In this article we describe some of the challenges and constraints that students face when they engage in qualitative research interviews. We borrow extensively from Ron Pelias’ in-depth description of leaning in during everyday life encounters. Although he refers to other kinds of relationships, we believe that the similarities are too important to overlook when it comes to the qualitative research interview. We begin the discussion by identifying what we believe are the main challenges facing novice qualitative researchers. Issues of professional identities, objectivity, relational engagement, and inherited understandings of what counts as research are highlighted. This article will be useful for graduate students engaged in narrative, ethnographic, and auto-ethnographic methodologies as well as other inquiries that require deeply relational processes. Recommendations for the kinds of supervisory conversations that may be helpful are included.
AndersonH.GehartD. (2007). Collaborative therapy: Relationships and conversations that make a difference. New York, NY: Routledge.
2.
AndersonH.GoolishianH. (1992). The client is the expert: A not-knowing approach to therapy. In McNameeS.GergenK. (Eds.), Therapy as social construction (pp. 25-39). Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
3.
CaputoJ. (1997). Deconstruction in a nutshell: A conversation with Jacques Derrida. New York, NY: Fordham University Press.
4.
CaputoJ. (2000). More radical hermeneutics: On not knowing who we are. Bloomington: Indiana Press.
5.
ChenailR.DuffyM.St. GeorgeS.WulffD. (2009). Facilitating coherence across qualitative research papers. Weekly Qualitative Report, 2(6), 32-44.
6.
ChurchillS. D. (2000). ‘“Seeing through” self-deception in narrative reports: Finding psychological truth in problematic data. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 31(1), 44-62.
7.
ClandininD. J.ConnellyM. (2000). Narrative inquiry: Experience and story in qualitative research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
8.
DenzinN. (1997). Interpretive ethnography: Ethnographic practices for the 21st century. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
9.
FindlayL.GoughB. (2003). Reflexivity: A practical guide for researchers in health and human science. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
10.
FineM.PowellL.WeisL.MunWongL. (Eds.). (1997). Off white: Readings on race, power, and society. New York, NY: Routledge.
11.
FischerC. T. (2009, September). Psychotherapy research methods: Bracketing in qualitative research: Conceptual and practical matters: Psychotherapy research methods. Psychotherapy Research, 19, 583-590.
12.
FontanaA.FreyJ. H. (1994). Interviewing: The art of science. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 361-976). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
13.
GeertzC. (1973). Interpretation of cultures. Selected essays. New York, NY: Basic Books.
14.
GendlinE. T. (1997). Experiencing and the creation of meaning. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press. (Original work published 1961)
15.
GendlinE. T. (1997). A process model. New York, NY: The Focusing Institute.
16.
GergenK. J. (1996). Technology and the self: From the essential to the sublime. In GrodinD.LindlofT. (Eds.), Constructing the self in a mediated world (pp. 127-140). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
17.
GergenK. J. (2009). Relational being: Beyond self and community. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
18.
GergenK. J.GergenM. M. (1998). Narrative and the self as relationship. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 21, 17-56.
19.
GubriumJ.HolsteinJ. A. (2002). From the individual interview to the interview society. In GubriumJ. F.HolsteinJ. A. (Eds.), Handbook of interview research: Context and method (pp. 1-32). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
HollwayW.JeffersonT. (2000). Doing qualitative research differently: Free association, narrative and the interview method. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
22.
HolsteinJ. A.GubriumJ. F. (2004). The active interview. In SilvermanD. (Ed.), Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice (2nd ed., pp. 140-161). London, UK: SAGE.
23.
HoskinsM. (2000). Living research: The experience of researching self, other, and discourse. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 13, 47-66.
24.
HoskinsM. L. (2001). True grit and the new frontier: Cultivating new ground for psychological research. Qualitative Inquiry, 7, 659-675.
25.
HoskinsM. L. (2002). Towards new methodologies for constructivist research: Synthesizing knowledges for relational inquiries. In RaskinJ.BridgesS. (Eds.), Studies in meaning: Exploring constructivist psychology (pp. 225-246). New York, NY: Pace University Press.
26.
HoskinsM. L. (2011). Not knowing or knowing naught: The role of expertise in child and youth care practice. Child and Youth Services, 32(2), 124-134.
27.
HoskinsM.StoltzJ. (2003). Balancing on words: Human change processes in mediation. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 20, 331-349
28.
HoskinsM. L.StoltzJ. (2005). Fear of offending: Disclosing researcher discomfort when engaging in analysis. Qualitative Research, 5(1), 95-111.
29.
HoskinsM.WhiteJ. (2009). Processes of discernment when considering issues of child neglect in child protection. Child and Youth Care Forum, 39, 27-45.
30.
JosselsonR. (1996). On writing other people’s lives. In JosselsonR. (Ed.), Ethics and process in the narrative study of lives (pp. 4, 60-71). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
31.
JosselsonR.LieblichA.McAdamsD. (2003). Up close and personal: The teaching and learning of narrative research. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
32.
KvaleS. (1996). InterViews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
33.
LatherP. (2007). Getting lost: Feminist efforts towards a double(d) science. Albany: State University of New York Press.
34.
MahoneyM. J. (1991). Human change processes: The scientific foundations of psychotherapy. NY: Basic Books.
35.
McKnightJ. (1996). The careless society: Community and its counterfeits. New York, NY: Basic Books.
36.
MishlerE. (1986). Research interviewing: Context and narrative. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
37.
MoustakasC. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
38.
NakkulaM. J.RavitchS. M. (1998). Matters of interpretation: Reciprocal transformation in therapeutic and developmental relationships with youth. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
39.
NewburyJ. (2011). The case for theoretical inconsistency. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 10, 336-347.
40.
PeliasR. (2011). Leaning: A poetics of personal relations. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
41.
RichardsonL. (2000). Writing: A method of inquiry. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 923-948). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
42.
SaukkoP. (2000). Between voice and discourse: Quilting interviews on anorexia. Qualitative Inquiry, 6, 299-317
43.
WhiteJ. (2007). Knowing, doing and being in context: A praxis-oriented approach to child and youth care. Journal of Child and Youth Care, 36, 225-244.
44.
WhiteJ.MorrisJ.HinbestJ. (2011). Collaborative knowledge-making in the everyday practice of youth suicide prevention. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 24, 1-17.
