Strong Analytical Skills
Situation: Qualitative Research Methods at Southern Utah University.
Task: Evaluate a failed interview (interview is 10 minutes 12 seconds long).
Actions: Systematically take notes (into, body, conclusion, color coordinate facts vs. opinions, etc.), strategically present 10 interview concepts, put it into a question, answer it immediately, and then explain the reasoning further.
Results: Able to:
Task: Evaluate a failed interview (interview is 10 minutes 12 seconds long).
Actions: Systematically take notes (into, body, conclusion, color coordinate facts vs. opinions, etc.), strategically present 10 interview concepts, put it into a question, answer it immediately, and then explain the reasoning further.
Results: Able to:
- Complete assignments in a timely manner
- Understand the interview process better
- Pay close attention to specific details
- Provide good PR for both the professor and the school
Kevin A. Stein, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Communication
Southern Utah University
Associate Professor of Communication
Southern Utah University
Interview Evaluation – Systematically Identifying Mistakes, Providing Excerpts, Referencing Class Materials, Assessing How Mistakes Negatively Impact the Quality of the Interview.
NOTE: See pages 148 & 149 in reading for detailed elements of good and bad interviewing techniques.
Professor Stein's Comments:
VERY nice job here. You've got the paper well structured in terms of general topic areas and you identify lots of mistakes. You also reference Kvale where appropriate and comment on how each mistakes hurts the quality of the interview. I could probably use this as a sample for future semesters so students would know what they should be doing. Thanks for always doing an amazing job!
25/25 Points Were Awarded.
Instructions:
For this assignment, you will watch a video of a mock interview and identify the weaknesses contained in it. The video is posted below. The video is 10 minutes and 12 seconds long. You will utilize the material provided to you in class readings (specifically Kvale) and in our class discussion on interviewing techniques. For each mistake, you will provide a specific quotation or close paraphrase from the video and identify the specific segment of our readings and/or discussion that indicates it is a mistake. This exercise will be written up as a short paper (4-6 pages) with you systematically identifying mistakes, providing excerpts to illustrate them, referencing class material to support your argument, and assessing how each mistake might negatively impact the quality of the interview.
Two major observed facts:
The principle point behind this failed interview is this. Barton wants to uncover good information yet fails to prepare and perform well when it really matters.
Ironically, Barton first side-steps questions and then hypocritically criticizes the interviewee for doing the same thing.
Notes and impressions of the interview:
Introduction:
Matthew Barton shakes interviewee’s hand in a friendly manner. Pleasantries occur quickly. Barton expresses concern for his inability to use recording equipment correctly. Barton shows he was ill-prepared for the interview by expressing concerns about his inability to use the recording equipment well. Interviewee ignores the statement and quickly asks—what is going to happen with the study? Barton said we are trying to find out about pain and how nurses deal with pain. Barton then said, “I really do not know everything that is going to happen so we are going to have to do our best, I guess.” Convergys provided useful advice during their training sessions (do not tell people what you can’t do but emphasize what you can do). The interviewee asks if there is any further information that Barton could provide. Barton said “like, like, what?” The interview asks what will happen with the study. Barton nervously rummages through papers and then rambles on about a consent form rather than focusing on the specific details of the interview. Barton does not have a consent form with him and shows he is unprepared for the interview. Barton reassures the interviewee that all consent forms are taken care of even though he seems unsure about what he is saying. Barton said the reason why he does not have the consent form is because he was in a hurry to get to the interview, which shows that he is much more unprepared for it. Barton falsely promises a phone number so the interviewee can ask and have his questions answered. Barton said, “I am a really good student. I did a little bit of research work in my undergraduate work. So… I am pretty confident in what’s going on.” Barton reassures the interviewee that SUU is a good school and that the interviewee can trust Barton and the school. Unfortunately, this is done in an awkward way. Barton asks “didn’t you do your work here like through Weber State as an extension? The interview responds with a yes. The interviewee asks if SUU is behind the study. Barton says yes. Barton said I can provide a couple of things later if you like.
Matthew Barton shakes interviewee’s hand in a friendly manner. Pleasantries occur quickly. Barton expresses concern for his inability to use recording equipment correctly. Barton shows he was ill-prepared for the interview by expressing concerns about his inability to use the recording equipment well. Interviewee ignores the statement and quickly asks—what is going to happen with the study? Barton said we are trying to find out about pain and how nurses deal with pain. Barton then said, “I really do not know everything that is going to happen so we are going to have to do our best, I guess.” Convergys provided useful advice during their training sessions (do not tell people what you can’t do but emphasize what you can do). The interviewee asks if there is any further information that Barton could provide. Barton said “like, like, what?” The interview asks what will happen with the study. Barton nervously rummages through papers and then rambles on about a consent form rather than focusing on the specific details of the interview. Barton does not have a consent form with him and shows he is unprepared for the interview. Barton reassures the interviewee that all consent forms are taken care of even though he seems unsure about what he is saying. Barton said the reason why he does not have the consent form is because he was in a hurry to get to the interview, which shows that he is much more unprepared for it. Barton falsely promises a phone number so the interviewee can ask and have his questions answered. Barton said, “I am a really good student. I did a little bit of research work in my undergraduate work. So… I am pretty confident in what’s going on.” Barton reassures the interviewee that SUU is a good school and that the interviewee can trust Barton and the school. Unfortunately, this is done in an awkward way. Barton asks “didn’t you do your work here like through Weber State as an extension? The interview responds with a yes. The interviewee asks if SUU is behind the study. Barton says yes. Barton said I can provide a couple of things later if you like.
Body:
The interview becomes more serious as Barton explains in an obvious, almost condescending way, that they were going to use a common, standard way of interviewing people. This method involves Barton asking questions and the interviewee answering them. Barton attempts to break the ice by asking how much experience the interviewee has in the hospital industry. The interviewee has about 25 years of hospital experience. This is a missed opportunity to start asking open-ended questions about the commentary provided. Open-ended questions about what is the interviewee’s favorite aspect of his job. Barton then asks about measurement of pain—is it hard to measure (Numeric Rating Scale – NRS pain scale). Barton said, “I guess what we are most interested in is the Numeric Rating Scale…what most people call NRS…I mean, do you feel like it is hard to measure?” The interviewee said yes because everyone’s pain is either a two or a ten. Barton then asks about the interviewees feelings about patient’s pain. Barton then gives a winded example about someone he knew who experienced serve pain. Personally, it seems like Barton is dominating the conversation and not allowing the interviewee to talk even though the interviewee seems very timid and shy. Barton asks about the interviewee if patients weigh off of his judgement of what pain is. Uncomfortably, the interviewee said, “I am not the one in pain…I am not sure that’s…Barton interrupts… the interviewee advises Barton to ask someone else [one of the administrators] who could answer the question better because it has to do with patient care. Barton pushes the question and seemed not to like the interviewee’s answers. Barton is a pushy interviewer. Barton said, “Ok well can you like, I don’t know, like can you think of any experiences that might relate to this [observing patients faking pain for more medicine]? Because I mean, this is really important. You can imagine if you are a patient, imagine if I were a patient and I came in and I thought the nurse wouldn’t believe me and I was in a lot of pain, I mean, that seems like it would effect a great deal what you are doing.” Desperate interviewing is pathetic interviewing. The interviewee hesitantly responses, “Yes, it can. I am not saying it affects me but it can affect people because you are looking at somebody who…I mean, come on it can’t hurt that bad.” Barton quickly assesses the situation and said, “It seems like you are holding back on me. I mean, are you worried about the informed consent or your boss?” The interviewee said, “I can’t give away private, personal information. I have to be careful not to give away information because there are fines and such that could be used against me.” Barton pathetically offers the interviewee confidentiality. The interviewee asks, “Well, why is my name on it?” Barton said we just need to know for transcription purposes and to know where the comments came from. The interview asked where the information would go. Barton said his professor would lock up the consent form and it would be safe. Clearly Barton is not telling the truth and does not know what is really going to happen with this interview information.
The interview becomes more serious as Barton explains in an obvious, almost condescending way, that they were going to use a common, standard way of interviewing people. This method involves Barton asking questions and the interviewee answering them. Barton attempts to break the ice by asking how much experience the interviewee has in the hospital industry. The interviewee has about 25 years of hospital experience. This is a missed opportunity to start asking open-ended questions about the commentary provided. Open-ended questions about what is the interviewee’s favorite aspect of his job. Barton then asks about measurement of pain—is it hard to measure (Numeric Rating Scale – NRS pain scale). Barton said, “I guess what we are most interested in is the Numeric Rating Scale…what most people call NRS…I mean, do you feel like it is hard to measure?” The interviewee said yes because everyone’s pain is either a two or a ten. Barton then asks about the interviewees feelings about patient’s pain. Barton then gives a winded example about someone he knew who experienced serve pain. Personally, it seems like Barton is dominating the conversation and not allowing the interviewee to talk even though the interviewee seems very timid and shy. Barton asks about the interviewee if patients weigh off of his judgement of what pain is. Uncomfortably, the interviewee said, “I am not the one in pain…I am not sure that’s…Barton interrupts… the interviewee advises Barton to ask someone else [one of the administrators] who could answer the question better because it has to do with patient care. Barton pushes the question and seemed not to like the interviewee’s answers. Barton is a pushy interviewer. Barton said, “Ok well can you like, I don’t know, like can you think of any experiences that might relate to this [observing patients faking pain for more medicine]? Because I mean, this is really important. You can imagine if you are a patient, imagine if I were a patient and I came in and I thought the nurse wouldn’t believe me and I was in a lot of pain, I mean, that seems like it would effect a great deal what you are doing.” Desperate interviewing is pathetic interviewing. The interviewee hesitantly responses, “Yes, it can. I am not saying it affects me but it can affect people because you are looking at somebody who…I mean, come on it can’t hurt that bad.” Barton quickly assesses the situation and said, “It seems like you are holding back on me. I mean, are you worried about the informed consent or your boss?” The interviewee said, “I can’t give away private, personal information. I have to be careful not to give away information because there are fines and such that could be used against me.” Barton pathetically offers the interviewee confidentiality. The interviewee asks, “Well, why is my name on it?” Barton said we just need to know for transcription purposes and to know where the comments came from. The interview asked where the information would go. Barton said his professor would lock up the consent form and it would be safe. Clearly Barton is not telling the truth and does not know what is really going to happen with this interview information.
Barton starts a new question. Barton asks, “How do you feel like nurses do with pain?” This is a very personal question. The interviewee gives a general answer— it’s hard to say it’s what the hospital uses (shrugging his shoulders). The interviewee seems nervous still and gives answers whereby his chances of getting into trouble are lessened. Barton asks if the NRS pain scale works. Barton said the general answer—that’s just what the hospital uses—was lame. Barton then asks a yes or no question—does the NRS pain scale work effectively, yes or no? The interviewee responses with a “sometimes.” The interviewee does a bit of explaining but quickly Barton interrupts the interviewee by pushing the yes or no question. The interviewee said no because it floats… your three is my eight. It is hard to give meds if someone thinks they are at a five on a pain scale. Barton asks if the interviewee thinks the hospital use of this pain scale useful again. If an interviewee is not answering questions straight up then it would be wise to adjust and move forward. The interviewee said the hospital uses it because it is what they use but sometimes in the interviewees opinion it doesn’t work that well. Barton asks if there is anything else that the interviewee wants to talk about the pain scale further. The interview said no. Barton pushes and asks why not. The interviewee said, “My opinions are my opinions and I can’t speak for the hospital.” Barton responses, “Well, that is too bad it sounds like they might have a tight hold on you.”
Conclusion:
Barton said, “I guess that is probably all that we should look at then.” I do not think enough information has been covered during the middle part of the interview. Barton looked at his watch and said, “O man, I have another appointment to get to so I should probably wrap this up.” Barton asks the interviewee, “Is there anything else to report?” Probably a question based on the first thought that popped into his head. The interviewee asks, “Yes, when can you get me a copy of the consent form? Barton said, “Umm…I will have to check on my professor with that. I am sure she could send one over. I got to go because as I mentioned I got a bunch of these interviews and I need to get them out of the way because I have a lot of things to do. But after I get done tonight I will send an email or something and I am sure she can get it to you tomorrow.” Barton doesn’t care about the interviewee and is more concerned about getting to another interview, which most likely will go poorly. The interviewee asked if he could get the professor’s name. Barton side-steps the question and answers with, “how about I leave you with a note or something and we will just go from there. In fact, here is her name and you can have that. Barton quickly and unprofessionally thanks the interviewee for his time and it ends abruptly.
Barton said, “I guess that is probably all that we should look at then.” I do not think enough information has been covered during the middle part of the interview. Barton looked at his watch and said, “O man, I have another appointment to get to so I should probably wrap this up.” Barton asks the interviewee, “Is there anything else to report?” Probably a question based on the first thought that popped into his head. The interviewee asks, “Yes, when can you get me a copy of the consent form? Barton said, “Umm…I will have to check on my professor with that. I am sure she could send one over. I got to go because as I mentioned I got a bunch of these interviews and I need to get them out of the way because I have a lot of things to do. But after I get done tonight I will send an email or something and I am sure she can get it to you tomorrow.” Barton doesn’t care about the interviewee and is more concerned about getting to another interview, which most likely will go poorly. The interviewee asked if he could get the professor’s name. Barton side-steps the question and answers with, “how about I leave you with a note or something and we will just go from there. In fact, here is her name and you can have that. Barton quickly and unprofessionally thanks the interviewee for his time and it ends abruptly.
1) Knowledgeable: Does Barton have extensive knowledge of the interview theme and does he pursue the right ideas?
In my opinion, not really. At the beginning of the interview, the interviewee asks if there is any information (papers and such) that might help him understand why Barton is doing the interview. Barton said, “We are trying to find out about pain and how nurses deal with pain.” Barton then said, “I really do not know everything that is going to happen so we are just going to have to do our best, I guess.”
This statement shows Barton’s lack of knowledge about the situation. The effect of this statement is simple: the interviewer loses credibility with the interviewee, especially at in important stage in the interview process—the beginning. I recall an experience I had working at a call center in Logan, Utah called Convergys. Convergys provided useful advice during their training sessions. They encouraged their employees not to tell people what you could not do but emphasize what they could do. I imagine interviewing is the similar. Barton explanation would have been sufficient. There was no need for him to ramble on about not knowing the specific details behind the interview.
2) Structure: Does Barton introduce, outline, and round off the purpose behind the interview?
At times yes but for the most part no. At the very beginning, Matthew Barton shakes interviewee’s hand in a friendly manner. Pleasantries occur quickly. Barton expresses concern for his inability to use recording equipment correctly. Barton shows he was ill-prepared for the interview by expressing concerns about his inability to use the recording equipment well. Interviewee ignores the statement and quickly asks—what is going to happen with the study? Personally, I think one of the most important parts of an interview is the beginning. The things you do and say reflect how well you are prepared and how much you care about the person being interviewed. Barton failed in both areas miserably. He did not know how to work the audio recording equipment and maintained a let’s get through this interview without sincere regards for the actual interviewee.
Although in the starting points of the body section Barton explains that this is a traditional question and answer interview, unfortunately in a somewhat condescending way, Barton fails to have organized structure to the rest of the interview, especially with the main questions he was asking. For example, I think Barton asked questions based on the first thing that came to his mind. After a brief and awkward conversation about the interviewee’s hospital work experience, Barton asked about measurement of pain—is it hard to measure (Numeric Rating Scale – NRS pain scale). Barton said, “I guess what we are most interested in is the Numeric Rating Scale…what most people call NRS…I mean, do you feel like it is hard to measure?” Besides using the phrase “I guess” too much, I think Barton was asking the question without really understanding the subject matter and therefore the question lack focus and direction. Plus Barton seemed to dominate the conversation and did not allow the interviewee time to think and talk despite the interviewee appearing very timid and shy.
Lastly, the conclusion was not very good. It was too brief and not detailed enough. Barton asks the interviewee, “Is there anything else to report?” The interviewee asks, “Yes, when can you get me a copy of the consent form? Barton said, “Umm…I will have to check on my professor with that. I am sure she could send one over. I got to go because as I mentioned I got a bunch of these interviews and I need to get them out of the way because I have a lot of things to do. But after I get done tonight I will send an email or something and I am sure she can get it to you tomorrow.” Barton is pushing responsibility off on his professor rather than admitting that he forgot the consent form. Accepting responsibility should be the dominate focus here instead of just saying you will do something when the chances are it will not get done as promised.
3) Clear: Does Barton simply explain ideas and ask concise questions?
No. Let’s take for example the conclusion of the interview. Barton said, “I guess that is probably all that we should look at then.” I think not enough information has been covered during the middle part of the interview. Barton looked at his watch and said, “O man, I have another appointment to get to so I should probably wrap this up.” Barton asked the interviewee, “Is there anything else to report?” Probably a question based on the first thought that popped into his head. The interviewee asks, “Yes, when can you get me a copy of the consent form? Barton said, “Umm…I will have to check on my professor with that. I am sure she could send one over. I got to go because as I mentioned I got a bunch of these interviews and I need to get them out of the way because I have a lot of things to do. But after I get done tonight I will send an email or something and I am sure she can get it to you tomorrow.” Barton doesn’t care about the interviewee and is more concerned about getting to another interview, which most likely will go poorly. The interviewee asked if he could get the professor’s name. Barton side-steps the question and answers with, “how about I leave you with a note or something and we will just go from there.”
Clarity is simplicity. Barton needs to answer questions in a more direct manner. The interviewee asked Barton about acquiring his professor’s information but Barton fails to be clear and productive. Honestly, Barton seems unorganized and it negatively affects the relationship between the two persons. The clarity of good questioning and answering was sorely lacking.
4) Gentle: Does Barton allow the interviewee to finish what they are saying and not pushy?
No. Barton interrupts the interviewee several times throughout the interview process. Barton said, “Ok well can you like, I don’t know, like can you think of any experiences that might relate to this [observing patients faking pain for more medicine]? Because I mean, this is really important. You can imagine if you are a patient, imagine if I were a patient and I came in and I thought the nurse wouldn’t believe me and I was in a lot of pain, I mean, that seems like it would effect a great deal what you are doing.” The interviewee hesitantly responses, “Yes, it can. I am not saying it affects me but it can affect people because you are looking at somebody who…I mean, come on it can’t hurt that bad.” Barton quickly assesses the situation and said, “It seems like you are holding back on me. I mean, are you worried about the informed consent or your boss?” The interviewee said, “I can’t give away private, personal information. I have to be careful not to give away information because there are fines and such that could be used against me.” Barton pathetically offers the interviewee confidentiality. The interviewee asks, “Well, why is my name on it?” Barton said we just need to know for transcription purpose and to know where the comments came from. The interview asked where the information would go. Barton said his professor would lock up the consent form and it would be safe. Clearly Barton is not telling the truth and does not know what is really going to happen with this interview information.
5) Sensitive: Is Barton an emphatic listener and does Barton display “emotional intelligence?”
Mostly no. At the beginning of the interview, Barton reassures the interviewee that SUU is a good school and that the interviewee can trust Barton and the school. Barton weirdly assures that both parties will do no wrong to the interviewee. This is done in an awkward way though, which seems to make the situation increasingly tense. Barton then, flippantly asks “didn’t you do your work here like through Weber State as an extension? The interview responds with a yes. The interviewee asks if SUU is behind the study. Barton said yes. Barton then said without cause or reason, “I can provide a couple of things later if you like.” Quickly and awkwardly the interview moves forward.
Barton displays a flippant attitude throughout the interview. Barton does not seem to show care for the interviewee. The questions Barton asks lack sincerity. He is there just because it is an assignment rather than a societal duty to gather, organize, and present good, beneficial information to others. Personally, I think Barton shows more apathy towards the interviewee than anything else. The questions lack respect, as well. Barton weakly tried to build a sense of commonality between the two parties. He asked too many close-ended questions and not enough useful open-ended questions. Unfortunately and seemingly, the interview is based on whether Barton is going to get a good grade rather than trying to genuinely uncover good information.
6) Open: Is Barton open to different types of thought?
No. Barton is not open to different types of thought. Barton lacks emotional intelligence. For example, Barton asked if the NRS pain scale works. Barton answered with the general answer provided by the interviewee—“that’s just what the hospital uses—is lame.” Barton then asks a yes or no question—does the NRS pain scale work effectively, yes or no? The interviewee responses with a “sometimes.” The interviewee does a bit of explaining but quickly Barton interrupts the interviewee by pushing the yes or no question. The interviewee said no because it floats… your three is my eight. It is hard to give meds if someone thinks they are at a five on a pain scale. Barton asks if the interviewee thinks the hospital use of this pain scale useful again.
If an interviewee is not answering questions straight up then it would be wise to adjust and move forward. Barton does not do this and therefore the interview becomes even more intense and awkward. Consequently, flexibility and emotional intelligence become important aspects to interviewing people well.
7) Direction: Does Barton know what he wants from the experience?
In my opinion, not really. The interview becomes more serious as Barton explains in a very obvious almost condescending way that we are going to use a common, standard way of interviewing people. This method involves Barton asking questions and the interviewee answering them. Barton attempts to break the ice by asking how much experience the interviewee has in the hospital industry. The interviewee has about 25 years of hospital experience. This is a missed opportunity to start asking open-ended questions about the commentary provided. Open-ended questions about what is the interviewee’s favorite aspect of his job.
Although this the transition from the introduction to the body is smooth, it lacks respect towards the interviewee.
8) Critical: Does Barton pay attention to the logical consistency of the interviewee?
Barton is a pushy interviewer. Barton said, “Ok well can you like, I don’t know, like can you think of any experiences that might relate to this [observing patients faking pain for more medicine]? Because I mean, this is really important. You can imagine if you are a patient, imagine if I were a patient and I came in and I thought the nurse wouldn’t believe me and I was in a lot of pain, I mean, that seems like it would effect a great deal what you are doing.” Desperate interviewing is pathetic interviewing.
9) Remembering: Does Barton retain information well?
No. At the beginning of the interview, the interviewee asks if there is any information that Barton could provide so he can gain a better understanding of the situation. Barton said “like, like, what?” The interviewee continues to ask what will happen with the study. Barton nervously rummages through papers and then rambles on about a consent statement rather than focusing on the specific details of the interview. Barton does not have a consent form with him [most likely because he forgot it] and shows he is unprepared for the interview. Barton reassures the interviewee that all consent forms are taken care of even though he seems unsure about what he is saying. Barton said the reason why he does not have the consent form is because he was in a hurry to get to the interview, which shows that he is much more unprepared for it. Barton falsely promises a phone number so the interviewee so he can ask and have his questions answered.
Barton does two things wrong as it relates to remembering. He forgets the consent form and he forgets to give the interviewee a reliable phone number at the end of the interview. This is a false promised, which lowers the quality of the interview process.
10) Interpreting: Does Barton clarify and extend the meanings of the interviewee’s statements?
At times Barton does a good job clarifying information but most of the time no. For example, Barton attempts to break the ice by asking how much experience the interviewee has in the hospital industry. The interviewee has about 25 years of hospital experience. This is a missed opportunity to start asking open-ended questions about the commentary provided. Open-ended questions about what is the interviewee’s favorite aspect of his job.
In my opinion, not really. At the beginning of the interview, the interviewee asks if there is any information (papers and such) that might help him understand why Barton is doing the interview. Barton said, “We are trying to find out about pain and how nurses deal with pain.” Barton then said, “I really do not know everything that is going to happen so we are just going to have to do our best, I guess.”
This statement shows Barton’s lack of knowledge about the situation. The effect of this statement is simple: the interviewer loses credibility with the interviewee, especially at in important stage in the interview process—the beginning. I recall an experience I had working at a call center in Logan, Utah called Convergys. Convergys provided useful advice during their training sessions. They encouraged their employees not to tell people what you could not do but emphasize what they could do. I imagine interviewing is the similar. Barton explanation would have been sufficient. There was no need for him to ramble on about not knowing the specific details behind the interview.
2) Structure: Does Barton introduce, outline, and round off the purpose behind the interview?
At times yes but for the most part no. At the very beginning, Matthew Barton shakes interviewee’s hand in a friendly manner. Pleasantries occur quickly. Barton expresses concern for his inability to use recording equipment correctly. Barton shows he was ill-prepared for the interview by expressing concerns about his inability to use the recording equipment well. Interviewee ignores the statement and quickly asks—what is going to happen with the study? Personally, I think one of the most important parts of an interview is the beginning. The things you do and say reflect how well you are prepared and how much you care about the person being interviewed. Barton failed in both areas miserably. He did not know how to work the audio recording equipment and maintained a let’s get through this interview without sincere regards for the actual interviewee.
Although in the starting points of the body section Barton explains that this is a traditional question and answer interview, unfortunately in a somewhat condescending way, Barton fails to have organized structure to the rest of the interview, especially with the main questions he was asking. For example, I think Barton asked questions based on the first thing that came to his mind. After a brief and awkward conversation about the interviewee’s hospital work experience, Barton asked about measurement of pain—is it hard to measure (Numeric Rating Scale – NRS pain scale). Barton said, “I guess what we are most interested in is the Numeric Rating Scale…what most people call NRS…I mean, do you feel like it is hard to measure?” Besides using the phrase “I guess” too much, I think Barton was asking the question without really understanding the subject matter and therefore the question lack focus and direction. Plus Barton seemed to dominate the conversation and did not allow the interviewee time to think and talk despite the interviewee appearing very timid and shy.
Lastly, the conclusion was not very good. It was too brief and not detailed enough. Barton asks the interviewee, “Is there anything else to report?” The interviewee asks, “Yes, when can you get me a copy of the consent form? Barton said, “Umm…I will have to check on my professor with that. I am sure she could send one over. I got to go because as I mentioned I got a bunch of these interviews and I need to get them out of the way because I have a lot of things to do. But after I get done tonight I will send an email or something and I am sure she can get it to you tomorrow.” Barton is pushing responsibility off on his professor rather than admitting that he forgot the consent form. Accepting responsibility should be the dominate focus here instead of just saying you will do something when the chances are it will not get done as promised.
3) Clear: Does Barton simply explain ideas and ask concise questions?
No. Let’s take for example the conclusion of the interview. Barton said, “I guess that is probably all that we should look at then.” I think not enough information has been covered during the middle part of the interview. Barton looked at his watch and said, “O man, I have another appointment to get to so I should probably wrap this up.” Barton asked the interviewee, “Is there anything else to report?” Probably a question based on the first thought that popped into his head. The interviewee asks, “Yes, when can you get me a copy of the consent form? Barton said, “Umm…I will have to check on my professor with that. I am sure she could send one over. I got to go because as I mentioned I got a bunch of these interviews and I need to get them out of the way because I have a lot of things to do. But after I get done tonight I will send an email or something and I am sure she can get it to you tomorrow.” Barton doesn’t care about the interviewee and is more concerned about getting to another interview, which most likely will go poorly. The interviewee asked if he could get the professor’s name. Barton side-steps the question and answers with, “how about I leave you with a note or something and we will just go from there.”
Clarity is simplicity. Barton needs to answer questions in a more direct manner. The interviewee asked Barton about acquiring his professor’s information but Barton fails to be clear and productive. Honestly, Barton seems unorganized and it negatively affects the relationship between the two persons. The clarity of good questioning and answering was sorely lacking.
4) Gentle: Does Barton allow the interviewee to finish what they are saying and not pushy?
No. Barton interrupts the interviewee several times throughout the interview process. Barton said, “Ok well can you like, I don’t know, like can you think of any experiences that might relate to this [observing patients faking pain for more medicine]? Because I mean, this is really important. You can imagine if you are a patient, imagine if I were a patient and I came in and I thought the nurse wouldn’t believe me and I was in a lot of pain, I mean, that seems like it would effect a great deal what you are doing.” The interviewee hesitantly responses, “Yes, it can. I am not saying it affects me but it can affect people because you are looking at somebody who…I mean, come on it can’t hurt that bad.” Barton quickly assesses the situation and said, “It seems like you are holding back on me. I mean, are you worried about the informed consent or your boss?” The interviewee said, “I can’t give away private, personal information. I have to be careful not to give away information because there are fines and such that could be used against me.” Barton pathetically offers the interviewee confidentiality. The interviewee asks, “Well, why is my name on it?” Barton said we just need to know for transcription purpose and to know where the comments came from. The interview asked where the information would go. Barton said his professor would lock up the consent form and it would be safe. Clearly Barton is not telling the truth and does not know what is really going to happen with this interview information.
5) Sensitive: Is Barton an emphatic listener and does Barton display “emotional intelligence?”
Mostly no. At the beginning of the interview, Barton reassures the interviewee that SUU is a good school and that the interviewee can trust Barton and the school. Barton weirdly assures that both parties will do no wrong to the interviewee. This is done in an awkward way though, which seems to make the situation increasingly tense. Barton then, flippantly asks “didn’t you do your work here like through Weber State as an extension? The interview responds with a yes. The interviewee asks if SUU is behind the study. Barton said yes. Barton then said without cause or reason, “I can provide a couple of things later if you like.” Quickly and awkwardly the interview moves forward.
Barton displays a flippant attitude throughout the interview. Barton does not seem to show care for the interviewee. The questions Barton asks lack sincerity. He is there just because it is an assignment rather than a societal duty to gather, organize, and present good, beneficial information to others. Personally, I think Barton shows more apathy towards the interviewee than anything else. The questions lack respect, as well. Barton weakly tried to build a sense of commonality between the two parties. He asked too many close-ended questions and not enough useful open-ended questions. Unfortunately and seemingly, the interview is based on whether Barton is going to get a good grade rather than trying to genuinely uncover good information.
6) Open: Is Barton open to different types of thought?
No. Barton is not open to different types of thought. Barton lacks emotional intelligence. For example, Barton asked if the NRS pain scale works. Barton answered with the general answer provided by the interviewee—“that’s just what the hospital uses—is lame.” Barton then asks a yes or no question—does the NRS pain scale work effectively, yes or no? The interviewee responses with a “sometimes.” The interviewee does a bit of explaining but quickly Barton interrupts the interviewee by pushing the yes or no question. The interviewee said no because it floats… your three is my eight. It is hard to give meds if someone thinks they are at a five on a pain scale. Barton asks if the interviewee thinks the hospital use of this pain scale useful again.
If an interviewee is not answering questions straight up then it would be wise to adjust and move forward. Barton does not do this and therefore the interview becomes even more intense and awkward. Consequently, flexibility and emotional intelligence become important aspects to interviewing people well.
7) Direction: Does Barton know what he wants from the experience?
In my opinion, not really. The interview becomes more serious as Barton explains in a very obvious almost condescending way that we are going to use a common, standard way of interviewing people. This method involves Barton asking questions and the interviewee answering them. Barton attempts to break the ice by asking how much experience the interviewee has in the hospital industry. The interviewee has about 25 years of hospital experience. This is a missed opportunity to start asking open-ended questions about the commentary provided. Open-ended questions about what is the interviewee’s favorite aspect of his job.
Although this the transition from the introduction to the body is smooth, it lacks respect towards the interviewee.
8) Critical: Does Barton pay attention to the logical consistency of the interviewee?
Barton is a pushy interviewer. Barton said, “Ok well can you like, I don’t know, like can you think of any experiences that might relate to this [observing patients faking pain for more medicine]? Because I mean, this is really important. You can imagine if you are a patient, imagine if I were a patient and I came in and I thought the nurse wouldn’t believe me and I was in a lot of pain, I mean, that seems like it would effect a great deal what you are doing.” Desperate interviewing is pathetic interviewing.
9) Remembering: Does Barton retain information well?
No. At the beginning of the interview, the interviewee asks if there is any information that Barton could provide so he can gain a better understanding of the situation. Barton said “like, like, what?” The interviewee continues to ask what will happen with the study. Barton nervously rummages through papers and then rambles on about a consent statement rather than focusing on the specific details of the interview. Barton does not have a consent form with him [most likely because he forgot it] and shows he is unprepared for the interview. Barton reassures the interviewee that all consent forms are taken care of even though he seems unsure about what he is saying. Barton said the reason why he does not have the consent form is because he was in a hurry to get to the interview, which shows that he is much more unprepared for it. Barton falsely promises a phone number so the interviewee so he can ask and have his questions answered.
Barton does two things wrong as it relates to remembering. He forgets the consent form and he forgets to give the interviewee a reliable phone number at the end of the interview. This is a false promised, which lowers the quality of the interview process.
10) Interpreting: Does Barton clarify and extend the meanings of the interviewee’s statements?
At times Barton does a good job clarifying information but most of the time no. For example, Barton attempts to break the ice by asking how much experience the interviewee has in the hospital industry. The interviewee has about 25 years of hospital experience. This is a missed opportunity to start asking open-ended questions about the commentary provided. Open-ended questions about what is the interviewee’s favorite aspect of his job.