Page 230 -

218 CHAPTER 8 Interviews and focus groups

Online interviews and focus groups are often easy to record. Email programs save
both sent and received messages, and instant-messaging programs generally record
transcripts of all comments. These running logs can be quite helpful for reviewing
and interpreting the conversation, even while it is still in progress. For example, the
interviewer can review the conversation to verify that all appropriate topics have been
covered. Another possibility would be to use the respondents' previous comments to
ask for further clarification: “Earlier, you said….” Reviewing these comments can
also help the interviewer ask repetitive questions. At the close of a discussion, you
might ask the interviewee to review the logs to see if there are any final comments
that she would like to add to the conversation (Voida et al., 2004).
Contextual feedback in email and chat interviews may be even more impover-
ished than with telephone interviews, as these text-only exchanges lack both the vi-
sual feedback of face-to-face meetings and the audio information generally available
on telephone calls. Many participants may be multitasking and perhaps carrying on
other instant-messaging conversations during the course of an online interview (Voida
et al., 2004). Text-based interviews via chat or email may lead to very different types
of responses, as some respondents will be more formal than they might be in person.
This is particularly the case for email, as some might take time to carefully organize
thoughts. Different expectations of pacing may also influence the content and quality
of responses. In a face-to-face conversation, we rarely pause for 30 s or one minute
before responding to a question. Online chats, by contrast, frequently have delays of
several minutes, and who among us hasn't let several days go by without respond-
ing to an email? This delay can be constructive in allowing for consideration of the
question, but it might also contribute to distraction and half-hearted answers. Delays
might indicate other potentially interesting behavior, including revision of initial re-
sponses. Many chat programs provide visual indicators of activity, such as a series
of dots indicating that the person is typing. If a participant in an instant-messaging
conversation provides a short answer after having been typing for quite some time,
you might consider asking them to clarify their thinking (Voida et al., 2004).
Pacing in online interviews is also a challenge. Going too slowly might cause par-
ticipants to lose focus and interest, but moving too quickly might prove unnerving.
Expecting participants to respond to emailed interview questions within a matter of
minutes is probably unrealistic. Online messaging need not always be instant. Given
the breaks that seem to occur naturally in instant-messaging conversations, taking
some time to rephrase a question or consider a response may be quite appropriate. On
the other hand, cutting and pasting a question from an interview script into a messag-
ing client may seem a bit too quick (Voida et al., 2004).
Online focus groups also lessen the presence of moderators—instead of being a
powerful presence at the front of the room, the moderator is reduced to simply be-
ing another voice or line on the chat screen. This may reduce participant fear that
the moderator may somehow disapprove of them or their comments (Walston and
Lissitz, 2000).
In some studies, respondents using computer-based systems have reported a
higher frequency of socially undesirable behavior, as compared to those participating