Considering Pilot Interviews

 

Anyone reading this blog probably already knows that I'm a post-graduate researcher with the Open University in the UK.  I'm currently studying for my EdD (Doctorate of Education) and things are going reasonably well so far.  I've managed to get my upgrade and, pending ethical approval, I hope to be commencing my data collection soon.  

("A researcher interviews a university student and part-time journalist on a university campus in Salvador, Brazil. May 29, 2017" by Marielle Velander is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0.)

As part of my research I'm hoping to conduct a series of narrative interviews with college lecturers from around Scotland as part of my wider study into the impact of infrastructural change on lecturer professionalism within the Scottish FE sector.  For clarity, the intention of my study is not about providing criticism of anyone's professional practice in any way.  Rather the aim of my study is to examine how infrastructural change may (or may not) have brought about constraints or enablers that potentially enhance or constrain professional practice.  The aim is to help lecturers to tell their career stories and thereby understand the kinds of challenges faced by lecturers as a result of infrastructural change.

But, as a novice researcher, I find myself nervous about conducting these interviews.  I found my mind whirling with a whole series of "what if" scenarios.  What if my interviewees misunderstand my questions?  How leading can I be?  What if my participants data shows things I hadn't considered in my literature review?  What if my questions are perceived as intrusive?  So, in discussion with my supervisors, it was suggested that I should perhaps consider doing some pilot interviews - which  is what I did.  And the results were interesting.

I read a paper by Doody and Doody (2015) where the authors highlight the confusion between feasability studies and pilot studies.  The authors suggest that pilot studies, "allow researchers to practice and to assess the effectiveness of their planned data collection and analysis techniques" (p. 1074).  What struck me about this paper was the emphasis that the authors placed on the value of the pilot study suggesting that it should be part of a researcher's ethical obligation to publish the results of every research endeavour.  While I take the point that, without further writing on the subject of pilot studies then there will continue to be a methodological challenge for novice researchers, I'm not sure that I agree on the point of there being an ethical obligation to publish the results of such studies.  Indeed, from within the paradigm of narrative inquiry, I would argue that one must always consider whether there is an ethical duty not to publish in order to protect the identities of actors involved in the study.  For one must weigh carefully the methodological benefits to the research community against protection of those involved in the pilot studies.

("Ethics-Cannot-Compromise" by Louisa-Chan is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.).

However, the authors later commented that, "a pilot can also be used to self-assess readiness, ability and commitment as a researcher."  This really hit home for me because, in reflection, I began to see that all of those "what if" scenarios were simply a reflection of my own self-doubt.  Imposter syndrome was creeping back in and I was beginning to question my readiness to enter the field and start the empirical phase of my research.  So, both on a methodological and personal level, conducting pilot interviews made a lot of sense. 

This led me to an important question.  What could I do to better prepare myself for the fieldwork that was to come?  Fortunately a later paper I read by Malmqvist et al. (2019) provided the answer.  The authors commented that in addition to the benefits of being able to test out my interview schedule, they recommend the use of pilot interviews to help prepare novice researchers for the intricacies of the field work process.  So pilot interviews became part of my official methodology.  

In conducting these pilot interviews I found two things:

(1)  My interview schedule seemed to work well.  While I had to give some direction about what infrastructure was actually referring to, my participants actually provided me with answers that were useful, surprising in some ways, but most of all they seemed to naturally connect with some key issues and theories I had previously written about in my literature review!!  

(2)  I found myself really noticing my responses to participants comments.  It was a real challenge because while I understand that from a narrative inquiry perspective, I understand that knowledge is co-constructed, I found that it could be very easy to make comments like, "I agree", or, "I've experienced that too..." so I couldn't help wondering after the event whether or not I had biased the answers that my research participants had given.  I suddenly became very aware of the kind of language I was using and the signals I was sending.  It could very quickly make someone quite self-conscious. 

("Lesson learned. Always make them show you the whole tree before you buy. Merry Christmas!" by Greg Palmer is licensed under CC BY 2.0.)

In this sense I'm glad I took the time to conduct these pilot studies because I do feel better prepared, or at least more self-aware of my role as the researcher.    

References

Doody, O. and Doody, C. M. (2024) 'Conducting a pilot study: case study of a novice researcher', British Journal of Nursing, Vol. 24, No. 21, pp. 1074 - 1078.

Malmqvist, J., Hellberg, K., Molass, G., Rose, R. and Shevlin, M. (2019) 'Conducting the Pilot Study: A Negleccted part of the Research Process? Methodological Findings Supporting the Importance of Piloting in Qualitative Research Studies', International Journal of Qualitative Methods, Vol. 18, pp. 1 - 11, DOI: 10.1177/1609406919878341.