This chapter discusses different ways to interview subjects when conducting autoethnographic research. It was interesting to learn that one interviewing method may be better than others, depending on the topic being considered. For instance, the reflexive dyadic interviewing method allows for a more intimate connection between the researcher and the interviewee than does a classic one-on-one interview. Therefore, it allows for feelings and emotions to be better portrayed. Interactive interviews go a step further, since they allow the researcher to stimulate two or more people to discuss their experiences in detail and play off of each other’s story. At the same time, however, they pose the threat of concerns about confidentiality that may be omitted by using the co-constructed narrative method. Overall, this chapter shed light on the importance of thoroughly analyzing the various layers of a topic being researched prior to choosing an interviewing method because of the potential impacts the interview may have on the quality of one’s research as well as on the people who are interviewed.
I think the conscious thought that is put into deciding which interviewing method would be most appropriate for one's topic is very interesting. In my opinion, the more personal the topic is to the interviewee, the more favorable the reflexive dyadic interview approach would be.
I strongly agree with the idea that it is important to research more before choosing the interviewing method. But on some occasions how do you know you are choosing the most appropriate method even when you have done the thinking? What are you going to use and why?
After reading chapter 3 of The Ethnographic I, I feel inspired and literate to begin my interview for my autoethnography. Prior to reading this chapter, I was very close minded with regards to the whole interviewing process. I pretty much thought every interview involved two people; an interviewer, and an interviewee. It never occurred to me how significant the interviewer's role is. For instance, something as simple as the facial expression of the interviewer can drastically influence the outcome of the interview. After considering the three classifications of autoethnographic interviews, I have decided that I am going to use the interactive interviewing technique. My autoethnography is going to be about college students who are emotionally attached to a comfort object, such as a baby blanket or a stuffed animal. The interactive approach will best suite me since I can relate to the interviewee. I will be able to share personal stories about my relationship with my blankie that will hopefully engage the interviewee by creating a safe space for conversation.
I had the same reaction to reading chapter 3 of The Ethnographic I as well. It really broadened my horizon in regards to the methods of interviewing others. I think your authoethnography will be extremely unique and interesting.
That seems like a really cool, unique topic! I'm interested to see how people respond to your questions and what you find out about the topic. I think the interactive approach is a good idea. Are you looking to just use the interactive approach or are you planning on including all the different styles of interviewing?
After reading chapter three, I found that the three classifications of autoethnographic interviews are reflexive dyadic, interactive, and co-constructed narratives. I discovered that in a reflexive dyadic interview the researcher interviews certain people based on their topic and then adds their own thoughts based on what the interviewee says. In addition, I learned that interactive interviews take a group of people, including the researcher, and works to create a meaningful relationship between them in order to tell a story. On the other hand, co-constructed narratives focus on developing stories independently, and then discussing those stories to formulate a single tale.
Based on my topic, the culture of younger siblings, I find it helpful to use reflexive dyadic interviewing. By using this method, I will be able to save time and interview more people since I will not have to form relationships, such as with interactive interviews, or take the time to combine stories, with co-constructed narratives. Reflexive dyadic interviewing also allows me to stay true to the interviewee's story while being able to incorporate my own thoughts behind their responses.
Although the benefits you described above of conducting a reflexive dyadic interview definitely hold true, there could also be some major advantages of conducting a interactive interview. You mentioned that the time aspect of the interactive interview was a concern of yours, however, forming that relationship between you and your interviewee could also provide for ground breaking conversations that you may not come across with a reflexive dyadic interview.
In the chapter three of The Ethnographic I, the author discusses three different ways for researchers to conduct the autoethnographic interviews. I find it instructive and inspiring that there is such a variation and flexibility. Both Interactive interviewing and co-constructed interviewing methods may better help researchers get more response and a deeper level of information from their interviewees , because researchers can better develop a relationship and build trust with their interviewees by also sharing their personal stories which are related to the topics. In these cases, researchers are just also participants. And moreover, with co-constructed interviewing method, researchers would not worry about the concerns about confidentiality, which may occur in multiparticipants interactive interviews, because participants independently write their own stories. However, those two methods require more time to conduct the interviews. They are more timeconsuming than the reflexive dyadic interviewing method, which is the traditional one-on -one interview. As for me, since I won't have to develop relationships with my interviewees and I prefer to add my personal reflections to the interviews, I think I will choose the reflexive dyadic interviewing method.
In this chapter, the author introduced three types of interview: reflexive dyadic interview, interactive interview, and co-constructed narratives.
Reading a reflexive interview, the first type, is like watching a movie with monologue. It is easier for us understand the topic and feel as if being present during the interview. Reading from description in Leigh’s interview such as “eyes light up”, I feel connected to interviewee’s words and emotions, which made me more aware of what this topic means to interviewee.
The second type, interactive interview, works for my project. How Chinese students study English can be a broad topic. If I can be part of the interview, I will be able guide the conversation to a deeper level. Also, if I talk about my experience, my interviewees may be inspired to talk more and deeper.
The third type is co-constructed narrative interview. In my opinion, it makes easier to compare and contrast people’s feelings from two perspectives. It stays away from being superficial, and can be very thought-provoking.
What's your topic about and what method are you going to use and why?
I am going to discuss the way Chinese students learn English and study for English tests, especially SAT. I think it is an interesting topic because it is now a trend in China to learn English and even go study abroad. The method I chosen is interactive interview. Since every Chinese student in Emory had already gone through the same path of studying for English tests, interactive interviews can be really effective because my interviewees will have a lot of say. I can also be inspired by their response.
This chapter surprised me by how various the interview can be. I have always been regarding it as an informative way to disclose people’s feelings and experiences. However I have discovered that there are many more goals than just disclosure for people to accomplish during the interviews.
People can develop a more intimate relationship between each other by co-constructing their stories. For example, Carolyn and Art wrote the piece of a complicated abortion experience, resulted in realizing the impeccable bond between them.
Besides intimacy, people can also be inspired by interactively interviewing those who have encountered the same situation, as proceeded in Valerie’s project. Valerie interviewed this woman, a same breast cancer survivor as herself, found sympathy and resonance for both of them.
For reflexive dyadic interviews, which is the method I am considering about, it provides a more crystal perspective of the interview. For instance, I am trying to interview those who have been growing up in big families. My perspective and experience as the only child in my family could make readers comprehend my interview in a more distinctive way.
I also am a only child in the family and I think it is a great topic. How about also considering the co-constructed narrative and make a story out of it? If I had that kind of topic I would make a good story to explore more about the relationships between the family. However I think it is a great topic!! Gluck
Why don't you choose co-constructed narratives? Don't you think this type of interview can help you on making compare and contrast?
In Class Three, the author discusses three different methods of handling the interview process--reflexive dyadic, interactive, and co-constructed narrative. Reflexive dyadic interviewing is more conversational and personal. Interactive interviewing is more collaborative but takes more time. Through co-constructed narrative interviewing the interviewer can achieve a deeper understanding of a relationship. This chapter really provoked me. I have never thought about how there are other ways of interviewing besides the traditional question-answer dynamic. It’s interesting to learn how all of the little pieces of the interview (setting, questions, actions) can affect a person’s response. This chapter was also helpful in that it lead me to see that there are a variety of ways to approach an autoethnography. I am going to write about freshman athletes adjusting to college life. The reflexive dyadic approach seems to be the best option because it makes the interviewee more comfortable thus evoking more a more accurate story.
Since there are many freshman athletes at Emory, maybe you should consider conducting an interactive interview instead. This would allow the interview to, in a sense, conduct itself as different people would play off of each other's ideas. The method may also bring up additional questions and ideas that would otherwise not have come up using the reflexive dyadic approach. Confidentiality probably wouldn't be a concern considering the nature of the topic.
Why don't you choose interactive interview? Since different people deal with the problems in different ways, it could be a better way to learn more about their adjusting lives.
Reflexive dyadic interviewing, interactive interviewing, and co-constructive narrative (including mediated and unmediated) are all discussed in chapter three. Before I read this chapter, I had only really considered reflexive dyadic interviewing. It never occurred to me that the researcher could be a part of the interview. I am planning on constructing my project around freshman, and because I am a part of this group I will be able to relate to the people I interview. Interactive interviewing allows the researcher and the participants to be one in the same. It appears to be particularly helpful if you are inside of the group you are researching because you can add your own account on the events that transpire. Mediated and unmediated co-constructive narratives focus more on telling a specific story that two or more people share. If it is mediated, the researcher is simply guiding the story along. If it is unmediated, the researcher works with others to develop his or her own story in relation to those other people. This chapter helped me to more clearly understand what autoethnography actually is, and gave me some interesting ideas about the interviewing process.
By reading the Ethnographic book by Carolyn Ellis, I was surprised on how interviews are not only a question and answer process but also an opportunity to go deeper to know one another. The three various methods of interviewing that the author mentions are reflexive dyadic, interactive, and co-constructed narrative. Reflexive dyadic interview methods can require a lot of emotional dynamics in the interview as we can see from the example of Leigh’s interview about breast cancer. Interactive interviewing focuses on the conversation that people commonly have, and it allows a group of people to talk about their experiences. Interactive interviewing can also be helpful for people who are less confident to speak up by sharing similar stories with each other. Lastly, co-constructed narrative is a really helpful method that helps us to learn about relationships with certain people. The example that the author wrote in her book was an intense narrative but at the same time a great method to understand their relationships. I would use the co-constructed narrative as my method because it is an easier way for me to know more about my people by telling our experiences through narratives.
I was also surprised by the different types of interviewing styles presented in this chapter. I am curious what you topic is that it fits the co-constructive narrative. What type of experiences are you going to be discussing?
I really liked the way Ellis described the ways of interviewing others. It makes me feel more comfortable and know all my options for interviewing people for my project. I also never knew there were so many different ways to interview people. I always assumed interviews were just one-on-one questions between the interviewer and the interviewee. I want to use the interactive interview method, because as Ellis mentioned, you are able to get the real outlook of the situation you are interviewing since you already know the person that you are interviewing. I don’t like the other methods Ellis discussed like Co-constructed Narrative, because I feel as though it digresses from the focus on the interviewee. In addition, when others are reading the interview, I feel that if the interviewers comments are present, the reader would not be able to properly be able to absorb the information that the interviewee gives out.
I feel the same way about the co constructed narrative but doesn't it impress you how this interview style combines two different interviews into one tale.
Yeah, thats one reason why I really liked the co-constructed narrative method.
First of all, I was surprised to see such a distinct way of writing and a very entertaining one at that. I would really feel as if I was part of the classroom learning about the three types of interview: reflexive dyadic interview, interactive interview, and co-constructed narratives. As I read the chapter I would see that interviews do not have to be straight forward spitballing, but something more exciting and actually deeper than the media makes it out to be. Including various excerpts of auto ethnographic works was key to understand the various types of interviews. This would enable me to identify myself with the reflexive dyadic interview, in which I could share my thoughts and view on what the interviewee's responses to develop a more intimate experience. For example, interviewing a non latin student and asking them about latin cultures in the university,writing down his answers and my thoughts would give an inside on how a hispanic person would respond or think like. All in all, Ellis did a great job illustrating all the interviews, I now feel more confident about my newly broadened knowledge about interviews. Can't wait to discuss in class.
Were you thinking of incorporating other styles of interview or did you prefer to solely use the reflexive dyadic interview?
The interview chapter talks about the three ways to interview, which are reflexive dyadic interview, interactive interview, and co-constructed narratives. The way the author writes the chapter is captivating and it really feels as if you are in the classroom itself in the highly engaged discussion. Not only does the chapter provide the reader with useful facts about how each interviewing style is conducted, but it also provides detailed examples of each style and reveals the emotions, outcomes, and consequences that are produced from each style. I feel that the creative way Ellis explains the styles in her unique way is very helpful in understanding and remembering each one. These ways of interviewing aren't just ways of gathering facts and personal experiences, but they can be ways of producing growth, such as emotional and relational growth. The example of the co-constructed narrative given by Ellis about the process of abortion and its implications showed in a very tangible way the growth that be gained in oneself and in one's relationships. This chapter broadened my awareness of the effects interviews can have and made me interested to see which interviewing style will work best with the topic i choose for the project.
I also noticed that she used these examples and really emphasized them in order for the audience to understand the three methods of interviewing.
Have you chosen a topic for your project yet? If so, which interviewing style do you think will work best for your project?
To be honest, I had no idea that there was such a variety of different methods to conduct an interview. Like Jack in the “Reflexive Dyadic Interview” section, I am accustomed to only one method: the traditional, Q&A style. Therefore, this Class Three chapter is a tremendous eye-opener for me personally. The author describes three methods of interviewing: the reflexive dyadic interview, the interactive interview, and the co-constructed narrative. Each style allows the interviewer to play a part in the interviewee's story. I now realize that the interview is a tool to not only gain factual information from others, but also to discover different perspectives, insight, behavior, and new ways of thinking on various topics. At this moment in time, I am not sure which style I will use, but at the very least, I have knowledge of the different styles/methods of the interview process.
I also had a very similar reaction to this chapter. It was very eye opening and I did not know previously about all of the different kinds of interviewing styles. I have always used the typical Q and A style as well. I am eager to also gain perspectives, insight, and behavior in my interviews rather than only factual information. Good luck on your project!
I felt the exactly the same way as you did. Moreover, interview is a tool to communicate and improve. It's really fine that you do not know which method to choose because it is an option we need to make thoughtfully.
I also find this chapter fascinating because of those new concepts it introduced about conducting interviews. I especially agree with you about your comment" to discover different perspectives, insight, behavior, and new ways of thinking on various topics." Also, good luck on your project.
After reading the chapter, it has helped me form a coherent plan to further my project and have successful interviews that I can use for my final project. I especially thought that interactive interviewing would be the most useful of the techniques as I can talk to my interviewees about their experiences and relate them to mine. However, in some instances in which my experiences do not relate to those of the subject I may have to do more of the standard question and answer type of interview. Although after taking a journalism class I understand that it is not that simple. I will need strong follow up questions and will need to decide whether I will be the type of interviewer who makes their subject feel comfortable and gives them a safe platform to share the story or push the interviewee with persistence and pounding that they eventually will share there story. These are certainly questions I need to think about but as of now I have begun the interview process and am certainly taking some of the advice of Carolyn Ellis.
Hello, Ross! I find it interesting that you have taken a journalism class because it gives us a different perspective on approaching interviews other than the Ellis' chapter. You mention two types of interviewer dispositions: one that "makes the subject feel comfortable" and an interviewer that will "push the interviewee with persistence and pounding". Carolyn Ellis emphasizes creating a more comfortable environment in her chapter, so what do you think would be the advantage of a persistent interviewing technique? Are there disadvantages of a comfortable interviewing session?
Hi Kali! I feel honored that you commented on my blog. By making the interviewee more comfortable you might be giving him/her a platform where they can just breeze through the interview without accomplishing much. If you ask more challenging questions and keep pushing for more then maybe they will feel backed against a corner to the point where they just let everything out. Both have been effective ways of interviewing and it really depends on how the subject responds.
This chapter discusses reflexive dyadic interviewing, interactive interviewing, and co-constructive narrative. Before I read this chapter, I had only really thought about reflexive dyadic interviewing. It never occurred to me that the researcher could play such a large role in not only the interviewing process, but the actual interview itself. I found it very interesting to read and become more informed on these different styles before conducting the interviews. However, I found the format of the reading to be sort of strange, but interesting nonetheless. I'm hoping to maybe be able to include elements from the multiple different interviewing styles when carrying out the interviews for my own project. I plan to do my project on people affected by cancer. By interviewing different people who have all been affected by this disease in numerous different ways, different interviewing styles may lend themselves to different situations. I look forward to carrying out interviews not constricted to the typical question by interviewer and answer by interviewee for this project due to what I have learned from Carolyn Ellis.
This chapter was tremendously essential in my understanding of autoethnographic interviews. Like the vast majority, I have grown accustomed to the generic interview - ask questions answer questions. This chapter helped me realize that an interview can be so much more colorful and descriptive with different techniques and strategies. It is astounding how deep and riveting an interviewee can be if made comfortable. Something that intrigued me, was that the interviewer should attempt to be incredibly considerate of the interviewee's feelings. One should never exploit an individual just for controversy.This chapter illumined the various types of interviews that I was once ignorant of - reflexive dyadic interview, interactive interview and co-constructed narrative. Each is unique and efficient in their own way. It allows the interviewer and interviewee display their creativity. I realize that one may choose any of these three or stick with the conventional interview. However, a phenomenal interview is eminent in the production of a unparalleled auto ethnography.
I was just like you in the sense that I was only aware of reflexive dyadic interviews. After seeing how much you learned from this chapter what type of interview do you think you will use in your autoethnography. Do you think you will branch out and try something new?
Before reading this chapter, I assumed it would be about different types of questions an interviewer should ask. I had not given thought to the idea of interviewing that goes beyond writing down questions and responses and instead incorporates personal emotion and perspective. I also loved how the author wrote in a story-like manner that exemplified an alternative way to record conversation. There were three classifications of autoethnographic interviews. Interactive interviews focus on a participant, but has incite and participation by the researcher. Interactive interviews allowed for more than one participant where the researcher can analyze more than one person as their stories play off of each other in a kind of guided discussion. Co-constructive interviewing has two main subjects who usually undergo a turning point and each collaborate on their points of views. For my autoethnography, I plan to write about the experience of employees at a well known retailer. Interactive interviews would fit well with this topic because I was a former employee of the retailer so I could weave in my personal incite. To me, however, co-constructive interviewing seems the most intriguing so I'm trying to figure out a way to incorporate that into my work.
Hi Kali, I found your response and topic about being a former employee very interesting. I noticed that few people chose to use the co-constructive interviewing method for their paper, but I think it will be perfect for your specific topic. When you share your experiences with you other employees, it might help them open up and be more willing to share their experience with you.
Prior to reading this chapter on interviewing, I was naïve. I did not fully appreciate the hidden values in interviewing. I never realized the different types of interviewing that existed and when used properly can and will lead to a more constructive and educational experience. I assumed interviews were solely generic questions and answers, which I now know is called ‘reflexive dyadic interviews’. However, after reading about the other types of interviews, the power and purpose of an interview is much more. Whether it comes from the real-time experience or the story/dialogue that evolves from a single question or answer or personal anecdotes, interviews are powerful tools when exploited. A very important factor when writing a reaction/response after an interview is to be cognizant of how the interviewee would feel and react to your written piece if he or she were to read it afterwards. In other words, be mindful of what you include and don’t include because some information shared should be kept secret whereas other insights should be expressed. Remind yourself that, “we should always write as though our participants will read what we write” (Ellis 61). Another tool that can and should be utilized when interviewing someone is to dig deeper and expand upon interesting insights the interviewee gives rather than solely relying on the preplanned. Particularly when both participants, the interviewer and interviewee, are both “insiders” and can relate and connect to the interview topic. When digging deeper, the possibility of sparking new ideas and questions may lead to a more dynamic and interactive experience that makes the interview even more worthwhile. My topic of summer camp will allow me to compare and contrast my experiences with those of my interviewees. I can relate with what the interviewees are saying as well as learn new insights and experiences in which I was not apart of, and because of this, the form of interactive interviewing is one in which I will apply.
What is your topic specifically about? Sounds like you are very passionate, would like to hear more.
Thanks for commenting on my paragraph. I am not exactly sure which direction I want to go, but I will use my interviews and how my interviewees respond as the tool that directs me. I assume I will talk about the unique qualities about our camp and what makes it so special and why people go as campers and continue to come back as counselors year after year for about 7-14 years (summers) of their lives. Hope this makes my topic more clear
In Class Three of the Ethnographic I, the author illustrates distinct ways to do autoethnographic interviews: reflexive dyadic interview, interactive interview and co-constructed narratives. I didn’t even think about there might be so many different ways when conducting an autoethnographic interview. Besides, I find it extremely inspiring and provoking that we can include researcher’s story in interviews of others. I never thought the interviewer could play such a significant role during the process. The reflexive dyadic interview, for example, does not only focus on the interviewees and their stories, but also considers the interviewers’ thoughts and feelings, which makes the stories well presented. Interactive interviewing, on the other hand, is a collaborative process that develops a relationship and interaction between the researchers and a group of participants. What’s more, co-constructed narratives, an intelligent way to study relationships, assist readers to know more about the topic through including the researcher’s story.
After reading thoroughly the three classifications in this chapter, I now have a clear idea about what my project will be like and I think I’m going to use the reflexive dyadic interviewing method.
In this unconventionally written chapter, Carolyn Ellis discusses three methods of interviewing she believes to be successful: reflexive dyadic, interactive, and co-constructive. All three methods bring a new perspective on traditional interviewing, but I also found that three have flaws that can hamper an efficient interview. The reflexive dyadic method, although bringing an intimate perspective of the interviewer into the narrative and thus adding the observers opinion, runs the risk of becoming too subjective and possibly skewing the interview due to the interviewer’s personal opinions. Interactive interviewing succeeds in bringing together many stories and opinions on a single issue, however it can quickly go off topic and lead to a convoluted narrative as all of the interviewees’ responses overlap. Finally, the co-constructive interview method can subtly reveal the balance of a relationship, but can cause a response bias as interview subjects may not feel comfortable revealing intimate details or secrets while a single other person sits in the room, attempting to corroborate or argue their points. For me, I believe the most useful method of interviewing would be the reflexive dyadic as the subjects and I would share similar experiences and the narrative would benefit from both opinions and I will not be focusing on the relationships or group dynamics of my topic yet.
I also chose to do the reflexive dyadic interviewing method since I found that it allows more time to interview multiple people, while focusing less on building relationships with them. I was curious as to how you are going to try to limit the bias during the interview and not be too subjective?
Since I come from a similar background as my intended interviewees, it will be easier to understand their story and thus not have too many preconceived notions.
Before reading chapter three, I thought an interview was one person asking questions and another person answering. However, after reading chapter three by Ellis, I was surprised by the different methods of interviewing. I never realized how involved and important an interviewer is to the interview process; I thought of them as the messengers present to simply ask about what people want to know. The three different processes of interviewing are reflexive dyadic, interactive interviewing, and co-constructed narrative. With these three different methods in mind, I began to have a clearer idea of how I will construct my paper. I intend to use the reflexive dyadic method. This method will be better for me and for my topic. I want to be able to reflect and compare my experiences with my interviewee’s experience after the entire interview process. This gives me a better chance to organize my thoughts and ideas.
I have a similar approach to my interview. How will you act around the interviewee? If you are interviewing someone who is not your friend, will you give your own background first so you can find similarities within the conversation or will you just do the interview and then compare later?
I had a similar reaction to reading chapter three. It certainly made me more aware of the different methods of interviewing.
What topic have you decided to do?
Reading Class Three of The Ethnographic I taught me that interviews, as a whole, are not as simple as I once thought. Had I not read this chapter, I would have conducted my interview in an elementary manner. Now, however, I am no longer ignorant to the effect that my relationship with an interviewee or the setting in which I conduct the interview can have on the success and depth of the conversation. The chapter also led me to understand that I should take note of non-verbal communication in additional to our verbal exchange. Lastly, Class Three taught me that I should not limit the goals of my interview to concrete question or create a survey-style questioning pattern. Instead, I should make sure to ask thought and emotion provoking questions as well.
I was in the same boat you were. If this chapter were not assigned I too would have enaged in an interview in a more elementary way with the more generic route of short question and answer. The same way this chapter enlightened you about the power of non-verbal communication as well as the impact the setting may have, my interview will be more worthwhile.
I was in the same boat you were. If this chapter were not assigned I too would have engaged in an interview in a more elementary way with the more generic route of short question and answer. The same way this chapter enlightened you about the power of non-verbal communication as well as the impact the setting may have, my interview will be more worthwhile.
Carolyn Ellis discusses three classifications of autoethnographic interviews: co-constructed narrative, interactive interviewing, and reflexive dyadic interviewing. Before reading this chapter, I was unaware of these classifications and had never pondered the emotional and reflective aspects of an interview-- I simply thought of an interview as a question-and-answer session. For my autoethnography, I plan to interview Californians and investigate how they think living in the Golden State has shaped not only them but America as well. I think reflexive dyadic interviewing will be best because it will allow me to relate to the interviewee and express my reflections on how California has influenced me as well.
I completely agree with you, Sheridan. The analysis of the art of interviewing was new to me, as well; it had never even crossed my mind that there were multiple methods of interviewing a subject. Our projects are fairly similar. While you plan on writing about Californians, I plan to interview and report on the tradition of "brotherhood" that is built and fostered by my high school alma mater (an all-male Catholic institution).
I will be documenting my findings and experiences as an insider. I think that will be beneficial to the report because I have the opportunity to truly personalize the work and make it my own. I can use the experiences and stories of the interviewees and compare them with my own.
I like your project idea, Chris. I think interviewing as an insider on a subject will be unique because it should provide a personal and maybe even emotional experience. Have you considered co-constructed narrative interviewing? It would be interesting for two of your "brothers" to interact and discuss their bond together during one interview.
The different interview styles discussed by Carolyn Ellis were extremely interesting to get to read through .The first one discussed by the author is the reflexive Dyadic interview it showed how by “including the researcher” in the interview one can better understand the story or situation of the interviewee .The interactive interview showed that the aim was to develop a relationship between the researcher and participant which helps in conveying better what the interview is all about however this style of interview has its drawbacks in terms of the “time factor” and “confidentiality” .The third style of interview discussed by the author is the “co constructive narrative” this interview was particularly interesting to me as it involved two different interviews being constructed into one story ,this form of interview Ellis tells us that that the interviewer doesn't involve him self in the interview but helps the co-authors in telling theirs .I personally wish to use the Reflexive dyadic interview as I want the to connect my story with that of the interviewee .
It is interesting to hear that you liked the reflexive dyadic interview method as you want to connect your story with that of the interviewee. But don't you think you can manage this better by using the interactive interview in that you become a subject too and get to share what you want to say?
In this chapter, Carolyn discusses three methods to interview subjects. While the reflexive dyadic method focuses solely on the interviewee, the interactive interviewing model invites the subjects to act as researchers too in an effort to make the project deeper and collaborative. Since I can relate to my topic and have had personal experience with it, I will experiment the interactive model. The co-constructed method involves at least two people and it lets them tell their stories through narratives of their own to form a mutual story. After reading this chapter, I realized how little I knew about the ways to conduct an interview and how interview goes way beyond than just gathering, rephrasing and giving the facts of the subject. Moreover, I find Ellis’s style to be very successful in creating the classroom experience by telling the story from a teacher’s perspective.
What is your topic and who will you be interviewing?I think it is cool that you are going to do the interactive method since I thought that it was one of the hardest to do.
After reading chapter three of The Ethnographic I, I learned many different ways about going about my interview. I realized how important my role is as the interviewer. It is my job to help the interviewee open up and feel comfortable in sharing personal anecdotes. In my interviews I will make sure to be responsive and connected to my interviewee's just as Ellis expressed. Prior to reading the chapter I typically pictured an interview being a one-on-one process which I learned is a reflexive dyadic interview. I did not know how complex and unique one could make a interview to be. The author discusses three different interviews methods, reflexive dyadic, interactive, and co-constructed narrative. The reflexive dyadic interview is helpful in bringing the emotional aspect to an account. This is where the interview and interviewee connect on a deeper level. Personal accounts are shared and it allows for the interview to understand exactly what the interviewee is thinking and how he or she is feeling. When going a step further to an interactive interview, this allows two or more participants to feed off one another. All of the participants have had experience with the topic of discussion and they interact and relate in intimate ways. This strategy is difficult and require times. Lastly, co-constructed narratives allows and interview to get an even closer view at a relationship. I am writing my autoethnography about camp and since there are so many aspects to it I can utilize each of these methods. Between my campers, my own camp friends, campers parents and co-counselors there are many different relationships that exist that I hope to study.
As mentioned above, there are different benefits to be gained from each interview methods. In this case, I think you may utilize the reflexive dyadic or interactive method since you have the experience of a camper and are capable of sharing your feelings and thoughts with your friends. This way, all the participants of the interview will be able to "feed off" one another and construct a great interview overall.
The chapter three of The Ethnography I discusses three methods to interview subjects - reflexive dyadic interview, interactive interview and co-constructed narratives. After the reading, it has come to my attention that an interviewer is not merely a person asking questions. Depending on the nature of interviewees, an interviewer may choose a different style of interview and impact the conversation dramatically. For example, an interactive interview allow one or more audience to relate to the topic and share their stories, which may be appropriate for shy interviewees. On the other hand, co-constructive interview takes a closer look at relationships, however, can be biased when interviewees are not comfortable revealing their feelings. I am writing my autoethnography about third culture kids, those who grow outside their parents’ native culture. As a student who has been to three international schools, I think that interactive interview may be a good strategy; this method will best allow me to closely observe the relationships of third culture kid. Although there is a risk of having bias within the interview, I feel pretty confident that my friends will be willing to share their feelings.
Initially dreading the reading of thirty pages in Carolyn Ellis's book, I was pleasantly surprised when I began the chapter. Ellis describes the three methods of interview in an interesting approach, as opposed to the general layout of a monotonous outline. Aforementioned, there are three methods: reflexive dyadic interview, interactive interview, and co-constructed narrative. Reflexive dyadic interview incorporates the interviewer's input and creates a more intimate experience with the interviewee. Interactive interview comprises of a couple people that act as "both researchers and research participants" (Ellis 64). Co-constructed narrative weaves two different perspectives into a story that reveals a closer insight into the relationship. My topic is differentiating between the different paths the first generation children follow after their parents immigrated to the United States from Asia. Being a first generation child myself, I see interactive interviewing working out the best. I can gather a group of first generation students at Emory and essentially share and record stories with one another. This can provide variety amongst the group. We can also inspire new topics as there are more minds contributing to the process.
In Chapter Three of Carolyn Ellis’s book “Ethnography I,” I learned about Auto ethnography and three effective methods of interviewing: reflexive dyadic interviewing, co-constructed narrative, and interactive interviewing. Each of these methods allow the interviewer and the interviewee to be presented in a certain way. For my upcoming auto ethnography project, I would use interactive interviewing because of the book’s description of the method and the examples also contained in the subchapter. I noticed that when using interactive interviewing, you and your interviewee form a relationship of trust, like friends. Providing an insider's view for my project, interactive interviewing is a great way to receive unbiased and non superficial responses. The chapter mentions when discussing about AIDS that you would most likely talk to someone who is close to you or “perhaps others with AIDS, maybe in a support group” (pg. 66). You wouldn’t tell a random stranger/ interviewer about your illness. To me, this method proves to be the most effective.
This was a spring 2015 forum. We mostly used our Facebook group for discussion forum.