7 minute read
3.4. Methodological aspects of the narrative interview
educational and professional environments. In addition, due to the knowledge of at least two languages, they also tend to be aware of the differences between the cultures of their home country and the host country.
Apart from providing valuable research data, narrative interviews also have a lot to offer to the narrators themselves. Participation in a narrative interview stimulates reflection on one’s own intercultural experiences by activating complex processes of thinking and metacognition (Søderberg and Worm, 2011), which is recognised as a key component of intercultural learning (Gertsen and Søderberg, 2010). For this reason, a narrative can have a practical application in the development of cultural intelligence. As a form of storytelling, it enables migrants to express themselves, articulate needs and share intercultural experiences, and as a result, reflect on them, understand them and ascribe to them a new meaning (Gertsen and Søderberg, 2010).
It is worth emphasising that social identity emerging in a narrative is not always consistent in a given time or context. The same speakers may portray themselves in various ways on different occasions, in different situations or within particular spheres of life. Social identities are dynamic, and an individual often belongs to many groups. Therefore, each individual may have many subjectivities and reveal them depending on the situation, time or social roles played (Weedon, 1987). People create diverse but coherent social identities that may consist of many elements or even blurriness. The same applies to intercultural contacts, because “there are no simple social or linguistic formulae that spit out how to compose suitable identities for the occasion” (Ochs, 1993, p. 298). This means that there is no one-size-fits-all approach that can be successfully applied in contact with people of different socio-cultural profiles. A communication strategy or behaviour that once proved effective may lead to communication failure in a different situation involving other interlocutors.
One of the most characteristic features of qualitative research is the collaborative relationship between the researcher and the subject. In the context of narrative research, Torill Moen (2006, p. 60) favours the use of the term “subject”, or alternatively “collaborator” or “participant”, rather than “informant”, and advises that cooperation should be based on a dialogue. Building such a relationship between the researcher and the narrator requires devoting adequate time and space to make both parties feel comfortable (cf. Connelly and Clandini, 1990;
Heikkinen, 2002) as well as creating an atmosphere of non-judgment and equality (Fetterman, 1998). Additionally, the researcher should remember that meaning is revealed on an ongoing basis during a successful narrative interview. We believe that narratives show not only the fully realised meanings, but also those constructed as a part of a reflection on one’s own experience.
While narrative research can be supported by various data collection techniques, such as notes, diary entries, observations, letter-writing and autobiographical writing (Connelly and Clandini, 1990), we chose narrative interview for the study presented in the next chapter. Compared to other interview types, it is the least structured one and is primarily aimed at collecting stories that give an insight into the lives and experiences of the interviewees. John Lofland et al. state this type of interviewing provides “rich, detailed materials that can be used in qualitative analysis” and its purpose “is to find out what kind of things are happening rather than to determine the frequency of predetermined kinds of things that the researcher already believes can happen” (Lofland, Snow, Anderson and Lofland, 2006, p. 76).
In an unstructured narrative interview, the researcher is expected to create conditions for storytelling rather than collect answers to listed questions (Kartch, 2017). Such questions are asked less frequently, the scenario is not closed, and the role of the researcher is to listen and ask clarifying or opinion-forming open-ended questions, unlike in partially structured interviews. By asking questions, the researcher can encourage the interlocutor to develop the story and share her or his emotions and opinions, thus ensuring a “rich and well-developed narrative” (Kartch, 2017, p. 1073). Anne-Marie Søderberg (2006) also advises refraining from commenting on and judging the responses received during an interview.
As a qualitative research technique, the narrative interview is based on the above-mentioned criteria, and as an alternative research approach, it is distinguished by the following features (Holstein and Gubrium, 1995, pp. 17; 28–34): Individualism: encourages respondents to develop topics in a way that is appropriate to their own experiences, and at the same time, it takes into account not only basic socio-cultural categories, such as social status, family role, gender or profession, but also those that make it possible to capture a personal perception of reality; Interpretability: enables the expression of alternative or hitherto unconscious reflections. This is especially true of content that is revealed in the dynamic interaction between the storyteller and the researcher; Language and meaning: the storyteller’s goal is not to “read from a fixed text” (Holstein and Gubrium, 1995, p. 28), but to improvise using the available
resources “far from merely reporting a chronicle of what is already present […], the respondent actively composes meaning by way of situated, assisted inquiry” (Holstein and Gubrium, 1995, p. 34); Thematic categories: parameters for analysis of first-person relationships are determined in cooperation with the storyteller; Holism: a given narrative cannot be repeated – its course depends on conditions that can be created as well as on individual characteristics of conversation.
Therefore, a narrative not only serves to obtain a story but also to discover its meaning in a complex, interactive context. This means that the role of the narrative interviewer is different from that observed in other types of interviews since it includes asking questions and writing down answers as well as creating conditions conducive to the free expression of thoughts and interpretations by a respondent. Where incomprehension occurs, the researcher should provide instructions leading to the full exploration of the theme undertaken. Before starting an interview, it is recommended to express genuine interest in it, and during its course, to maintain a focused and neutral attitude to the received content, whether transmitted verbally or non-verbally (Kartch, 2017). In fact, in this type of interview, the researcher takes the role of a listener, of the “narrator’s empathic «fellow traveller»” (Gabriel, 2000, after: Søderberg, 2006, p. 402).
With regard to the scope of moderation, the researcher may allow an interlocutor “free rein to tell his or her story” or enter into a dialogue with her or him, if necessary (Lindlof, 1995, p. 174). The researcher can also allow the narrator to interpret the meaning of the stories told by sharing one’s knowledge or experiences, which can serve as stimuli initiating a constructive dialogue and involvement of both parties.
Researchers who interview people from other cultures face additional challenges. Rafał Beszterda (2016) pointed to several cultural pitfalls that await them. He paid particular attention to excessive self-confidence, manifested by the assumption of the uniformity of European cultures or the universality of human experiences. Another threat to a successful narrative is the transculturality of interviewees and the resulting difficulty in recognising the cultural hybridisation of an individual by a interviewer.
Among the methodological pitfalls, Beszterda mentioned time constraints, which may be prevented by meticulous preparation for an interview (e.g. gaining solid knowledge on the topics discussed in advance, obtaining as much information about a respondent as possible). Secondly, the language of the conversation must be adapted to the communication skills of the interlocutor. This is also related
to the formulation of the questions themselves – those that suggest the answer or are ambiguous should be avoided5 . In addition, researchers tend to simplify linguistic forms, which may result in excessive familiarity and affect the neutrality of the researcher–narrator relationship (Beszterda, 2016). It is also important to pay attention to the accuracy of the interview transcript and the researcher being properly concentrated.
In the early stage of the data analysis process, an interview may appear less “scientific”. The narrative session does not have a rigorous structure and provides both factual and interpretative data. Therefore, researchers most often focus on isolating and categorising thematic threads, e.g. consistent with the adopted theoretical approach or the purpose of the research. The analysis may, however, focus on discovering the reasoning presented by a respondent in her or his story (Holstein and Gubrium, 1995).
The qualitative approach is not the only one that can be applied to analysis of the collected data. In recent years, narratives are also analysed using corpus linguistics and other methods, and are based on such tools as finding keywords, collocations or sentiment of language resources used.
5 Details on how to formulate questions are provided in the research methodology literature (e.g. Dörnyei, 2007; Patton, 2002).
