{"title":"修补二对一访谈:关于在定性建构主义调查中使用两位访谈者的思考","authors":"Javier Monforte , Joan Úbeda-Colomer","doi":"10.1016/j.metip.2021.100082","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Typically, qualitative interviews implicate a single interviewer. In this article, we consider an alternative comprising the simultaneous, active involvement of two interviewers. We base our considerations on experiences using the two-to-one interview in a nationwide research project on disability and physical activity. In addition to untapping and developing a qualitative interview method, the article provides an example in action of tinkering in qualitative inquiry. Tinkering entails a constant questioning of what to do, what is best, and what is appropriate within each moment of the research. Echoing social constructionist scholars, we argue that this flexible approach is useful to move away from methodological prescription and predictability.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":93338,"journal":{"name":"Methods in Psychology (Online)","volume":"5 ","pages":"Article 100082"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590260121000394/pdfft?md5=64db86834ea147a51de79ad6cc965c0f&pid=1-s2.0-S2590260121000394-main.pdf","citationCount":"14","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tinkering with the two-to-one interview: Reflections on the use of two interviewers in qualitative constructionist inquiry\",\"authors\":\"Javier Monforte , Joan Úbeda-Colomer\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.metip.2021.100082\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Typically, qualitative interviews implicate a single interviewer. In this article, we consider an alternative comprising the simultaneous, active involvement of two interviewers. We base our considerations on experiences using the two-to-one interview in a nationwide research project on disability and physical activity. In addition to untapping and developing a qualitative interview method, the article provides an example in action of tinkering in qualitative inquiry. Tinkering entails a constant questioning of what to do, what is best, and what is appropriate within each moment of the research. Echoing social constructionist scholars, we argue that this flexible approach is useful to move away from methodological prescription and predictability.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93338,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Methods in Psychology (Online)\",\"volume\":\"5 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100082\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590260121000394/pdfft?md5=64db86834ea147a51de79ad6cc965c0f&pid=1-s2.0-S2590260121000394-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"14\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Methods in Psychology (Online)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590260121000394\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Psychology\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Methods in Psychology (Online)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590260121000394","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
Tinkering with the two-to-one interview: Reflections on the use of two interviewers in qualitative constructionist inquiry
Typically, qualitative interviews implicate a single interviewer. In this article, we consider an alternative comprising the simultaneous, active involvement of two interviewers. We base our considerations on experiences using the two-to-one interview in a nationwide research project on disability and physical activity. In addition to untapping and developing a qualitative interview method, the article provides an example in action of tinkering in qualitative inquiry. Tinkering entails a constant questioning of what to do, what is best, and what is appropriate within each moment of the research. Echoing social constructionist scholars, we argue that this flexible approach is useful to move away from methodological prescription and predictability.