The conversational research interview constitutes a complex and fraught context for personal accounts, and the methodological literature of the past few decades has acknowledged this. Theoretical discussions about representation, ethics, and power in interviews have been extended in empirical studies of actual interaction. Particularly useful for observing subtleties of talk between interviewer and interviewee are tools drawn from conversation analysis and other, overlapping forms of linguistic analysis. This article seeks to add to existing studies of interview interaction by proposing a strategy for examining the specifically generic features of interviewing. Genre, as framed by rhetorical theory, encompasses both form and social situation, allowing interviews to be framed as local enactments of historically regularized but flexible discursive forms. By focusing on interlocutors’ expectations around and linguistic action within the conventions of talk, genre offers a valuable additional wedge into an oft-used means for collecting narrative research data.
Atkinson, P., & Silverman, D. ( 1997). Kundera’s Immortality: The interview society and the invention of the self. Qualitative Inquiry, 3, 304-325.
2.
Baker, C.D. ( 2000). Locating culture in action: Membership categorization in texts and talk. In A. Lee & C. Poynton (Eds.), Culture and text: Discourse and methodology in social research and cultural studies (pp. 99-113). Sydney , Australia: Allen and Unwin.
3.
Baker, C.D. ( 2002). Ethnomethodological analyses of interviews. In J. F. Gubrium & J. A. Holstein (Eds.), Handbook of interview research: Context and method (pp. 777-795). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
4.
Baker, C.D. ( 2004). Membership categorization and interview accounts. In D. Silverman (Ed.), Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice (2nd ed., pp. 162-176). London: Sage.
5.
Bakhtin, M.M. ( 1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.). Austin: University of Texas Press.
6.
Bakhtin, M.M. ( 1986). Speech genres and other late essays (V. W. McGee, Trans.). Austin: University of Texas Press .
7.
Bernstein, M.A. ( 1989). The poetics of ressentiment. In G. S. Morson & C. Emerson (Eds.), Rethinking Bakhtin: Extensions and challenges (pp. 197-223). Evanston, Il: Northwestern UP.
8.
Briggs, C. ( 1986). Learning how to ask: A sociolinguistic appraisal of the role of the interview in social science research. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
9.
Briggs, C. ( 2002). Interviewing, power/knowledge, and social inequality . In J. F. Gubrium & J. A. Holstein (Eds.), Handbook of interview research: Context & method (pp. 911-922). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10.
Cicourel, A.V. ( 1974). Theory and method in a study of Argentine fertility. New York: John Wiley.
11.
Coe, R., Lingard, L. , & Teslenko, T. (Eds.). (2001). The rhetoric and ideology of genre: Strategies for stability and change. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.
12.
De Certeau, M. ( 1984). The practice of everyday life. Berkeley : University of California Press.
13.
Dingwall, R. ( 1997). Accounts, interviews and observations. In G. Miller & R. Dingwall (Eds.), Context and method in qualitative research (pp. 51-65). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
14.
El Or, T. ( 1992). Do you really know how they make love? The limits on intimacy with ethnographic informants. Qualitative Sociology , 15, 53-72.
15.
Ellis, C., & Berger, L. ( 2002). Their story/my story/our story: Including the researcher’s experience in interview research. In J. Gubrium & J. A. Holstein (Eds.), Handbook of interview research: Context and method (pp. 849-876). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
16.
Enosh, G., & Buchbinder, E. (2005). The interactive construction of narrative styles in sensitive interviews: The case of domestic violence research. Qualitative Inquiry, 11, 588-617.
17.
Fogel, A. ( 1989). Coerced speech and the Oedipus dialogue complex. In G. S. Morson & C. Emerson (Eds.), Rethinking Bakhtin: Challenges and extensions (pp. 173-196). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
18.
Freedman, A., & Medway, P. ( 1994a). Introduction: New views of genre and their implications for education. In A. Freedman & P. Medway (Eds.), Learning and teaching genre (pp. 1-22). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.
19.
Freedman, A., & Medway, P. (Eds.). (1994b). Genre and the new rhetoric . London: Taylor & Francis.
20.
Freire, P. ( 1985). The politics of education: Culture, power and liberation . South Hadley, MA: Bergin & Garvey.
21.
Freire, P. ( 1993). Pedagogy of the oppressed (new revised ed.). New York: Continuum.
22.
Giltrow, J. ( 2001). Meta-genre. In R. Coe, L. Lingard, & T. Teslenko (Eds.), The rhetoric and ideology of genre: Strategies for stability and change (pp. 187-205). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
23.
Giltrow, J. (in press). Genre as difference: The sociality of linguistic variation . In H. Dorgeloh & A. Wanner (Eds.), Genre and syntactic variation . Berlin: Mouton.
24.
Goffman, E. ( 1981). Forms of talk. Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press.
25.
Gubrium, J., & Holstein, J.A. (1998). Narrative practice and the coherence of personal stories. Sociological Quarterly , 39, 163-187.
26.
Gubrium, J., & Holstein, J. A. (Eds.). (2002). Handbook of interview research: Context and method. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
27.
Hester, S., & Francis, D. ( 1994). Doing data: The local organization of a sociological interview. British Journal of Sociology, 45, 675-695.
28.
Hiller, H.H., & DiLuzio, L. ( 2004). The interviewee and the research interview: Analyzing a neglected dimension in research. Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 41(1), 1-26.
29.
Holstein, J.A., & Gubrium, J. ( 1995). The active interview. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
30.
Kong, T.S.K., Mahoney, D., & Plummer, K. ( 2002). Queering the interview. In J. Gubrium & J. A. Holstein (Eds.), Handbook of interview research: Context and method (pp. 239-258). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
31.
Kratz, C. ( 2001). Conversations and lives. In L. White, S. Miescher, & C. D. William (Eds.), African words, African voices (pp. 127-161). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
32.
Mazeland, H., & ten Have, P. ( 1996). Essential tensions in (semi-)open research interviews . In I. Maso & F. Wester (Eds.), The deliberate dialogue: Qualitative perspectives on the interview. Brussels: VUB University Press.
33.
Miller, C.R. ( 1994). Genre as social action. In A. Freedman & P. Medway (Eds.), Genre and the new rhetoric (pp. 23-42). London: Taylor & Francis.
34.
Mishler, E.G. ( 1986). Research interviewing: Context and narrative. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
35.
Rapley, T.J. ( 2001). The art(fulness) of open-ended interviewing: Some considerations on analysing interviews. Qualitative Research, 1, 303-323.
36.
Rapley, M., & Antaki, C. ( 1998). "What do you think about . . . ?": Generating views in an interview. Text, 18, 587-608.
37.
Roulston, K. ( 2001). Data analysis and "theorizing as ideology." Qualitative Research, 1, 279-302.
38.
Roulston, K. ( 2006). Close encounters of the "CA" kind: A review of literature analyzing talk in research interviews. Qualitative Research , 6, 515-534.
39.
Sands, R., & Krumer-Nevo, M. (2006). Interview shocks and shockwaves . Qualitative Inquiry, 12, 950-971.
40.
Scheurich, J.J. ( 1997). Research method in the postmodern. London: Falmer Press.
41.
Tanggaard, L. ( 2007). The research interview as discourses crossing swords . Qualitative Inquiry, 13, 160-176.
42.
Wasserfall, R. ( 1993). Reflexivity, feminism and difference. Qualitative Sociology, 16, 23-41.
