview is a tool to assist the respondent define, in their own words with as much detail as possible, the concept(s) under study

4. Personal context- interview is to elicit contextual elements pertinent to the respondent for the concept(s) under study

Lastly, it is the interview that is centered upon specific concepts and hypotheses. The interview tool itself can take the form of a number of structured levels:

Some selected issues of interest:

Control and tone: roles of interviewer and interviewee:

The interviewer is to make clear that s/he is detached (not objective) from the situation that is being discussed: was not part of event, not producer of film, not a member of HIV team, etc. So the commitment issues are non-existent, only in so far as the interviewer has no direct involvement with the situation (not the interview but the event the interview is to examine). Merton distinguishes this from the role of the interviewer: "detached versus interested listener" (p. 178 and subsequent examples on pages 180-181; reversal of roles on pages 184-186) For Merton, two role definitions exist and they are to be kept distinct at all times: question- who is in control and why is this important? How does this compare to the narrative interview?

Keep the tone of the interview on the experience of the respondent: what did s/he experience and not others who are in her/his similar role or situation

Conflict and consensus in the focus group interview – consensus is never to be expected. What you are seeking in this ‘group setting’ is a discussion of opinions set around an event or issue- all experiences and opinions count. You as the researcher are analyzing the discussion that arises and trying to force closure or consensus defeats the purpose.

Language and cultural sensitivity matter – Merton’s notion of ‘idiom’. Question: does this go far enough? Why or why not?