Clean language interviewing

Last updated

Clean language interviewing (CLI), sometimes shortened to clean interviewing, aims to maximise the reliability that information collected during an interview derives from the interviewee. CLI seeks to address some of the "threats to validity and reliability" [1] that can occur during an interview and to increase the "trustworthiness" of the data collected. [2] It does this by employing a technique that minimises the unintended introduction of interviewer content, assumption, leading question structure, presupposition, framing, priming, tacit metaphor and nonverbal aspects such as paralanguage and gesture that may compromise the authenticity of the data collected. [3]

Contents

At the same time clean language interviewing seeks to minimise common interviewee biases, such as the consistency effect, acquiescence bias and the friendliness effect which may mean an interviewee (unconsciously) looks for cues from the interviewer about how to answer. [4]

Furthermore, a systematic application of a 'cleanness rating' protocol provides a quantitive measure of adherence to interview guidelines and by extension the "confirmability" of the data collected. [5] [6]

CLI can be considered a phenomenologically-based interview method, similar in intent to neuro- and micro-phenomenology, [7] psycho-phenomenology, [8] phenomenography, [9] and Interpersonal Process Recall. [10] Clean interviewing can be seen as a method of operationalising the phenomenological aim of bracketing (epoché). [3]

CLI has the flexibility to be applied at four progressive levels of practice and principles: [11] :10
    A questioning technique
    A method of eliciting interviewee-generated metaphors
    A method of studying how people do things
    A coherent research strategy based on ‘clean’ principles.

CLI is also an integral part of a new action research methodology, Modelling Shared Reality which suggests that by paying careful attention to the language they use, qualitative researchers can reduce undesired influence and unintended bias during all stages of research—design, data gathering, analysis and reporting. [12]

History

Clean interviewing derived from clean language, the language model of therapeutic processes devised by David Grove [13] which has since found application in education, business, organisational change, health and academic research. [14]

Grove devised the principles of clean language in the 1980s and continued to develop a specific question set until his death in 2008. Although Owen first suggested applying clean language to phenomenological research in 1996, [15] it was not until 2010 that the first systematic research into the veracity of the method was conducted and published in the British Journal of Management. [16]

Another milestone is the publication of Clean Language Interviewing: Principles and Applications for Researchers and Practitioners. [17] It consists of four chapters introducing the method and eleven chapters detailing the application of CLI to fields such as: journalism in Malaysia; the experience of neurodifferent job applicants in the UK; parents of children diagnosed with encephalopathy in France; modelling an excellent case manager of neurodiverse offenders in the UK; conflict resolution with gang leaders in Haiti; management systems auditing in Japan; serious injury or fatality investigations in the US, among others.

Features

The features of clean interviewing include: the specificity of the technique; minimising unintended influence; data collection from the perspective of the interviewee; its applicability to in-depth interviews; elicitation of autogenic metaphors; investigating tacit knowledge; modelling mental models; and the verifiability of the adherence to the method. [16] [18] [19] [20]

CLI seeks to address the issues raised by research that demonstrates responses can materially be affected by: question construction; [21] [22] framing; [23] changing a single word; [24] [25] introduced metaphors; [26] [27] presupposition; [28] and the nonverbal behaviour of the interviewer such as paralanguage [29] and gesture. [30] Furthermore, in these studies, not only did the subjects show little or no awareness of being subtly and systematically influenced, many reported their answers with a high degree of confidence. [31]

The amount of training required to become a proficient interviewer is commonly underestimated [32] [33] and because of the rigour of the CLI technique, training and practice are required to become a competent clean language interviewer. [20] [16]

Cleanness rating

Roulston maintains "researchers must demonstrate the quality of their work in ways that are commensurate with their assumptions about their use of interviews" [34] :193 yet systematic methods for assessing the reliability and validity of the data collected during an interview are noticeably absent from published research. [35]

A "cleanness rating" can be used to measure the proportion of 'clean' to 'leading' interviewer interventions and hence the authenticity or trustworthiness of the data collected (i.e. how much is sourced in the interviewee's lexicon and logic). “The principal benefit of the rating is to enhance reflexivity” and contribute to “methodological transparency by enabling researchers to report on confirmability”. [36] :19

The rating was created in 2011 [16] and subsequently extended and formalised. An independent examination of interview transcripts allocates one of six categories (Classically clean; Clean repeat; Contextually clean; Mildly leading; Strongly leading; Other) to every question or statement made by the interviewer. The tabulated results are used to arrive at a summary assessment for each interview. [36]

Interviewers experienced in CLI can consistently achieve over 85% of 'clean' interventions. [18] [5] Whereas as many as two-thirds of the questions asked by an untrained interviewer may be 'leading'. [20] An inter-rater reliability analysis of 19 interviews from five research studies demonstrated substantial agreement among raters with an average intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.72 (95% CI). [5]

Critique

The assumption that interviewers can minimise their influence on the collection of data has been questioned for several decades [37] and the social constructivist school claims all knowledge is co-constructed. [38] Practitioners of CLI do not claim it does not influence nor that it is "non-directive". [39] They acknowledge that the interviewer's role is to set the overall purpose and direct the general flow of the interview [1] and they emphasise that all questions, including clean questions, set frames, contain presuppositions and invite the interviewee to attend to certain aspects of his or her experience. [14] Clean questions aim to stay within the lexicon and inherent logic expressed by the interviewee and leave them maximally free to answer from within his or her frames of reference. Tosey maintains that, "accounts are co-constructed through the process of selecting and asking questions. At the same time, Clean Language [Interviewing] aims to minimise the co-construction of the content." [3] :205

In inexperienced hands the questions may “feel scripted, mechanical and inappropriately therapeutic” [40] and the "guidelines may be quite hard to follow, and rub up against a tension between sustaining neutrality and developing rapport” yet still “invite interviewees to talk about their inner world in their own way which could ideally create openness”. [41]

As yet there has been no comprehensive test of the premise that interviews with a high cleanness rating result in higher quality data. Rather, an interview with a low cleanness rating may raise questions about compliance with research protocols and doubts about the authorship of the data collected.

Other forms of interviewing would be more appropriate where the researcher intentionally aims for the 'co-construction of meaning' or to challenge and change the understandings of participants, as in 'transformative interviews'. [34]

Some critics have maintained that the metaphor 'clean' is pejorative to other methods. Grove settled on the metaphor after discovering how others – including Carl Rogers the originator of "non-directive therapy" [42] – (unwittingly) 'contaminate' another person's perceptions with introduced content and presupposition

Applications

While clean interviewing is ideally suited to research, it has also been used by police interviewers, critical incident investigators and in commercial projects such as requirements gathering, market research and organisational change. There is scope for it to be applied in fields such as cognitive task analysis [43] and Naturalistic decision-making.

Examples of published research include:

In addition clean interviewing has been used in a range of PhD research topics:

See also

Notes

  1. 1 2 Seidman, 2006
  2. Lincoln & Guba, 1985
  3. 1 2 3 Tosey, 2015
  4. Podsakoff et al., 2003
  5. 1 2 3 Nehyba & Lawley, 2020
  6. Jensen, 2008
  7. Petitmengin, 2017
  8. Mathison & Tosey, 2010
  9. Reid & Solomonides, 2007
  10. Larson et al., 2008
  11. Tosey, Cairns-Lee & Lawley, 2022
  12. 1 2 van Helsdingen & Lawley, 2012
  13. Grove & Panzer, 1989
  14. 1 2 Lawley & Tompkins, 2000
  15. Owen, 1996
  16. 1 2 3 4 5 Tosey, Lawley & Meese, 2014
  17. Cairns-Lee, Lawley & Tosey, 2022
  18. 1 2 Lawley, 2017
  19. 1 2 Linder-Pelz & Lawley, 2015
  20. 1 2 3 4 Nehyba & Svojanovsky, 2017
  21. Loftus & Palmer, 1974
  22. Harris, 1973
  23. Tversky & Kahneman, 1981
  24. Loftus & Zanni, 1975
  25. Heritage et al., 2007
  26. Thibodeau & Boroditsky, 2011
  27. Thibideau & Boroditsky, 2013
  28. Loftus, 1975
  29. Duncan et al., 1969
  30. Gurney et al., 2013
  31. Loftus & Hoffman, 1989
  32. Cho, 2014
  33. Kvale & Brinkmann, 2014
  34. 1 2 Roulston, 2010
  35. Mann, 2010
  36. 1 2 Cairns-Lee, Lawley & Tosey, 2021
  37. Mishler, 1986
  38. Silverman, 2006
  39. Rogers, 1945
  40. Buetow, 2013, p.53
  41. Langley & Meziani, 2020, p.11
  42. Tompkins & Lawley, 1996
  43. Clark et al., 2007
  44. Cáscová, 2015
  45. Lawley & Linder-Pelz, 2016
  46. Cairns-Lee, 2015
  47. Janssen et al., 2014
  48. Akbari, 2013
  49. Nixon & Walker, 2009
  50. Snoddon, 2005
  51. Sanders et al., 2018
  52. van Schuppen, 2021
  53. Conway, 2019
  54. Sinclair, 2019
  55. Walker, 2021
  56. Philmon, 2019
  57. Calderwood, 2017
  58. Hanley, 2018
  59. Cairns-Lee, 2017
  60. Munsoor, 2018
  61. Pickerden, 2013
  62. Vanson, 2011
  63. Gurney 2013.

Related Research Articles

A leading question is a question that suggests a particular answer and contains information the examiner is looking to have confirmed. The use of leading questions in court to elicit testimony is restricted in order to reduce the ability of the examiner to direct or influence the evidence presented. Depending on the circumstances, leading questions can be objectionable or proper.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Interview</span> Structured series of questions and answers

An interview is a structured conversation where one participant asks questions, and the other provides answers. In common parlance, the word "interview" refers to a one-on-one conversation between an interviewer and an interviewee. The interviewer asks questions to which the interviewee responds, usually providing information. That information may be used or provided to other audiences immediately or later. This feature is common to many types of interviews – a job interview or interview with a witness to an event may have no other audience present at the time, but the answers will be later provided to others in the employment or investigative process. An interview may also transfer information in both directions.

Qualitative psychological research is psychological research that employs qualitative methods.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Qualitative research</span> Form of research

Qualitative research is a type of research that aims to gather and analyse non-numerical (descriptive) data in order to gain an understanding of individuals' social reality, including understanding their attitudes, beliefs, and motivation. This type of research typically involves in-depth interviews, focus groups, or field observations in order to collect data that is rich in detail and context. Qualitative research is often used to explore complex phenomena or to gain insight into people's experiences and perspectives on a particular topic. It is particularly useful when researchers want to understand the meaning that people attach to their experiences or when they want to uncover the underlying reasons for people's behavior. Qualitative methods include ethnography, grounded theory, discourse analysis, and interpretative phenomenological analysis. Qualitative research methods have been used in sociology, anthropology, political science, psychology, communication studies, social work, folklore, educational research, information science and software engineering research.

Educational research refers to the systematic collection and analysis of evidence and data related to the field of education. Research may involve a variety of methods and various aspects of education including student learning, interaction, teaching methods, teacher training, and classroom dynamics.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Methodology</span> Study of research methods

In its most common sense, methodology is the study of research methods. However, the term can also refer to the methods themselves or to the philosophical discussion of associated background assumptions. A method is a structured procedure for bringing about a certain goal, like acquiring knowledge or verifying knowledge claims. This normally involves various steps, like choosing a sample, collecting data from this sample, and interpreting the data. The study of methods concerns a detailed description and analysis of these processes. It includes evaluative aspects by comparing different methods. This way, it is assessed what advantages and disadvantages they have and for what research goals they may be used. These descriptions and evaluations depend on philosophical background assumptions. Examples are how to conceptualize the studied phenomena and what constitutes evidence for or against them. When understood in the widest sense, methodology also includes the discussion of these more abstract issues.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Job interview</span> Type of interview

A job interview is an interview consisting of a conversation between a job applicant and a representative of an employer which is conducted to assess whether the applicant should be hired. Interviews are one of the most common methods of employee selection. Interviews vary in the extent to which the questions are structured, from an unstructured and informal conversation to a structured interview in which an applicant is asked a predetermined list of questions in a specified order; structured interviews are usually more accurate predictors of which applicants will make suitable employees, according to research studies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Narrative inquiry</span> Discipline within qualitative research

Narrative inquiry or narrative analysis emerged as a discipline from within the broader field of qualitative research in the early 20th century, as evidence exists that this method was used in psychology and sociology. Narrative inquiry uses field texts, such as stories, autobiography, journals, field notes, letters, conversations, interviews, family stories, photos, and life experience, as the units of analysis to research and understand the way people create meaning in their lives as narratives.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Lera Boroditsky</span> American cognitive scientist

Lera Boroditsky is a cognitive scientist and professor in the fields of language and cognition. She is one of the main contributors to the theory of linguistic relativity. She is a Searle Scholar, a McDonnell Scholar, recipient of a National Science Foundation Career award, and an American Psychological Association Distinguished Scientist. She is Professor of Cognitive Science at the University of California, San Diego. She previously served on the faculty at Massachusetts Institute of Technology and at Stanford University.

Clean language is a technique primarily used in counseling, psychotherapy and coaching but now also used in education, business, organisational change and health. It has been applied as a research interview technique called clean language interviewing.

Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) is a qualitative form of psychology research. IPA has an idiographic focus, which means that instead of producing generalization findings, it aims to offer insights into how a given person, in a given context, makes sense of a given situation. Usually, these situations are of personal significance; examples might include a major life event, or the development of an important relationship. IPA has its theoretical origins in phenomenology and hermeneutics, and many of its key ideas are inspired by the work of Edmund Husserl, Martin Heidegger, and Maurice Merleau-Ponty. IPA's tendency to combine psychological, interpretative, and idiographic elements is what distinguishes it from other approaches to qualitative, phenomenological psychology.

Phenomenology or phenomenological psychology, a sub-discipline of psychology, is the scientific study of subjective experiences. It is an approach to psychological subject matter that attempts to explain experiences from the point of view of the subject via the analysis of their written or spoken words. The approach has its roots in the phenomenological philosophical work of Edmund Husserl.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Semi-structured interview</span> Social science interview method

A semi-structured interview is a method of research used most often in the social sciences. While a structured interview has a rigorous set of questions which does not allow one to divert, a semi-structured interview is open, allowing new ideas to be brought up during the interview as a result of what the interviewee says. The interviewer in a semi-structured interview generally has a framework of themes to be explored.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Unstructured interview</span> Interview in which questions are not prearranged.

An unstructured interview or non-directive interview is an interview in which questions are not prearranged. These non-directive interviews are considered to be the opposite of a structured interview which offers a set amount of standardized questions. The form of the unstructured interview varies widely, with some questions being prepared in advance in relation to a topic that the researcher or interviewer wishes to cover. They tend to be more informal and free flowing than a structured interview, much like an everyday conversation. Probing is seen to be the part of the research process that differentiates the in-depth, unstructured interview from an everyday conversation. This nature of conversation allows for spontaneity and for questions to develop during the course of the interview, which are based on the interviewees' responses. The chief feature of the unstructured interview is the idea of probe questions that are designed to be as open as possible. It is a qualitative research method and accordingly prioritizes validity and the depth of the interviewees' answers. One of the potential drawbacks is the loss of reliability, thereby making it more difficult to draw patterns among interviewees' responses in comparison to structured interviews. Unstructured interviews are used in a variety of fields and circumstances, ranging from research in social sciences, such as sociology, to college and job interviews. Fontana and Frey have identified three types of in depth, ethnographic, unstructured interviews - oral history, creative interviews, and post-modern interviews.

In qualitative research, a member check, also known as informant feedback or respondent validation, is a technique used by researchers to help improve the accuracy, credibility, validity, and transferability of a study. There are many subcategories of members checks, including: narrative accuracy checks, interpretive validity, descriptive validity, theoretical validity, and evaluative validity. In many member checks, the interpretation and report is given to members of the sample (informants) in order to check the authenticity of the work. Their comments serve as a check on the viability of the interpretation.

Symbolic modeling is a therapeutic and coaching process developed by psychotherapists Penny Tompkins and James Lawley, based on the work of counselling psychologist David Grove. Using Grove's clean language, a progressive questioning technique using clients' exact words, the facilitator works with a client's self-generating metaphors to clarify personal beliefs, goals, and conflicts, and to bring about meaningful change. Because of its reliance on emergence and self-organization it has been called a "post-modern oriented therapeutic approach".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Misinformation effect</span> Effect of later events on a previous memory

The misinformation effect occurs when a person's recall of episodic memories becomes less accurate because of post-event information. The misinformation effect has been studied since the mid-1970s. Elizabeth Loftus is one of the most influential researchers in the field. One theory is that original information and the misleading information that was presented after the fact become blended together. Another theory is that the misleading information overwrites the original information. Scientists suggest that because the misleading information is the most recent, it is more easily retrieved.

Thematic analysis is one of the most common forms of analysis within qualitative research. It emphasizes identifying, analysing and interpreting patterns of meaning within qualitative data. Thematic analysis is often understood as a method or technique in contrast to most other qualitative analytic approaches – such as grounded theory, discourse analysis, narrative analysis and interpretative phenomenological analysis – which can be described as methodologies or theoretically informed frameworks for research. Thematic analysis is best thought of as an umbrella term for a variety of different approaches, rather than a singular method. Different versions of thematic analysis are underpinned by different philosophical and conceptual assumptions and are divergent in terms of procedure. Leading thematic analysis proponents, psychologists Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke distinguish between three main types of thematic analysis: coding reliability approaches, code book approaches and reflexive approaches. They first described their own widely used approach in 2006 in the journal Qualitative Research in Psychology as reflexive thematic analysis. This paper has over 120,000 Google Scholar citations and according to Google Scholar is the most cited academic paper published in 2006. The popularity of this paper exemplifies the growing interest in thematic analysis as a distinct method.

The descriptive phenomenological method in psychology was developed by the American psychologist Amedeo Giorgi in the early 1970s. Giorgi based his method on principles laid out by philosophers like Edmund Husserl and Maurice Merleau-Ponty as well as what he had learned from his prior professional experience in psychophysics. Giorgi was an early pioneer of the humanistic psychology movement, the use of phenomenology in psychology, and qualitative research in psychology, and to this day continues to advocate for the importance of a human science approach to psychological subject matter. Giorgi has directed over 100 dissertations that have used the Descriptive Phenomenological Method on a wide variety of psychological problems, and he has published over 100 articles on the phenomenological approach to psychology.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Interview (research)</span> Research technique

An interview in qualitative research is a conversation where questions are asked to elicit information. The interviewer is usually a professional or paid researcher, sometimes trained, who poses questions to the interviewee, in an alternating series of usually brief questions and answers. They can be contrasted with focus groups in which an interviewer questions a group of people and observes the resulting conversation between interviewees, or surveys which are more anonymous and limit respondents to a range of predetermined answer choices. In addition, there are special considerations when interviewing children. In phenomenological or ethnographic research, interviews are used to uncover the meanings of central themes in the life world of the subjects from their own point of view.

References