[Air-L] IM interviews not interviews?
j.unger at lancaster.ac.uk
Mon Aug 19 00:28:19 PDT 2013
In addition to what others have already said: It's hard to say without seeing the detailed critique of the reviewers, but I wouldn't be surprised if what is at the heart of it are differing understandings of synchronicity/asynchronicity in digitally augmented communication. While it doesn't specifically refer to interviews, you might be interested in Erika Darics' work in this area:
Dr J W Unger
Lecturer and Academic Director of Summer Programmes
Department of Linguistics and English Language
e-mail: j.unger at lancaster.ac.uk<mailto:j.unger at lancaster.ac.uk>
tel: +44 1524 592591
Follow me on Twitter @johnnyunger<http://twitter.com/#!/johnnyunger>
On 18 Aug 2013, at 14:46, Jenny Davis <jdavis4 at neo.tamu.edu<mailto:jdavis4 at neo.tamu.edu>> wrote:
Long time lurker and responder, first time inquirer.
I am working on an R&R for a paper in which I use both FtF and IM interviews. I am aware of the literature that talks about the strengths and weaknesses of IM as an interview mode, but one of the reviewers says that IM does not constitute an interview at all, but merely a question/answer session. I want to address this critique adequately. Is anyone familiar with specific articles/books that make this argument and/or push back against it?
Jenny L. Davis
Department of Sociology & Anthropology
James Madison University
email: Davis5JL at jmu.edu<mailto:Davis5JL at jmu.edu>
The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org<mailto:Air-L at listserv.aoir.org> mailing list
is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org
Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers:
More information about the Air-L