Abstract
The success of interview-based investigations considerably depends on the “quality” of the interviewees, that is on the extent to which they meet our expectations in the interview situation. We expect interviewees to understand which information we need, to provide this information in extensive, complete and detailed responses, and to adjust their communication to our steering of the conversation. We also hope to meet respondents which reflect on their own social situation and who are able to provide information about their perceptions, social relations and motives.1
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Further readings
Bernard, H. R., Killworth, P., Kronenfeld, D. and Sailer, L. (1984) “The Problem of Informant Accuracy: The Validity of Retrospective Data” in Annual Review of Anthropology 13, 495–517.
Dean, J. P. and Foote Whyte, W. (1958) “How Do You Know If the Informant is Telling the Truth” in Human Organization 17, 34–9.
Laudel, G. (2006) “The ‘quality myth’: Promoting and hindering conditions for acquiring research funds” in Higher Education 52, 375–403.
References
Becker, H. S. and Geer, B. (1970) “Participant Observation and Interviewing: A Comparison” in Filstead, W. J. (ed.) Qualitative Methodology: Firsthand Involvement with the Social World (Chicago: Markham Publishing), pp. 133–42.
Bernard, H. R. (2002) Research Methods in Anthropology: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches (Walnut Creek: Altamira Press).
Bernard, H. R., Killworth, P., Kronenfeld, D. and Sailer, L. (1984) “The Problem of Informant Accuracy: The Validity of Retrospective Data” in Annual Review of Anthropology, Vol. 13, 495–517.
Bogner, A. and Menz, W. (2005) “Expertenwissen und Forschungspraxis: Die modernisierungstheoretische und die methodische Debatte um die Experten. Zur Einführung in ein unübersichtliches Problemfeld” in Bogner, A., Littig, B. and Menz, W. (eds) Das Experteninterview — Theorie, Methode, Anwendung, 2nd edn (Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften), pp. 7–30.
Cole, J. R. and Cole, S. (1972) The Ortega Hypothesis, Science 178, pp. 368–75.
Cole, J. R. and Cole, S. (1967) “Scientific Output and Recognition, a Study in the Operation of the Reward System in Science” in American Sociological Review 32, 377–90.
Cole, S. (1970) “Professional Standing and the Reception of Scientific Discoveries” in American Journal of Sociology 76, 286–306.
D. Crane (1972) Invisible Colleges: Diffusion of Knowledge in Scientific Communities (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).
Dean, J. P. and Whyte, W. F. (1958) “How Do You Know If the Informant is Telling the Truth” in Human Organization 17, 34–9.
Gläser, J. and Laudel, G. (2009) Experteninterviews und qualitative Inhaltsanalyse als Instrumente rekonstruierender Untersuchungen, 3rd edn (Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften).
Gläser, J. and Laudel, G. (2007a) “The social construction of bibliometric methods” in Barker, K., Gläser, J. and Whitley, R. (eds.) The Changing Governance of the Sciences: The Advent of Research Evaluation Systems (Dordrecht: Springer), pp. 101–23.
Gläser, J. and Laudel, G. (2007b) “Evaluation without Evaluators: The impact of funding formulae on Australian University Research” in Gläser, J. and Whitley, R. (eds.) he Changing Governance of the Sciences: The Advent of Research Evaluation Systems (Dordrecht: Springer), pp. 127–51.
Hagstrom, W. O. (1965) The Scientific Community (Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press).
Hopf, C. (1993 [1979]) “Soziologie und qualitative Sozialforschung” in Hopf, C and Weingarten, E. (eds.) Qualitative Sozialforschung (Stuttgart: Klett-Kotta).
Jackson, D. N. and Rushton, J. P. (eds.) (1987) Scientific Excellence. Origins and Assessment. (Newbury Park: SAGE).
Knorr-Cetina, K. (1984) Die Fabrikation von Erkenntnis. Zur Anthropologie der Naturwissenschaft (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp).
Latour, B. and Woolgar, S. (1986 [1979]) Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts (Princeton: University Press).
Laudel, G. (2005) “Is external funding a valid indicator for research performance?” in Research Evaluation 14, 27–34.
Laudel, G. (2006a) “The art of getting funded: How Scientists adapt to their funding conditions” in Science and Public Policy 33, 489–504.
Laudel, G. (2006b) “The ‘quality myth’: Promoting and hindering conditions for acquiring research funds” in Higher Education 52, 375–403.
Lynch, M. (1985) Art and Artifact in Laboratory Science: A Study of Shop Work and Shop Talk in a Research Laboratory (London: outledge and Kegan Paul).
Pelz, D. C. and Andrews, F. M. (1966) Scientists in organizations. Productive Climates for Research and Development (New York: iley).
Richards, D. (1996) “Doing Politics: Elite Interviewing: Approaches and Pitfalls” in Politics 16, 199–204.
Zelditch Jr., M. (1961) “Some Methodological Problems of Field Studies” in American Journal of Sociology 67, 566–76.
Zuckerman, H. and Cole, J. R. (1994) “Research Strategies in Science: A Preliminary Inquiry” in Creativity Research Journal 7, 391–405.
Zuckerman, H. (1977) Scientific Elite: Nobel Laureates in the United States (New York: Free Press).
Zuckerman, H. (1972) “Interviewing an Ultra-Elite” in Public Opinion Quarterly 36, 159–75.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2009 Jochen Gläser and Grit Laudel
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gläser, J., Laudel, G. (2009). On Interviewing “Good” and “Bad” Experts. In: Bogner, A., Littig, B., Menz, W. (eds) Interviewing Experts. Research Methods Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230244276_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230244276_6
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-30575-9
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-24427-6
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)