Invited Review: Collecting Data through Dyadic Interviews: A Systematic Review

IF 1.1 3区 社会学 Q2 ANTHROPOLOGY Field Methods Pub Date : 2024-07-26 DOI:10.1177/1525822x241267171
David L. Morgan
{"title":"Invited Review: Collecting Data through Dyadic Interviews: A Systematic Review","authors":"David L. Morgan","doi":"10.1177/1525822x241267171","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article reports on a systematic review of journal articles that used dyadic interviews, also known as paired or joint interviews. The two basic formats for these interviews involve either interviewing participants separately or together, plus the additional possibility of using both formats in the same study. A search using the Social Science Citations Index yielded 471 articles that reported on such interviews. Of these articles, 38% reported interviewing the dyad members separately, 55% reported interviewing them together, and 7% used both formats. Over 40% reported on interviews of married couples or equivalents, and an additional 30% of the interviews involved other pairs of family members. Less common pairings involved coworkers, patients and providers, or friends. These results indicate an almost unanimous use of dyadic interviews based on pre-existing relationships and family members in particular, with only limited use as a broader interviewing method.","PeriodicalId":48060,"journal":{"name":"Field Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Field Methods","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822x241267171","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article reports on a systematic review of journal articles that used dyadic interviews, also known as paired or joint interviews. The two basic formats for these interviews involve either interviewing participants separately or together, plus the additional possibility of using both formats in the same study. A search using the Social Science Citations Index yielded 471 articles that reported on such interviews. Of these articles, 38% reported interviewing the dyad members separately, 55% reported interviewing them together, and 7% used both formats. Over 40% reported on interviews of married couples or equivalents, and an additional 30% of the interviews involved other pairs of family members. Less common pairings involved coworkers, patients and providers, or friends. These results indicate an almost unanimous use of dyadic interviews based on pre-existing relationships and family members in particular, with only limited use as a broader interviewing method.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
特邀评论:通过社群访谈收集数据:系统回顾
本文报告了对使用二元访谈(又称配对或联合访谈)的期刊文章进行的系统性回顾。这种访谈有两种基本形式,一种是分别访谈参与者,另一种是共同访谈参与者。使用《社会科学引文索引》进行搜索后,发现有 471 篇文章对此类访谈进行了报道。在这些文章中,有 38% 的文章报告了对二人组成员的单独访谈,55% 的文章报告了对二人组成员的共同访谈,7% 的文章同时使用了两种访谈形式。超过 40% 的文章报道了对已婚夫妇或同等成员的访谈,另有 30% 的访谈涉及其他成对的家庭成员。较少见的配对涉及同事、病人和医疗服务提供者或朋友。这些结果表明,基于先前存在的关系和家庭成员的双人访谈几乎得到了一致的使用,而作为一种更广泛的访谈方法的使用则非常有限。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Field Methods
Field Methods Multiple-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
5.90%
发文量
41
期刊介绍: Field Methods (formerly Cultural Anthropology Methods) is devoted to articles about the methods used by field wzorkers in the social and behavioral sciences and humanities for the collection, management, and analysis data about human thought and/or human behavior in the natural world. Articles should focus on innovations and issues in the methods used, rather than on the reporting of research or theoretical/epistemological questions about research. High-quality articles using qualitative and quantitative methods-- from scientific or interpretative traditions-- dealing with data collection and analysis in applied and scholarly research from writers in the social sciences, humanities, and related professions are all welcome in the pages of the journal.
期刊最新文献
ChatGPTest: Opportunities and Cautionary Tales of Utilizing AI for Questionnaire Pretesting What predicts willingness to participate in a follow-up panel study among respondents to a national web/mail survey? Invited Review: Collecting Data through Dyadic Interviews: A Systematic Review Offering Web Response as a Refusal Conversion Technique in a Mixed-mode Survey Network of Categories: A Method to Aggregate Egocentric Network Survey Data into a Whole Network Structure
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1