The shift from positivistic to interpretive and critical paradigms within qualitative research entails a certain messiness in its methodology and analyses. This aligns with an entailed abandonment of objectives to arrive at absolute truth. I argue in this article that the same levels of messiness and uncertainty should apply to the definition and characterizations of perhaps the primary knowledge-producing activity within qualitative inquiry, the research interview. Untethering this concept from unnecessary delimitation might, or so I argue, allow for fresh perspectives concerning its uses and analyses, revealing less positivistically “loaded” deployment strategies and opening up vast vistas for future research.
BowenG. (2008). Naturalistic inquiry and the saturation concept: A research note. Qualitative Research, 8(1), 137–152.
6.
BrinkmannS. (2014a). Doing without data. Qualitative Inquiry, 20(6), 720–725.
7.
BrinkmannS. (2014b). Unstructured and semi-structured interviewing. In LeavyP. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of qualitative research (pp. 277–299). Oxford University Press.
8.
CharmazK. (2000). Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. In DenzinN.LincolnY. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 509–535). SAGE.
9.
ChoJ.TrentA. (2014). Evaluating qualitative research. In LeavyP. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of qualitative research (pp. 577–596). Oxford University Press.
10.
ConquergoodD. (1991). Rethinking ethnography: Towards a critical cultural politics. Communication Monographs, 58, 179–194.
11.
ConquergoodD. (1992). Ethnography, rhetoric, and performance. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 78, 80–123.
12.
de CerteauM. (2011). The practice of everyday life (RendallS., Trans.) (3rd ed.). University of California Press. (Original work published 1984)
13.
DeenerA. (2018). The architecture of ethnographic knowledge: Narrowing down data and contexts in sociological cases. Sociological Perspectives, 61(2), 295–313.
14.
DenzinN. (1989). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (3rd ed.). Prentice Hall.
15.
DenzinN. (2001). The reflexive interview and a performative social science. Qualitative Research, 1(1), 23–46.
16.
DenzinN. (2003). The call to performance. Symbolic Interaction, 26, 187–208.
17.
FontanaA.FreyJ. (2008). The interview: From neutral stance to political involvement. In DenzinN.LincolnY. (Eds.), Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials (3rd ed., pp. 115–159). SAGE.
18.
FoucaultM. (1972). The archaeology of knowledge. Routledge.
19.
GartonS.CoplandF. (2010). “I like this interview: I get cakes and cats!” The effect of prior relationships on interview talk. Qualitative Research, 10(5), 533–551.
20.
GlaserB.StraussA. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine.
21.
GrindalB. (2011). Confrontation, understanding, and friendship in a redneck culture. Anthropology and Humanism, 36(1), 89–100.
HaleC. (2001). What is activist research?Social Science Research Council, 2(1–2), 13–15.
24.
HallT.LashuaB.CoffeyA. (2008). Sound and the everyday in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(6), 1019–1040.
25.
HarperD. (2002). Talking about pictures: A case for photo elicitation. Visual Studies, 17(1), 13–26.
26.
HarrisC.CarbadoD. (2006). Loot or find: Fact or frame? In TrouttD. (Ed.), After the storm: Black intellectuals explore the meaning of Hurricane Katrina (pp. 87–110). The New Press.
27.
HodderI. (2000). The interpretation of documents and material culture. In DenzinN.LincolnY. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 703–715). SAGE.
28.
Holman-JonesS. (2008). Autoethnography: Making the personal political. In DenzinN.LincolnY. (Eds.), Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials (3rd ed., pp. 205–245). SAGE.
29.
HolmesD.MarcusG. (2008). Collaboration today and the re-imagination of the classic scene of fieldwork encounter. Collaborative Anthropologies, 1, 81–101.
30.
HolsteinJ.GubriumJ. (2003). Inside interviewing: New lenses, new concerns. In HolsteinJ.GubriumJ. (Eds.), Inside interviewing: New lenses, new concerns (pp. 3–29). SAGE.
31.
IrvineJ. (2016). Mapping the walk of shame: Incorporating emotions into concepts and methods. Social Currents, 3(3), 207–216.
32.
JanesickV. (2001). Intuition and creativity: A Pas de Deux for qualitative researchers. Qualitative Inquiry, 7(5), 531–540.
33.
KvaleS. (2006). Dominance through interviews and dialogues. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(3), 480–500.
34.
LamontM.SwidlerA. (2014). Methodological pluralism and the possibilities and limits of interviewing. Qualitative Sociology, 37, 153–171.
35.
LaneJ. (2016). The digital street: An ethnographic study of networked street life in Harlem. American Behavioral Scientist, 60(1), 43–58.
36.
LassiterL. (2001). From “reading over the shoulders of natives” to “reading alongside natives,” literally: Toward a collaborative and reciprocal ethnography. Journal of Anthropological Research, 57(2), 137–149.
37.
LatherP. (1986). Issues of validity in openly ideological research: Between a rock and a soft place. Interchange, 17(4), 63–84.
38.
LatourB. (1993). We have never been modern. Harvard University Press.
39.
LawlessE. (1992). “I was afraid someone like you. . .an outsider. . .would misunderstand”: Negotiating interpretive difference between ethnographers and subjects. Journal of American Folklore, 105, 302–314.
40.
LennartssonR. (2011). Notes on “not being there”: Ethnographic excursions in eighteenth-century Stockholm. Ethnologia Europaea, 41(1), 105–114.
41.
MaccobyE.MaccobyN. (1954). The interview: A tool of social science. In LindzeyG. (Ed.), Handbook of social psychology (pp. 449–487). Addison-Wesley.
42.
MadisonD. S. (2014). Narrative poetics and performative interventions. In DenzinN.LincolnY.SmithL. (Eds.), Handbook of critical and indigenous methodologies (pp. 391–406). SAGE.
PotterJ. (2004). Discourse analysis as a way of analyzing naturally occurring talk. In SilvermanD. (Ed.), Qualitative research: Theory, method, and practice (2nd ed., pp. 200–219). SAGE.
49.
RogersL.SwadenerB. (1999). Reframing the “field.”Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 30(4), 436–440.
50.
RoulstonK.ChoiM. (2018). Qualitative interviews. In FlickU. (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative data collection (pp. 233–249). SAGE.
51.
SteinmetzK. (2012). Message received: Virtual ethnography in online message boards. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 11(1), 26–39.
