How was it for you? The Interview Society and the irresistible rise of the (poorly analyzed) interview

Abstract

Atkinson and Silverman’s (1997) depiction of the Interview Society analysed the dominance of interview studies that seek to elicit respondents ‘experiences’ and ‘perceptions’. Their article showed that this vocabulary is deeply problematic, assuming an over-rationalistic account of behaviour and a direct link between the language of people’s accounts and their past and present psychic states. In this article, using a Constructionist approach, I develop these ideas, by asking what sort of data are we trying to retrieve through interviews, i.e. what do interviews reveal? I go on to examine and discount the claimed intellectual auspices for most interview studies and the way in which interview data are usually analysed. I conclude by showing how the reliability of interview transcripts can be improved and the analysis of interview data made more robust.