Pawson and Tilley suggest a unique strategy for conducting qualitative interviews within realist evaluation studies. Theories are placed before the interviewee for them to comment on with a view to providing refinement. The subject matter of the interview is the researcher’s theory and interviewees confirm, falsify, and refine this theory. This relationship – described as a teacher–learner cycle – is integral to realist evaluations. This article provides an overview of how interview techniques have been applied in realist evaluations in the last decade as well as suggesting two guiding principles. The first one relates to the design of realist studies and the second one explains how to ask questions like a realist, and proposes three different phases in realist interviews: theory gleaning, theory refining and theory consolidation. The article aims to contribute to a growing understanding of the practical and epistemological challenges presented by primary data collection in realist evaluation.
BenneyMHughesEC (1956) Of sociology and the interview. American Journal of Sociology62: 137–42.
2.
BlameyAMackenzieM (2007) Theories of change and realistic evaluation: Peas in a pod or apples and oranges?Evaluation13: 439–55.
3.
BoyceCNealeP (2006) Conducting In-depth Interviews: A Guide for Designing and Conducting In-depth Interviews for Evaluation Input. Watertown, MA: Pathfinder International.
4.
BriggsC (1986) Learning How to Ask. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5.
CampbellDT (1975) ‘Degrees of freedom’ and the case study. Comparative Political Studies8: 178–93.
6.
ChenHTRossiPH (eds) (1992) Using Theory to Improve Program and Policy Evaluations. Santa Barbara, CA: Greenwood Press.
7.
ClarkAM (2008) Critical realism. In: GivenL (ed.) The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 167–70.
8.
CorbinJStraussA (2008) Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. London: SAGE.
9.
Dahler-LarsenP (2011) The Evaluation Society. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
10.
DalkinSMGreenhalghJJonesD. (2015) What’s in a mechanism? Development of a key concept in realist evaluation. Implementation Science10(1): 49.
11.
DenzinNKLincolnYS (2000) Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In: DenzinNKLincolnYS (eds) Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
12.
Dixon-WoodsMShawRLAgarwalS. (2004) The problem of appraising qualitative research. Quality and Safety in Health Care13: 223–5.
13.
EmmelN (2013) Sampling and Choosing Cases in Qualitative Research: A Realist Approach. London: SAGE.
14.
EtheridgeFCouturierYDenisJL. (2014) Explaining the success or failure of quality improvement initiatives in long-term care organizations from a dynamic perspective. Journal of Applied Gerontology33(6): 672–89.
15.
FieldingNThomasH (2001) Qualitative interviewing. In: GilbertN (ed.) Researching Social Life. London: SAGE.
16.
GoffmanE (1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. London: Penguin.
17.
GreenhalghT (1999) Narrative based medicine in an evidence based world. British Medical Journal318: 323–5.
18.
GreenhalghTHumphreyCHughesJ. (2009) How do you modernize a health service? A realist evaluation of whole-scale transformation in London. Milbank Quarterly87: 391–416.
19.
GubriumJF (ed.) 2012) The SAGE Handbook of Interview Research: The Complexity of the Craft. London: SAGE.
20.
GuestGArwenBJohnsonL (2006) How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods18: 59–82.
21.
HammersleyM (1992) Ethnography and realism. In: HammersleyM (ed.) What’s Wrong with Ethnology? Methodological Explorations. London: Routledge, 43–56.
HenryGJulnesGMarkM (1998) Realist evaluation: An emerging theory in support of practice. New Directions in Program Evaluation 78. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
24.
HolsteinJAGubriumJF (1997) The Active Interview. London: SAGE.
25.
IosifidesT (2011) A generic conceptual model for conducting realist qualitative research: Examples from migration studies. In: InstituteIM (ed.) Working Papers. Oxford: Oxford Department of International Development (QEH), University of Oxford.
26.
KvaleS (1996) Interviews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
27.
KvaleSBrinkmannS (2009) InterView: Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
28.
Lawrence-LightfootS (2005) A dialogue between art and science. Qualitative Inquiry11: 3–15.
29.
LinnanLStecklerA (2002) Process evaluation for public health interventions and research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1–24.
30.
MadillA (2008) Realism. In: GivenL (ed.) The SAGE Encyclopaedia of Qualitative Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 731–5.
31.
MalukaSKamuzoraPSansebastianM (2011) Implementing accountability for reasonableness framework at district level in Tanzania: A realist evaluation. Implementation Science6: 1–15.
32.
ManzanoAPawsonR (2014) Evaluating deceased organ donation: A programme theory approach. Journal of Health Organization and Management28(3): 366–85.
33.
Manzano-SantaellaA (2011) A realistic evaluation of fines for hospital discharges: Incorporating the history of programme evaluations in the analysis. Evaluation17(1): 21–36.
34.
MarchalBVan BelleSVan OlmenJ. (2012) Is realist evaluation keeping its promise? A review of published empirical studies in the field of health systems research. Evaluation18(2): 192–212.
35.
MarkMMHenryGTJulnesG (1999) Toward an integrative framework for evaluation practice. American Journal of Evaluation20: 177–98.
36.
MasonJ (2002) Qualitative interviewing: Asking, listening and interpreting. In: MayT (ed.) Qualitative Research in Action. London: SAGE, 225–41.
PopperK (2002) The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Routledge.
54.
RubinHJRubinIS (1995) Qualitative Interviewing. The Art of Hearing Data. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
55.
Rycroft-MaloneJFontenlaMBickDSeersK (2008) Protocol-based care: Impact on roles and service delivery. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice14: 867–73.
56.
SapsfordRAbbottP (1992) Research Methods for Nurses and the Caring Professions. Buckingham: Open University Press.
57.
SaumoreKGivenL (2008) Data saturation. In: GivenL (ed.) The SAGE Encyclopaedia of Qualitative Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 195–6.
58.
SayerA (1992) Method in Social Science: A Realist Approach. London: Routledge.
59.
SeidmanI (2012) Interviewing as Qualitative Research: A Guide for Researchers in Education and the Social Sciences. New York: Teachers College Press.
60.
StakeRE (2010) Qualitative Research: Studying How Things Work. New York: Guilford Press.
61.
StraussAFagerhaughSSuczekB. (1985) Social Organization of Medical Work. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
62.
TilleyN (2000) The evaluation jungle. In: BallintyneSPeaseKMcLarenV (eds) Secure Foundations: Key Issues in Crime Prevention, Crime Reduction and Community Safety. London: Institute for Public Policy Research.
63.
TilleyN (2009) What’s the ‘what’ in ‘what works’? Health, policing and crime prevention. In: KnutssonJTilleyN (ed.) Evaluating Crime Reduction Initiatives. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.
64.
WeissCH (1998) Evaluation: Methods for Studying Programs and Policies. London: Prentice-Hall.
65.
WesthorpG (2013) Developing complexity-consistent theory in a realist investigation. Evaluation19(4): 364–82.
66.
YinRK (2010) Qualitative Research from Start to Finish. New York: Guildford Press.
