Reflecting on the Reflectivist Approach to Qualitative Interviewing

Year 2019, , 339 - 357, 01.07.2019

Alper Kaliber

https://doi.org/10.20991/allazimuth.477335

Cited By: 3

Abstract

This study aims to reflect
on qualitative interviewing with a particular emphasis on semi-structured
interviewing (SSI), with the purpose of guiding students and young scholars of
International Relations and Political Science who will use this method in their
research. This study begs to differ from both radical post-positivist’s deep
scepticism which makes any scientific inquiry almost impossible as well as from
positivism’s unreflective, unproblematized, instrumental approach to
interviewing. It proposes a reflectivist approach to qualitative interviewing
that emphasizes the political nature of the interviewing process with various
political, ethical and even social consequences. The reflectivist approach
requires researchers to be self-critical at all times, in particular concerning
their role and influence on the interview setting and the interviewee. This article proceeds as follows: It first
addresses my own research on the nexus between civil society and the Kurdish
question in Turkey, where SSI has been operationalized as the main research
method. It then addresses the positivist and post-positivist debates on
qualitative interviewing as well as the reflectivist approach that this study
promotes. The article then engages in SSI in three distinct stages:
pre-interview, interview and post-interview phases. Finally, the concluding
part introduces some works utilising interviewing in Turkish IR and wraps up
the theoretical/methodological arguments disseminated throughout the study at
hand.

Keywords

Semi-structured interviewing, qualitative interviewing, reflexive approach to qualitative interviewing, qualitative research

References

• Alvesson, Mats. “Methodology for Close up Studies- Struggling with Closeness and Closure.” Higher Education 46 (2003): 167–93.
• Alvesson, Mats. “Beyond Neopositivists, Romantics, and Localists: A Reflexive Approach to Interviews in Organizational Research.” Academy of Management Review 28, no. 1 (2003): 13–33.
• Aydın Düzgit, Senem. “Legitimizing Europe in Contested Settings: Europe as a Normative Power in Turkey?” Journal of Common Market Studies. Accessed March 8, 2018. doi: 10.11/jcms.12647.
• Baker, Carolyn. “Membership Categorizations and Interview Accounts.” In Qualitative Research, edited by David. Silverman, 130–43. London: Sage, 1997.
• Brinkmann, Svend. Qualitative Interviewing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
• Boşnak, Büke. “Europeanisation and De-Europeanisation Dynamics in Turkey: The Case of Environmental Organisations.” South European Society and Politics 21, no. 1 (2016): 75–90.
• Buzan, Barry, Ole Waever, and Jaap de Wilde. Security: A New Framework for Analysis. London: Lynne Rienner, 1998.
• Bürgin, Alexander. “Why the EU Still Matters in Turkish Domestic Politics: Insights from Recent Reforms in Migration Policy.” South European Society and Politics 21, no.1 (2016): 105–18.
• Caputo, John D. Radical Hermeneutics: Repetition, Deconstruction, and the Hermeneutic Project. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1987.
• Diefenbach, Thomas. “Are Case Studies More Than Sophisticated Storytelling?: Methodological Problems of Qualitative Empirical Research Mainly Based on Semi-structured Interviews.” Quality & Quantity 43 (2009): 875–94.
• Grigoriadis, Ioannis N. Trials of Europeanization: Turkish Political Culture and the European Union. UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008.
• Irvine, Annie, Paul Drew, and Roy Sainsbury. “‘Am I Not Answering your Questions Properly?’ Clarification, Adequacy and Responsiveness in Semi-Structured Telephone and Face-to-Face Interviews.” Qualitative Research 13, no.1 (2012): 87–106.
• Kaliber, Alper. “De-Europeanisation of Civil Society and Public Debates in Turkey: The Kurdish Question Revisited.” South European Society and Politics 21, no. 1 (2016): 59–74. Kaliber, Alper, and Nathalie Tocci. “Conflict Society and the Transformation of Turkey’s Kurdish Question.” Security Dialogue 41, No. 2 (2010): 191–215.
• Keyman, E. Fuat. “Turkish Foreign Policy in the post-Arab Spring Era: From Proactive to Buffer State.” Third World Quarterly 37, no. 12 (2016): 2274–87.
• McLaren, Lauren M. and Meltem Müftüler Baç. “Turkish Parliamentarians' Perspectives on Turkey's Relations with the European Union.” Turkish Studies 4, no.1 (2003): 195–218.
• Onursal-Beşgül, Özge. “Policy Transfer and Discursive De-Europeanisation: Higher Education from Bologna to Turkey.” South European Society and Politics 21, no. 1 (2016): 91–103.
• Öniş, Ziya, and Şuhnaz Yılmaz. “Turkey and Russia in a Shifting Global Order: Cooperation, Conflict and Asymmetric Interdependence in a Turbulent Region.” Third World Quarterly 31, no. 1 (2016): 71–95.
• Öztürk, Ahmet Erdi, and Semiha Sözeri, “Diyanet As A Foreign Policy Tool: Evidence from the Netherlands and Bulgaria.” Politics and Religion. Accessed March 8, 2018. doi: 10.1017/S175504831700075X.
• Rapley, Timothy John. “The Art(fulness) of Open-ended Interviewing: Some Considerations on Analysing Interviews.” Qualitative Research 1 (2001): 303–23.
• Rumelili, Bahar, and E. Fuat Keyman. “Enacting Multi-Layered Citizenship: Turkey’s Armenians’ Struggle for Justice and Equality.” Citizenship Studies 20, no. 1 (2016): 67–83.
• Rumelili, Bahar, and Didem Çakmaklı. “Civic Participation and Citizenship in Turkey: A Comparative Study of Five Cities.” South European Society and Politics 22, no. 3 (2017): 365–84.
• Sarıgil, Zeki, and Ömer Fazlıoğlu. “Religion and Ethno-nationalism: Turkey's Kurdish Issue.” Nations and Nationalism 19, no. 3 (2003): 551–71.
• Sarıgil, Zeki. Ethnic Boundaries in Turkish Politics: The Secular Kurdish Movement and Islam. New York: New York University Press, 2018.
• Tocci, Nathalie, and Alper Kaliber. “Conflict Society and the Transformation of Turkey’s Kurdish Question.” SHUR Working Paper Series, 2008. Accessed August 7, 2017. http://www.luiss.it/shur/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/shurwp01-08.pdf.
• Zihnioğlu, Özge. European Union Civil Society Policy and Turkey: A Bridge Too Far? UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013.