Interviews | AQA A-Level Psychology Revision

For 7182 specification, first teach in September 2025

AQA A-Level Psychology | Free Revision Notes

Estimated study time: 45 minutes

These Interviews A-Level Psychology revision notes explain how psychologists collect self-report data through structured and unstructured conversations. You will learn how question wording, interviewer behaviour, recording and ethical procedures affect the quality of the evidence collected. The page also compares the reliability, validity and practical demands of each format. Interviews build on written self-report techniques and connect with later lessons on participant and researcher influences and consistency in psychological measurement.

Learning Objectives 🎯

By the end of this revision page, you should be able to:

• Define an interview as a self-report technique.

• Distinguish structured and unstructured interviews.

• Explain how an interview schedule is designed.

• Explain how interviews should be conducted and recorded.

• Identify suitable interview questions and prompts.

• Evaluate the strengths and limitations of structured interviews.

• Evaluate the strengths and limitations of unstructured interviews.

• Apply methodological evaluation to an unfamiliar interview study.

Revision Notes 📚

Interviews A-Level Psychology revision overview

An interview is a self-report technique in which a researcher asks a participant questions and records their answers.

Interviews can be used to investigate:

• Behaviour.

• Attitudes.

• Beliefs.

• Opinions.

• Experiences.

• Feelings.

• Reasons for actions.

Unlike a questionnaire, an interview normally involves direct interaction between the researcher and participant.

This interaction may occur:

• Face to face.

• By telephone.

• Through an online video call.

• Using another form of direct verbal communication.

The AQA specification requires knowledge of two types:

• Structured interviews

• Unstructured interviews

Students should understand how they differ and be aware of their strengths and limitations.

Source boundary

The AQA specification identifies structured and unstructured interviews as required self-report techniques. It does not prescribe a particular interview schedule or a mandatory procedure.

The guidance below therefore focuses on general research-method principles needed to design, conduct and evaluate these two named interview formats.

Interviews as self-report techniques

A self-report technique is a research method in which participants provide information about themselves.

In an interview, participants may report:

• What they have done.

• What they believe.

• How they felt.

• Why they acted in a particular way.

• What they remember about an event.

• How they interpret an experience.

This allows psychologists to investigate information that cannot be directly observed.

For example, a researcher cannot directly observe:

• Whether someone believes that examinations are fair.

• Why a student stopped attending a club.

• How a person interpreted a stressful experience.

• Whether someone feels confident about university.

These ideas can be explored by asking participants to explain their experiences.

Interviews and questionnaires compared

Interviews and questionnaires are both self-report methods, but they collect information differently.

Interview	Questionnaire
Questions are asked by an interviewer	Questions are normally read by the participant
Direct interaction takes place	Researcher may not be present
Answers may be clarified or explored	Clarification may be difficult
Interviewer behaviour may affect responses	Interviewer effects may be reduced
Usually requires more time per participant	Can often be given to many people quickly
Verbal answers may need recording and transcription	Written answers are already recorded

The construction of written self-report items is covered in open and closed questionnaire items.

Interviews are not automatically experiments

An interview is a technique for collecting data.

It does not necessarily involve:

• Manipulating an independent variable.

• Creating experimental conditions.

• Measuring cause and effect.

For example:

A psychologist interviews students about their experiences of starting sixth form.

This is an interview study but not necessarily an experiment.

An interview could also be used within an experiment.

For example:

1. Participants complete one of two tasks.

2. The researcher interviews them afterwards.

3. Their interview answers are used as the dependent-variable data.

The overall research method and the data-collection technique should therefore be identified separately.

Structured interviews

What is a structured interview?

A structured interview uses a predetermined set of questions.

Each participant is normally asked:

• The same questions.

• Using the same wording.

• In the same order.

• With the same instructions.

• Under similar conditions.

The interviewer follows an interview schedule, which is a planned list of questions and instructions.

The aim is to standardise the procedure so that participants’ answers can be compared fairly.

Example of a structured interview

A psychologist investigating revision habits might ask every participant:

1. During the past seven days, on how many days did you revise psychology?

2. Which revision method did you use most often?

3. How confident do you feel about your next psychology examination?

4. Did you use a revision timetable?

5. How many psychology practice questions did you complete?

The interviewer asks each question in the same way and records each answer using a standard procedure.

Questions in a structured interview

A structured interview may contain:

• Open questions.

• Closed questions.

• A mixture of both.

It is incorrect to assume that structured interviews use only closed questions.

The structure comes from the standardised procedure, not solely from the question type.

For example, the following is an open question:

Explain the main reason why you use practice questions.

It can still form part of a structured interview if every participant is asked the question using the same wording and in the same position.

The interview schedule

An interview schedule is a prepared document setting out how the interview will be conducted.

It may contain:

• The introduction given to participants.

• The questions to be asked.

• The order of questions.

• Standard response options.

• Instructions for the interviewer.

• Approved prompts or clarifications.

• Procedures for recording answers.

• A closing statement.

• Debriefing information.

A clear interview schedule supports standardisation.

Standardised questions

Standardisation means keeping the procedure consistent.

In a structured interview, the interviewer should avoid:

• Rewording questions differently for different participants.

• Giving additional encouragement to selected participants.

• Explaining an item in different ways.

• Asking spontaneous follow-up questions only to some people.

• Reacting positively to particular answers.

• Skipping questions without a planned reason.

These differences could influence responses and reduce the fairness of the comparison.

Standardised prompts

A structured interview may allow standard prompts.

For example, if a participant gives no answer, the schedule might instruct the interviewer to say:

Please take your time. Could you give your best estimate?

Every participant who needs prompting should receive the same prompt.

This allows limited clarification without abandoning standardisation.

Recording structured interview responses

Closed responses may be recorded by:

• Ticking a category.

• Writing a number.

• Selecting a rating.

• Entering a code into a digital form.

Open responses may be:

• Written down.

• Audio recorded.

• Video recorded.

• Transcribed after the interview.

The recording method should be the same for all participants.

Permission should be obtained before making audio or video recordings.

Strength of structured interviews: standardisation

A major strength is that every participant receives a similar procedure.

This reduces variation caused by:

• Different wording.

• Different question order.

• Unequal prompting.

• Different explanations.

• Different interview lengths.

Differences in responses are therefore less likely to result from inconsistencies in the interview procedure.

Strength: reliability

Structured interviews may have high reliability because the same procedure can be repeated.

Another researcher can use:

• The same interview schedule.

• The same questions.

• The same response categories.

• The same instructions.

• The same scoring system.

If the interview produces similar findings when repeated, confidence in its consistency increases.

However, a procedure can be reliable without being valid. Consistently asking a poorly worded question will produce consistently weak evidence.

Strength: replication

A detailed interview schedule allows another researcher to reproduce the study closely.

Replication is particularly straightforward when:

• Questions are clearly worded.

• The order is fixed.

• Prompts are specified.

• Closed responses are coded consistently.

• The setting and duration are standardised.

This supports psychology’s scientific emphasis on procedures that can be checked and repeated.

Strength: easy comparison

Participants’ answers are easier to compare because they respond to the same questions.

For example, researchers can compare:

• The percentage answering yes.

• Mean rating scores.

• Frequency categories.

• Differences between groups.

• Changes across two assessment periods.

This can be useful when the research aim requires clear group comparisons.

Strength: efficient analysis

Structured interviews often produce data that can be organised quickly.

Closed responses can be:

• Counted.

• Converted into percentages.

• Displayed in tables.

• Presented in graphs.

• Analysed statistically.

Open responses are more difficult to analyse, but asking the same open questions still makes comparisons easier than in an unstructured interview.

Strength: interviewer training may be simpler

Interviewers can be trained to follow a clear schedule.

Training may focus on:

• Reading each question exactly.

• Using an appropriate neutral tone.

• Applying standard prompts.

• Recording responses accurately.

• Avoiding personal reactions.

• Following ethical procedures.

The clear structure may reduce variation between interviewers.

Limitation of structured interviews: limited detail

A fixed schedule may prevent the interviewer from exploring an important answer.

Suppose a participant says:

“I stopped revising because something happened at home.”

The interviewer may want to ask what happened and how it affected revision.

A highly structured procedure may not permit this follow-up.

Important information may therefore remain unexplored.

Limitation: unexpected topics may be missed

The researcher decides the questions before collecting data.

If the interview schedule overlooks an important factor, participants may have no opportunity to discuss it.

For example, a study of revision difficulties might ask about:

• Motivation.

• Time.

• Resources.

It might fail to ask about:

• Caring responsibilities.

• Disability.

• Lack of a suitable study space.

• Uncertainty about examination technique.

The structure can therefore restrict the evidence to the researcher’s original assumptions.

Limitation: reduced validity

Structured interviews may produce less valid accounts of complex experiences.

Participants may be forced to:

• Give short answers.

• Choose an imperfect category.

• Discuss topics in an unnatural order.

• Leave important explanations unspoken.

A participant’s response may fit the schedule without representing the full meaning of their experience.

Limitation: misunderstandings may remain

Although an interviewer is present, strict standardisation may limit how much explanation can be given.

A participant might misunderstand:

• A word.

• A time period.

• The response scale.

• The intention of the question.

If different explanations are given to different participants, standardisation is weakened.

Researchers should therefore pilot the schedule carefully before the main study.

Limitation: interaction still creates interviewer effects

A structured interview reduces but does not eliminate interviewer influence.

Participants can still respond to:

• Tone of voice.

• Facial expression.

• Body language.

• Perceived approval or disapproval.

• The interviewer’s manner.

• The social situation of being questioned.

The same written schedule may produce different responses when delivered by different interviewers.

Unstructured interviews

What is an unstructured interview?

An unstructured interview does not use a fixed set of questions that must be asked in a predetermined order.

The interviewer usually begins with:

• A research topic.

• A broad opening question.

• A set of themes to explore.

The direction then develops from the participant’s answers.

The interview may resemble a guided conversation.

Example of an unstructured interview

A psychologist investigating the transition to sixth form might begin by asking:

Tell me about your experience of starting sixth form.

The interviewer may then ask questions based on the answer.

For example:

What made that difficult?

How did your friendships change?

Could you explain what happened next?

How did that affect your schoolwork?

Different participants may therefore receive different questions and discuss different topics.

Unstructured does not mean unplanned

An unstructured interview should still have:

• A clear aim.

• A defined topic.

• Ethical procedures.

• A method of recording.

• An appropriate opening question.

• A plan for managing sensitive disclosures.

• A clear ending and debrief.

The interviewer does not simply talk about anything.

The flexibility concerns the exact wording, sequence and follow-up questions.

Open questions in unstructured interviews

Unstructured interviews usually rely heavily on open questions.

Examples include:

Describe your experience of preparing for examinations.

How did you feel when you received your results?

What happened after you joined the group?

Why was that experience important to you?

These questions encourage participants to:

• Speak in detail.

• Introduce relevant experiences.

• Explain their interpretation.

• Discuss unexpected ideas.

• Use their own language.

Follow-up questions

A major feature of unstructured interviews is the use of follow-up questions.

The interviewer may ask:

Could you explain that further?

What did you mean by that?

How did that affect you?

Can you give an example?

What happened next?

Follow-up questions allow the interviewer to explore the participant’s meaning rather than assuming what an answer means.

Probes

A probe is a prompt used to encourage a fuller or clearer answer.

A neutral probe might be:

Could you tell me more about that?

A leading probe would be:

That must have made you very angry, didn’t it?

The leading version suggests an emotion that the participant may not have experienced.

Probes should encourage detail without directing the answer.

Strength of unstructured interviews: rich data

Unstructured interviews can produce detailed qualitative data.

Participants may describe:

• Events.

• Feelings.

• Relationships.

• Reasons.

• Interpretations.

• Changes across time.

This can provide a fuller understanding than a score or brief fixed response.

Strength: participants can express their own meaning

Participants are not restricted to categories chosen by the researcher.

They can:

• Introduce topics they consider important.

• Explain how events are connected.

• Correct the interviewer’s assumptions.

• Describe unusual experiences.

• Use their own words.

This may improve validity because the evidence reflects the participant’s perspective more closely.

Strength: unexpected information

Flexible questioning can reveal factors the researcher had not predicted.

For example, a researcher investigating examination stress may expect participants to discuss:

• Revision.

• Grades.

• Time pressure.

Participants might instead emphasise:

• Family expectations.

• Comparison with friends.

• Travel difficulties.

• Fear of disappointing a teacher.

• Uncertainty about university.

These findings may lead to new hypotheses or later research.

Strength: answers can be clarified

If a participant gives an unclear answer, the interviewer can ask for:

• An example.

• An explanation.

• A definition.

• A fuller description.

This reduces the risk that the researcher will analyse an answer without understanding what the participant meant.

Strength: rapport

Rapport is a relationship of trust and understanding between the interviewer and participant.

An unstructured format may help rapport develop because:

• The interviewer listens to the participant.

• Questions respond to what the participant says.

• The discussion may feel less like a test.

• Participants have more control over the direction.

• The interviewer can show appropriate interest.

Good rapport may encourage honest and detailed responses.

However, excessive familiarity may also influence what participants say.

Strength: useful for unfamiliar or sensitive topics

An unstructured interview may be valuable when:

• Little is known about a topic.

• Experiences vary greatly.

• Individual meaning is important.

• Researchers do not yet know which questions matter most.

• A fixed set of response categories would be too restrictive.

Care is still needed when discussing sensitive experiences.

Flexibility should not become pressure to disclose information the participant does not wish to share.

Limitation of unstructured interviews: low standardisation

Participants may receive:

• Different questions.

• Different wording.

• Different prompts.

• Different interview lengths.

• Different levels of encouragement.

• Different topic sequences.

This makes it difficult to determine whether differences in answers reflect:

• Genuine differences between participants.

• Differences in how the interview was conducted.

Limitation: difficult to replicate

Another researcher may find it difficult to reproduce the interview.

The direction depends on:

• The participant’s answers.

• The interviewer’s decisions.

• The relationship that develops.

• The particular follow-up questions used.

Even the same interviewer might conduct the interview differently on another occasion.

This reduces replicability.

Limitation: lower reliability

The lack of standardisation may reduce reliability.

Different interviewers might:

• Focus on different topics.

• Interpret answers differently.

• Ask different follow-up questions.

• Record different levels of detail.

The findings may depend heavily on who conducted the interview.

Limitation: interviewer effects

Unstructured interviews create considerable opportunity for interviewer effects.

The interviewer may influence answers through:

• Tone.

• Facial expressions.

• Body language.

• Choice of follow-up question.

• Interruptions.

• Showing approval.

• Expressing surprise.

• Spending longer on particular topics.

For example, if an interviewer responds enthusiastically to criticism of school rules, the participant may provide more criticism.

The data may then reflect both the participant’s experiences and the interviewer’s reactions.

Limitation: interviewer bias

Interviewer bias occurs when expectations influence the way questions are asked or answers are interpreted.

A researcher who expects social media to increase anxiety may:

• Ask more follow-up questions about negative experiences.

• Spend less time exploring positive experiences.

• Interpret ambiguous responses negatively.

• Select quotations that support the hypothesis.

This threatens validity.

Limitation: analysis is time-consuming

Unstructured interviews may produce:

• Long audio recordings.

• Lengthy transcripts.

• Large amounts of descriptive data.

• Different topics across participants.

Researchers may need to:

• Transcribe every interview.

• Read transcripts repeatedly.

• Develop categories or themes.

• Code sections of text.

• Compare interpretations.

• Select representative examples.

This requires considerable time and researcher judgement.

Interview transcripts may be analysed using coding and behavioural themes.

Limitation: difficult comparison

Participants may discuss different topics in different levels of detail.

One participant may speak for 40 minutes about schoolwork.

Another may focus mainly on friendships.

Direct comparison becomes difficult because they have not answered the same set of questions.

This may be appropriate for understanding individual experience but less suitable when the aim is to calculate clear group differences.

Limitation: requires skilled interviewers

An unstructured interviewer must be able to:

• Listen carefully.

• Ask relevant follow-up questions.

• Avoid leading the participant.

• Maintain the research focus.

• Manage silence.

• Respond appropriately to emotion.

• Recognise ethical concerns.

• Avoid imposing personal views.

Weak interviewing may produce superficial, biased or irrelevant data.

Limitation: time and cost

Unstructured interviews may be lengthy.

Researchers must allow time for:

• Arranging appointments.

• Conducting each interview.

• Building rapport.

• Recording responses.

• Transcribing recordings.

• Analysing qualitative data.

This may limit the number of participants who can be included.

A smaller sample can restrict generalisation.

Structured and unstructured interviews compared

Feature	Structured interview	Unstructured interview
Questions	Predetermined	Develop from participant responses
Order	Usually fixed	Flexible
Wording	Standardised	May vary
Follow-up questions	Limited or standardised	Used freely where relevant
Interviewer control	High	Lower
Participant freedom	More restricted	Greater
Typical data	Often quantitative, but may include qualitative data	Usually qualitative
Detail	Usually lower	Usually higher
Comparison	Easier	More difficult
Reliability	Usually higher	Usually lower
Validity	May be limited by fixed questions	May be higher for personal meaning
Replication	Easier	More difficult
Analysis	Usually quicker	Usually slower
Interviewer effects	Reduced but still possible	Greater opportunity for influence

A direct distinction

A strong distinction might state:

A structured interview uses a predetermined set of questions asked in a standard order, whereas an unstructured interview develops more flexibly from the participant’s answers and allows the interviewer to ask individual follow-up questions.

This is stronger than saying:

Structured interviews are strict and unstructured interviews are relaxed.

The stronger answer identifies the methodological difference precisely.

Designing an interview

Begin with the research aim

The researcher must first decide exactly what the interview should investigate.

For example:

To investigate students’ experiences of moving from GCSE to A-Level study.

The aim determines:

• Who should be interviewed.

• Which topics are relevant.

• Whether a structured or unstructured format is suitable.

• What type of data is needed.

• How the answers will be analysed.

Questions that do not contribute to the aim should be removed.

Selecting the interview format

A structured interview may be suitable when the researcher wants:

• Standardised data.

• Direct comparisons.

• A larger sample.

• Numerical responses.

• Easier replication.

• A shorter interview.

An unstructured interview may be suitable when the researcher wants:

• Detailed personal accounts.

• Unexpected information.

• Participant-led explanations.

• Exploration of an unfamiliar topic.

• Greater flexibility.

• Rich qualitative data.

Writing a structured interview schedule

A structured schedule may include:

1. A standard introduction.

2. Confirmation of consent.

3. Simple opening questions.

4. Questions addressing the main aim.

5. Approved prompts.

6. Sensitive questions later in the interview.

7. A standard closing question.

8. A debrief.

9. A procedure for recording and scoring responses.

The schedule should be tested through a small-scale trial of the procedure.

Planning an unstructured interview

An unstructured interview may begin with a topic guide rather than a fixed list.

The guide could include:

• A broad opening question.

• Key areas that should be explored.

• Neutral prompts.

• Topics that may be sensitive.

• Procedures for managing distress.

• A closing question.

• Debriefing information.

The interviewer may cover the topics in different orders depending on what each participant says.

Question wording

Interview questions should be:

• Clear.

• Concise.

• Relevant.

• Neutral.

• Appropriate for the participant.

• Focused on one issue.

• Free from unnecessary technical language.

Poor question:

Don’t you think excessive homework causes unnecessary stress?

This is leading because it suggests the expected answer.

Improved question:

How, if at all, does homework affect your stress?

The improved wording allows:

• Positive effects.

• Negative effects.

• No effect.

• A detailed explanation.

Avoid double-barrelled questions

A double-barrelled question asks about two issues at once.

Poor question:

How useful and enjoyable do you find group revision?

A participant may find group revision useful but not enjoyable.

Improved questions:

How useful do you find group revision?

How enjoyable do you find group revision?

Each response now measures one issue.

Avoid double negatives

Poor question:

Do you disagree that revision sessions should not be compulsory?

The wording is confusing because it combines two negatives.

Improved question:

Should revision sessions be compulsory?

• Yes

• No

• Unsure

Avoid vague wording

Poor question:

Do you revise regularly?

“Regularly” may mean:

• Every day.

• Every week.

• Before assessments.

• Whenever homework is set.

Improved question:

During the past seven days, on how many days did you revise psychology?

The improved question specifies a measurable period.

Avoid assumptions

Poor question:

Why did your revision timetable improve your grades?

This assumes that:

• The participant used a timetable.

• Their grades improved.

• The timetable caused the improvement.

An improved sequence would begin:

Did you use a revision timetable before your most recent assessment?

If yes:

How useful, if at all, did you find the timetable?

Use suitable open questions

A suitable open question:

• Addresses the aim.

• Allows participants to answer in their own words.

• Does not suggest the desired answer.

• Encourages an appropriate amount of detail.

Example:

Describe one challenge you experienced when beginning A-Level study.

Use suitable closed questions

A suitable closed question should have:

• Complete response options.

• Non-overlapping categories.

• Clear labels.

• A balanced scale where appropriate.

Example:

How confident did you feel during your first month of A-Level study?

• 1: Not at all confident

• 2: Slightly confident

• 3: Moderately confident

• 4: Very confident

• 5: Extremely confident

Question order

The order of questions can affect the interview.

A suitable sequence may be:

1. Clear introduction.

2. Simple factual questions.

3. General questions about the topic.

4. More detailed questions.

5. Sensitive questions later.

6. A final opportunity to add information.

7. Debriefing.

Beginning with highly personal questions may make participants uncomfortable and damage rapport.

Order effects within an interview

Earlier questions may influence later answers.

For example, asking participants to list stressful experiences before rating school satisfaction could make negative experiences more accessible.

Researchers should consider whether question order could:

• Suggest the hypothesis.

• Prime particular memories.

• Create a negative or positive mood.

• Make later answers less independent.

In a structured interview, every participant should normally receive the same order.

Designing prompts

Prompts should encourage participants without suggesting a particular answer.

Neutral prompt:

Could you explain what you mean?

Leading prompt:

Do you mean that your teacher was unsupportive?

The leading prompt introduces an interpretation that the participant did not necessarily intend.

Planning how responses will be recorded

Researchers should decide in advance whether answers will be:

• Written by the interviewer.

• Entered into a digital form.

• Audio recorded.

• Video recorded.

• Coded using predetermined categories.

• Transcribed and analysed later.

The recording method affects:

• Accuracy.

• Time.

• Cost.

• Privacy.

• Participant behaviour.

• The form of later analysis.

Audio recording

Audio recording can provide an accurate account of what was said.

It allows:

• Exact wording to be checked.

• The interviewer to focus on listening.

• Interviews to be transcribed.

• Other researchers to check coding.

However:

• Consent is required.

• Participants may become self-conscious.

• Equipment can fail.

• Transcription takes time.

• Voices may reveal participants’ identities.

Video recording

Video recording captures:

• Spoken answers.

• Pauses.

• Facial expressions.

• Body language.

However, it creates greater ethical and practical demands because participants are easily identifiable.

Researchers must consider:

• Informed consent.

• Secure storage.

• Who can view the recording.

• How long it will be retained.

• Whether video is genuinely necessary.

Note-taking

An interviewer may write notes during the discussion.

This is practical and inexpensive, but:

• Answers may be summarised inaccurately.

• Exact wording may be lost.

• Writing may interrupt eye contact.

• The interviewer may miss later information.

• Participants may wonder what is being recorded.

A clear procedure is needed to ensure consistency.

Conducting an interview

Creating an appropriate setting

The interview should take place in an environment that is:

• Quiet.

• Private where necessary.

• Free from unnecessary interruptions.

• Accessible.

• Safe.

• Comfortable.

• Suitable for recording.

A public or noisy location may prevent participants from answering honestly or being heard accurately.

Providing information

Before the interview, participants should receive enough information to make an informed choice.

They should understand:

• The general nature of the research.

• What participation involves.

• How long the interview will take.

• Whether it will be recorded.

• How their data will be used.

• Their right to withdraw.

• How confidentiality will be protected.

These requirements connect with ethical principles in research.

Obtaining informed consent

Participants should normally consent before the interview begins.

Consent should cover:

• Participation.

• Recording where relevant.

• Use of anonymised quotations.

• Storage of data.

• The right to stop the interview.

Consent to be interviewed does not automatically mean consent to every possible use of the recording.

Building rapport

The interviewer can help participants feel comfortable by:

• Introducing themselves clearly.

• Explaining the procedure.

• Listening without unnecessary interruption.

• Using an appropriate tone.

• Avoiding judgemental reactions.

• Allowing time to answer.

• Treating participants respectfully.

Rapport should support honest communication without encouraging the interviewer to become biased or over-involved.

Maintaining neutrality

The interviewer should avoid communicating that one answer is preferred.

They should not:

• Praise selected responses.

• Show shock or amusement.

• Argue with the participant.

• Complete answers for them.

• Express personal opinions.

• Use a disapproving tone.

• Ask leading follow-up questions.

Neutral behaviour reduces interviewer effects.

Allowing time to answer

Participants may need time to:

• Remember an experience.

• Organise their thoughts.

• Discuss an emotional topic.

• Decide whether they wish to answer.

The interviewer should not interpret every silence as a failure to respond.

However, excessive pressure to answer may create discomfort and reduce validity.

Managing sensitive topics

If the interview concerns sensitive experiences, the researcher should decide in advance:

• Whether the question is necessary.

• How it will be worded.

• Whether participants can skip it.

• What support information will be provided.

• What the interviewer should do if distress occurs.

• When confidentiality might have limits.

The interviewer should not pressure participants to provide more detail than they wish to share.

Ending the interview

The interview should have a clear ending.

The interviewer may ask:

Is there anything else relevant to the topic that you would like to add?

Participants should then be:

• Thanked.

• Debriefed.

• Reminded of confidentiality.

• Told how to withdraw their data where possible.

• Given appropriate support information if the topic was sensitive.

Interviewer effects

What are interviewer effects?

Interviewer effects occur when features of the interviewer or their behaviour influence participants’ responses.

Possible influences include:

• Tone of voice.

• Facial expression.

• Body language.

• Apparent approval.

• Question wording.

• Use of prompts.

• Interruptions.

• The relationship established with the participant.

These effects may occur in both structured and unstructured interviews.

They are usually more difficult to control in unstructured interviews because the interviewer makes more decisions during the discussion.

Example of an interviewer effect

Suppose a participant says:

“I sometimes use social media when I should be revising.”

Interviewer A responds:

“That is understandable. Could you explain when that usually happens?”

Interviewer B responds with a disapproving expression and asks:

“Don’t you think that is irresponsible?”

The participant may give different answers depending on which interviewer is present.

The interview is no longer measuring only the participant’s behaviour.

Reducing interviewer effects

Researchers may:

• Train interviewers.

• Use standardised instructions.

• Use a fixed schedule.

• Prepare neutral prompts.

• Avoid showing approval or disapproval.

• Record interviews.

• Review interviewer behaviour.

• Use the same interviewer for all participants where practical.

Using one interviewer may improve consistency, but that interviewer’s personal influence could affect every participant.

Participant response biases

Social desirability

Social desirability occurs when participants give answers that present themselves favourably.

They may underreport:

• Rule-breaking.

• Prejudice.

• Dishonest behaviour.

• Lack of revision.

• Socially disapproved attitudes.

They may overreport:

• Helping.

• Exercise.

• Studying.

• Healthy behaviour.

• Socially approved attitudes.

The face-to-face nature of an interview may make social desirability stronger than in an anonymous questionnaire.

Demand characteristics

Participants may guess the interview’s aim from:

• Repeated topics.

• The wording of questions.

• The interviewer’s reactions.

• The organisation conducting the study.

• The information given beforehand.

They may then alter their answers to support or resist the expected conclusion.

These influences are explored in Demand characteristics and investigator effects.

Memory and recall

Interview answers may depend on participants remembering earlier events.

Recall may be:

• Incomplete.

• Reconstructed.

• Influenced by later experiences.

• Affected by the wording of the question.

• Less accurate for distant events.

An interviewer can ask for clarification, but cannot guarantee that the memory itself is accurate.

Acquiescence

Some participants may tend to agree with statements regardless of their true opinion.

For example, they may answer “yes” because:

• They want to be cooperative.

• They feel uncomfortable disagreeing.

• They believe agreement is expected.

Balanced questions and neutral interviewer behaviour can reduce this problem.

Reliability of interviews

Structured interview reliability

Structured interviews may be more reliable because:

• Questions are standardised.

• The order is fixed.

• Prompts can be prescribed.

• Responses may be coded consistently.

• The procedure can be replicated.

However, reliability may still be affected by:

• Different interviewer tones.

• Different interpretations.

• Participant mood.

• Changes in the setting.

• Ambiguous questions.

Unstructured interview reliability

Unstructured interviews are usually less reliable because:

• Questions vary.

• Follow-up decisions vary.

• Interview length varies.

• Different topics are explored.

• Analysis requires interpretation.

Low reliability does not mean that the data have no value.

The method may prioritise depth and personal meaning rather than exact consistency.

Improving reliability

Interview reliability may be improved by:

• Piloting questions.

• Training interviewers.

• Using clear wording.

• Standardising the setting.

• Recording responses.

• Developing coding categories.

• Having more than one researcher code transcripts.

• Comparing agreement between coders.

The broader principles are covered in Reliability.

Validity of interviews

Potential for high validity

Interviews may produce valid data because participants can:

• Explain answers.

• Ask for clarification.

• Correct misunderstandings.

• Give examples.

• Describe complex experiences.

• Express ideas in their own words.

Unstructured interviews may be particularly strong when personal meaning is central to the research question.

Threats to validity

Validity may be reduced by:

• Leading questions.

• Interviewer effects.

• Social desirability.

• Demand characteristics.

• Poor recall.

• Lack of privacy.

• Fear that answers will not remain confidential.

• Participants giving answers they believe are expected.

The presence of detailed answers does not automatically mean that those answers are truthful or accurate.

The distinction between apparent detail and accurate measurement is explored in Validity.

Quantitative and qualitative interview data

Quantitative data

Structured interviews often produce quantitative data through:

• Yes or no responses.

• Rating scales.

• Frequency categories.

• Numerical estimates.

• Multiple-choice items.

These data are easy to:

• Count.

• Compare.

• Summarise.

• Display.

• Analyse statistically.

Qualitative data

Unstructured interviews usually produce qualitative data through:

• Descriptions.

• Explanations.

• Personal accounts.

• Examples.

• Reasons.

• Narratives.

These data can provide depth and context.

However, they are more difficult to summarise objectively.

The differences between these forms of evidence are examined in Quantitative and qualitative data.

Structured interviews can produce qualitative data

A structured interview may contain open questions.

For example:

Describe one difficulty you experienced during your first term.

If every participant receives this question in the same order, the interview remains structured even though the answer is qualitative.

Unstructured interviews may include numerical information

An unstructured interview may contain some numerical questions.

For example:

Approximately how many hours did you study that week?

The overall format remains unstructured if the discussion develops flexibly.

Question type and interview structure should not be confused.

Analysing interview responses

Analysing closed responses

Closed responses may be:

• Counted.

• Converted into frequencies.

• Converted into percentages.

• Compared between groups.

• Used to calculate averages where appropriate.

Researchers should decide on the scoring system before conducting the interview.

Analysing open responses

Open responses may be transcribed and organised into categories or themes.

A possible procedure is:

1. Record the interview.

2. Produce a transcript.

3. Read the transcript.

4. Identify recurring ideas.

5. Develop coding categories.

6. Apply categories consistently.

7. Compare patterns across participants.

This is a form of Content analysis.

Problems with coding interview data

Coding may be affected by:

• Researcher expectations.

• Ambiguous categories.

• Different interpretations.

• Selective use of quotations.

• Loss of context.

• Overlapping themes.

Researchers can improve consistency by:

• Defining categories clearly.

• Training coders.

• Using more than one coder.

• Comparing coding decisions.

• Retaining examples of each category.

Ethical issues in interviews

Informed consent

Participants should know:

• That they are being interviewed for research.

• The broad nature of the topic.

• How long the interview will take.

• Whether it will be recorded.

• How their responses will be used.

• Their right to withdraw.

Confidentiality

Interview data may contain sensitive or identifying information.

Researchers should:

• Remove names.

• Use participant codes.

• Store recordings securely.

• Limit access to transcripts.

• Avoid identifiable quotations.

• Explain how long data will be retained.

• Report findings without revealing identities.

Privacy

Interviews should normally occur in a setting where participants cannot be overheard.

A lack of privacy may:

• Prevent honest answers.

• Cause embarrassment.

• Reveal sensitive information.

• Reduce validity.

• Breach confidentiality.

Protection from harm

Questions may produce:

• Distress.

• Embarrassment.

• Anxiety.

• Unwanted memories.

• Concern about how answers will be judged.

Researchers should avoid unnecessary intrusion and should stop or redirect the interview if continuing could cause harm.

Right to withdraw

Participants should be allowed to:

• Refuse a particular question.

• Pause the interview.

• End the interview.

• Request removal of their data where possible.

The interviewer should not pressure participants to continue.

Debriefing

Afterwards, researchers should explain:

• The purpose of the study.

• How the data will be used.

• Any information withheld earlier.

• How confidentiality will be maintained.

• How to withdraw data.

• Where to obtain support if necessary.

Practical issues

Time

Interviews require time for:

• Recruiting participants.

• Arranging appointments.

• Conducting the interview.

• Recording answers.

• Transcribing.

• Coding.

• Analysing.

Unstructured interviews are usually more time-consuming than structured interviews.

Cost

Possible costs include:

• Interviewer training.

• Travel.

• Room hire.

• Recording equipment.

• Transcription.

• Data storage.

• Staff time.

A questionnaire may collect information from a much larger sample using fewer resources.

Sample size

Because interviews are time-consuming, studies may use smaller samples.

This can reduce the extent to which findings generalise to a wider population.

Structured interviews may allow a larger sample because they are usually shorter and easier to analyse.

Access to participants

Some participants may be difficult to interview because of:

• Location.

• Availability.

• Communication needs.

• The sensitivity of the topic.

• Gatekeepers such as schools or organisations.

• Concern about being recorded.

Researchers should design procedures that are accessible and appropriate for the intended sample.

Transcription

A transcript is a written record of spoken interview data.

Producing transcripts can be demanding because researchers must decide whether to include:

• Every spoken word.

• Pauses.

• Repeated phrases.

• Laughter.

• Hesitation.

• Non-verbal behaviour.

The required level of detail should reflect the research aim.

Selecting an appropriate interview format

When a structured interview may be appropriate

Choose a structured interview when:

• Clear comparisons are required.

• The sample is relatively large.

• The research needs numerical data.

• Reliability is important.

• Several interviewers are collecting data.

• The study needs to be replicated.

• Interview time is limited.

Example:

A psychologist wants to compare how frequently Year 12 and Year 13 students use different revision methods.

A structured interview would allow every student to receive the same frequency questions.

When an unstructured interview may be appropriate

Choose an unstructured interview when:

• Detailed experience is important.

• Little is known about the topic.

• Participant meaning is central.

• Individual experiences differ greatly.

• Unexpected information is valuable.

• The researcher wants to develop new explanations.

Example:

A psychologist wants to understand students’ personal experiences of returning to education after a long absence.

An unstructured interview would allow each participant to explain their individual circumstances.

Applying interviews to research scenarios

Scenario: revision habits

A psychologist wants to compare the revision habits of 200 students.

A structured interview may be appropriate because:

• The same questions can be asked.

• Responses can be coded numerically.

• Groups can be compared.

• Interview time can be limited.

• The procedure can be replicated.

A questionnaire might be more efficient, but an interview allows the researcher to clarify questions.

Scenario: experience of school transition

A psychologist wants to understand how individual students experienced the move to a new school.

An unstructured interview may be appropriate because:

• Experiences may vary widely.

• Students can discuss issues important to them.

• The researcher can ask follow-up questions.

• Unexpected themes can be identified.

However, analysis will be time-consuming and interviewer effects may reduce validity.

Scenario: comparing confidence ratings

A researcher wants to compare confidence before and after an examination-skills course.

A structured interview using a standard rating scale may be appropriate.

The same question could be asked before and after the course:

How confident do you feel about answering extended psychology questions?

• 1: Not at all confident

• 2: Slightly confident

• 3: Moderately confident

• 4: Very confident

• 5: Extremely confident

Standardisation allows the two sets of responses to be compared.

Scenario: exploring a sensitive experience

A psychologist wants to investigate students’ experiences of severe examination anxiety.

An unstructured interview may provide depth, but the researcher should consider:

• Whether the interviewer is appropriately trained.

• How distress will be managed.

• Whether questions are necessary.

• Whether participants can skip questions.

• How confidentiality will be protected.

• What support information will be available.

Methodological value does not override ethical responsibility.

A method for answering interview-design questions

Step 1: Identify the aim

State what information the interview must collect.

Step 2: Select the format

Choose:

• Structured for standardised comparison.

• Unstructured for depth and exploration.

Step 3: Write suitable questions

Questions should be:

• Clear.

• Neutral.

• Relevant.

• Focused on one issue.

• Appropriate for the participant.

Step 4: Plan prompts

Use neutral prompts that encourage clarification without suggesting an answer.

Step 5: Decide the order

Begin with accessible questions and place sensitive questions later where appropriate.

Step 6: Plan recording

State whether responses will be:

• Written down.

• Coded.

• Audio recorded.

• Transcribed.

Step 7: Standardise where appropriate

For a structured interview, specify:

• Wording.

• Order.

• Instructions.

• Prompts.

• Scoring.

Step 8: Address ethics

Include:

• Consent.

• Confidentiality.

• Withdrawal.

• Protection from harm.

• Debriefing.

Step 9: Pilot the procedure

Test whether:

• Questions are understood.

• The interview takes an appropriate amount of time.

• Recording procedures work.

• Sensitive questions are handled appropriately.

• The resulting data address the aim.

Writing an effective evaluation paragraph

A developed evaluation of structured interviews might state:

One strength of structured interviews is their standardisation. Every participant receives the same questions in the same order, so differences in answers are less likely to result from variations in the procedure. This makes the study easier to replicate and can improve reliability. However, fixed questions may prevent the interviewer from exploring unexpected answers, so the data may lack the depth needed to understand complex experiences.

A developed evaluation of unstructured interviews might state:

One strength of unstructured interviews is that the interviewer can ask follow-up questions and clarify what the participant means. This may increase validity because participants can explain their experiences in detail rather than being restricted to predetermined responses. However, different participants may receive different questions, making the procedure difficult to replicate and reducing reliability.

Overall evaluation

Structured interviews are strongest when the priority is:

• Standardisation.

• Reliability.

• Replication.

• Comparison.

• Efficient analysis.

• Collection of quantitative data.

Their main limitations include:

• Restricted responses.

• Limited depth.

• Reduced flexibility.

• Possible misunderstanding.

• Interviewer effects despite standardisation.

Unstructured interviews are strongest when the priority is:

• Detail.

• Personal meaning.

• Flexibility.

• Clarification.

• Unexpected findings.

• Rich qualitative evidence.

Their main limitations include:

• Lower reliability.

• Difficulty replicating.

• Greater interviewer influence.

• Time-consuming transcription and analysis.

• Difficulty comparing participants.

• Need for highly skilled interviewers.

The most suitable format depends on the research aim.

A structured interview gains consistency but may lose detail.

An unstructured interview gains depth but may lose reliability and comparability.

Key Words 🔑

Key word	Student-friendly definition	How it may be used in an exam
Interview	A self-report technique in which a researcher asks questions and records a participant’s answers.	Define the method or identify how data were collected.
Self-report technique	A method in which participants provide information about themselves.	Explain the type of evidence produced by interviews.
Structured interview	An interview using predetermined questions asked in a standardised way.	Identify or evaluate a consistent interview procedure.
Unstructured interview	A flexible interview that develops from the participant’s answers.	Identify or evaluate an in-depth interview.
Interview schedule	A prepared list of questions, instructions and procedures for an interview.	Explain how a structured interview is designed.
Open question	A question allowing participants to answer in their own words.	Design an item producing qualitative data.
Closed question	A question providing predetermined response options.	Design an item producing quantitative data.
Follow-up question	A question based on an earlier answer that explores it further.	Explain a feature of unstructured interviews.
Probe	A prompt encouraging a participant to clarify or expand an answer.	Explain how detailed answers may be obtained.
Rapport	A relationship of trust and understanding between interviewer and participant.	Explain why participants may provide fuller answers.
Standardisation	Keeping instructions and procedures consistent.	Explain the reliability of structured interviews.
Interviewer effect	An influence of the interviewer or their behaviour on a participant’s answer.	Evaluate the validity of interview data.
Interviewer bias	The interviewer’s expectations influencing questions or interpretations.	Evaluate unstructured interviews.
Social desirability	Giving answers that create a favourable impression.	Explain why participants may not report honestly.
Demand characteristics	Cues that allow participants to guess the aim and alter their responses.	Evaluate the validity of interview answers.
Qualitative data	Descriptive information expressed in words.	Identify data commonly produced by unstructured interviews.
Quantitative data	Numerical information that can be counted or measured.	Identify data often produced by structured interviews.
Transcript	A written record of spoken interview data.	Explain how interview responses may be analysed.
Reliability	The consistency of a procedure or measure.	Compare structured and unstructured interviews.
Validity	The extent to which evidence measures what it claims to measure.	Evaluate detail, honesty and interviewer influence.
Pilot study	A small trial used to identify problems before the main investigation.	Explain how an interview schedule can be improved.
Informed consent	Agreement to participate after receiving sufficient information.	Explain an ethical requirement before interviewing.
Confidentiality	Protecting participants’ identities and personal information.	Explain how sensitive interview data should be managed.
Right to withdraw	The right to stop participating or request removal of data.	Explain an ethical safeguard during interviews.
Debriefing	Explaining the study fully after participation.	Explain how participants should be supported after the interview.

Common Mistakes ⚠️

Mistake: Saying that structured interviews use only closed questions.

Why this is incorrect:A structured interview can contain open or closed questions. Its defining feature is the standardised schedule.

How to improve:Focus on whether every participant receives the same questions in the same order.

Mistake: Saying that an unstructured interview has no aim or preparation.

Why this is incorrect:The interview still has a research aim, topic and ethical procedure.

How to improve:Describe it as flexible rather than unplanned.

Mistake: Saying that every participant receives identical questions in an unstructured interview.

Why this is incorrect:Questions and follow-ups develop from each participant’s responses.

How to improve:Explain that different participants may discuss different topics.

Mistake: Confusing an interview with a questionnaire.

Why this is incorrect:An interview normally involves direct interaction with an interviewer, while a questionnaire is usually completed by the participant in writing.

How to improve:Identify who presents the questions and whether direct interaction occurs.

Mistake: Describing an interview as an experiment.

Why this is incorrect:An interview is a data-collection technique and does not necessarily involve manipulation of an IV.

How to improve:Classify the overall method separately from the way responses are collected.

Mistake: Writing a leading interview question.

Why this is incorrect:Leading wording suggests the expected answer and may reduce validity.

How to improve:Use neutral language that allows different viewpoints.

Mistake: Asking about two issues in one question.

Why this is incorrect:A participant may have different views about each issue.

How to improve:Separate the item into two focused questions.

Mistake: Assuming that detailed answers must be truthful.

Why this is incorrect:Participants may still show social desirability, demand characteristics or inaccurate recall.

How to improve:Evaluate the accuracy of the account as well as its depth.

Mistake: Saying structured interviews eliminate interviewer effects.

Why this is incorrect:Tone, facial expression and manner may still influence answers.

How to improve:State that standardisation may reduce interviewer effects rather than remove them.

Mistake: Saying unstructured interviews are always more valid.

Why this is incorrect:Flexibility may improve depth, but leading prompts and interviewer bias may reduce validity.

How to improve:Explain how validity depends on the way the interview is conducted.

Mistake: Saying qualitative data cannot be collected in a structured interview.

Why this is incorrect:Predetermined open questions can produce qualitative responses.

How to improve:Separate the structure of the interview from the type of question asked.

Mistake: Saying unstructured interviews cannot produce numerical information.

Why this is incorrect:A flexible interview may still include occasional numerical questions.

How to improve:Identify the overall interview procedure rather than one response.

Mistake: Giving “easy to replicate” without explaining why.

Why this is incomplete:Evaluation should link replicability to fixed questions, wording, order and instructions.

How to improve:Explain the specific standardised features that can be repeated.

Mistake: Ignoring the need for interviewer training.

Why this is incorrect:Poor prompts, reactions or recording can influence responses and reduce validity.

How to improve:Explain how interviewers should be trained to remain neutral and follow the procedure.

Mistake: Recording an interview without considering consent.

Why this is incorrect:Audio and video recordings contain personal and potentially identifiable information.

How to improve:Obtain specific informed consent and explain how recordings will be stored and used.

Mistake: Selecting an unstructured interview only because it produces more information.

Why this is incomplete:More data are not always useful if the research needs standardised comparison.

How to improve:Choose the format according to the research aim and planned analysis.

Exam-Style Questions ✍️

Question 1

Which one of the following best describes a structured interview?

A. Participants choose which topics to discuss without researcher guidance

B. Each participant receives predetermined questions in a standardised way

C. The interviewer secretly observes participants’ behaviour

D. Participants complete written questions without an interviewer

[1 mark]

Question 2

Define an unstructured interview.

[2 marks]

Question 3

Explain one difference between a structured and an unstructured interview.

[3 marks]

Question 4

A psychologist wants to investigate how frequently students use different revision methods.

Write one suitable question for a structured interview.

[3 marks]

Question 5

A researcher begins an unstructured interview by asking:

Tell me about your experience of starting sixth form.

Write two suitable neutral follow-up questions.

[4 marks]

Question 6

Explain one strength and one limitation of structured interviews.

[6 marks]

Question 7

Explain one strength and one limitation of unstructured interviews.

[6 marks]

Question 8

A researcher interviews students about examination stress. During the interview, the researcher smiles and nods whenever a student criticises homework.

Explain how the researcher’s behaviour might affect the validity of the interview data.

[4 marks]

Question 9

A psychologist wants to explore the personal experiences of adults returning to education after a long absence.

Explain why an unstructured interview might be more suitable than a structured interview for this investigation.

[6 marks]

Question 10

A researcher plans to conduct structured interviews about students’ sleep habits.

Explain how the interviews should be designed and conducted to produce reliable and valid data.

[8 marks]