When it comes to doing research, I find informal chats or casual conversations are my most comfortable arena. I find the tangents that naturally come up can be really oinformative, and find the more organic flow of a conversation helps the person being questioned feel more comfortable, and on control of what information they want to share. This is only from my personal experience and opinion, but I have always felt more comfortable discussing difficult topics in a conversational way, rather than a strict question and answer format.
This research method is called Qualitative Research. Informal conversations or unstructured interviews with participants. Qualitative research all about open-ended discussions, where the researcher and the participants just chat it out. This way, they can dive into topics, experiences, and how people see things without sticking to a strict set of questions.
Even though we call it informal, there still needs to be a bit of structure. To give the discussion some kind of direction, I need to focus on what exactly I want to ask. My plan was to send out some general points about what I wanted to talk about. This gave the participants a heads-up so they could decide if they were up for a chat and maybe even prepare a bit beforehand.
I really enjoyed the more casual conversations and felt it worked for me and my topic of discussion.The conversations were flexible, and as the topic of personal support and professional development via a book fair is quite niche, i was able to gain deep insights by just having a natural, relaxed chat with the participants. we were able to discuss personal experiences, unique perspectives, and meanings that might not have come up in a more structured, or formal setup of email survey, or secondary data.
As Koro-Ljungberg (2016) pointed out in THIS article, different projects and research plans need different approaches. Sometimes, the data leads researchers down unexpected paths. So, even though you plan your research method, sometimes you’ve got to be open to taking detours and exploring new spaces to get what you need.
After each conversation, I used something called Conversational Analysis (CA) to dissect all that was discussed.
Conversational Analysis is a sophisticated method used to delve deeply into the intricacies of communication within conversations. It focuses on dissecting various elements, such as the specific words used, the timing of pauses, shifts in tone, instances of interruptions, and other subtle nuances that construct and convey meaning during social interactions. The goal is to comprehend how individuals convey and interpret messages through their communication. I feel a natural tendency toward this and so I was confident to employ CA as my main method.
However, Conversational Analysis does have its challenges. One significant issue is the necessity to address and confront personal biases. Acknowledging and managing one’s own predispositions is important to maintain the integrity and reliability of the any findings. Allowing biases to influence the analysis can potentially skew the outcomes, undermining the credibility and validity of the entire research project. A meticulous and conscious effort to mitigating biases is needed to ensure the research remains impartial and credible
I read papers by Emanuel A. Schegloff and Gail Jefferson, Charles Goodwin and John Heritage. Each of them discussed how Conversational Analysis tries to unpack the social rules and conventions that make conversation flow smoothly. Illuminating an invisible structure that shows how we communicate with one another.
This felt really essential to my research, specifically with my belief that certain events, like a book fair, can create a level playing field between students and industry professionals. These events give students the chance work alongside professionals as equals, creating this cool space where connections just naturally click.