Table 1: Procedural steps and phases associated with the survey

Procedural steps Phase

1. Theoretical conceptualisation of the topic under study.
2. Formulation of one or more hypotheses
1. Planning
3. Design of the data collection instrument
4. Identification of target population/ Sample design
2. Field
5. Data collection
administration
6. Data capture
7. Data analysis (Content analysis – qualitative technique 3. Data processing,
or statistical analysis – quantitative technique) analysis and
9. Interpretation of data documentation

11. Documentation of results (Report writing)

surveys, scientists usually use one or both of the two basic qualities of data derived from
two types of variables, namely quantitative variables; and/or qualitative variables. The
distinction between quantitative and qualitative variables is important as it often calls
for different data collection techniques and has a direct impact on the type and design
of the data collection instrument that will ultimately be used in the survey. Therefore,
it is important to make sure that the researcher understands the difference between
the two qualities of information, when to use it and how to interpret it. Because of the
type of information needed in most of the natural science disciplines like Physics and
Engineering, the focus usually falls on quantitative variables (that can be empirically
measured), whilst researchers in the social sciences are less restricted to the use of only
quantitative variables. Though, it is also true that in practice, social scientists often use
both quantitative and qualitative variables in a single research project. Whatever the use,
it is important to know that the decision as to which one of the two or both forms of
data the researcher would need, lies with the nature of the topic under investigation; the
research setting (circumstances under which the research is to be conducted); and the
type of information that is needed to elude the question(s) that were asked that lead to
the specific research topic.
Quantitative data
Quantitative data refers to the use of variables that can be characterised in numerical
terms. This type of variable is common in the natural sciences, where numbers, formulae
and rigid exact physical laws play an important role. Variables such as mass, distance and
time are typical quantitative measurements in the natural sciences. This type of variable

D.B. Jarbandhan & De Wet Schutte

671
 was also introduced into the social sciences via the positivist tradition pioneered by
August Compte, a French sociologist, during middle 1800s. The underlying argument of
the positivist approach is that social life is, like physical laws, also governed by underlying
laws and principles that can be discovered with methods that are traditionally associated
with physical techniques (Welman and Kruger, 2001:7,8; Babbie 1992:258). Typical
quantitative variables in the social sciences are variables like income, fertility rate and
education level. Quantitative information is usually easily accessed through large sample
surveys on representative populations. Like in the physical sciences, quantitative data in
the social sciences is also associated with statistical inference. In short, if the researcher
can make meaningful calculations with the information in some or other way, it is
quantitative data.
Research based on quantitative data, as it is used in the social sciences, is often
described as outsider in data. That is that one of the researcher’s claims is to be
objective and that the researcher positions him-/herself outside the study object and look
from outside into the subject under study. This tends to give useful and well targeted
information, especially when the structured questionnaire technique is used. At the
same time the data may be considered as clinical information that does not necessarily
exactly reflect the human nature. It is sometimes too unemotional and derived from the
respondent’s real human experience and reduces human behaviour to merely categories
that is eluded with statistical inference. It is exactly this notion that made social scientists
search for a different kind of information to shed some light from another angle in
search of understanding and getting to the truth behind what drives human behaviour
and attitudes. This search resulted in an alternative/complementary approach in human
sciences inquiry, namely to use qualitative data.
Qualitative data
As already mentioned, the qualitative research approach developed in reaction to
the dehumanising and too clinical positivistic approach. It is argued that if one really
want to understand human behaviour, the researcher must get closer to it (Bless and
Higson–Smith, 1995:100). That is exactly what the qualitative data collection techniques
strive to do. The use of qualitative variables refers to a research design that uses data that
is not suited for statistical inference. That means that it is not possible to quantify the
data collected.
Qualitative researchers are concerned with understanding the context in which
behaviour occurs, not just the statistical extent to which it occurs (Babbie 1992:258). The
assessment may be more subjective in that the dependent variables are not necessarily
defined in empirical terms. In fact, qualitative researchers are not concerned with a
few narrowly defined variables that impact on a phenomenon, but are concerned with
the description and interaction of multiple variables, sometimes over a period of time.
In qualitative research there is less concern with isolating variables in highly constraint
situations like in the experimental procedure, as it is argued that such situations most likely
bear little resemblance to real world contexts. This speaks for itself that it is not possible to
manipulate data derived from a qualitative variable with statistical techniques. In fact, the

672 Journal of Public Administration • Vol 41 no 3.1 • October 2006

 researcher could argue that valid information regarding a specific issue would only be
obtained via unstructured interviews (i.e. how people experience their work environment)
and in other cases, especially when factual information is needed, via structured
interviews (i.e. household expenditure surveys).
The structured interview
A structured interview is an interview where a respondent is visited by an interviewer that
reads the questions from a questionnaire to him/her and writes down his/her responses. The
interviewer is usually instructed to ask the questions exactly as it is formulated. This is how
the researcher takes maximum control (structures) over the respondent’s frame of reference
when responding to questions. This could be typical “yes” or “no” responses to questions, or
responses to open-ended questions where respondents are allowed to think within specific
parameters when they respond. i.e. how would you describe your work environment?
Instruments for structured interviews
This type of research instrument has no flexibility. When used with the face-to-face
interview technique, it requires that the questions be asked with exactly the same wording
and in exactly the same sequence for all the respondents. This standardisation is designed
to control response bias by ensuring that the respondents are responding to exactly the
same question. For this purposes rigid instructions are often given by the researcher to
the interviewers on how to ask the questions in order to improve the quality of the data
by minimising measurement error. Needless to mention that this type of data collection
instrument requires extensive time and skill to develop.
Do’s and don’ts during structured face-to-face interviews
• always be friendly and polite;
• remember, the researcher is an uninvited guest in conversation with a stranger;
• the respondent seldom has any interest in the research, so, be brief, to the point and
try to be as acceptable as possible to the respondent from the outset, avoid negative
stereotyping (clothes);
• make an appointment if the respondent is busy at the specific time;
• although refusals are normal, they should be minimised as far as possible. Therefore,
always try to convince the respondent to partake in the research;
• when open-ended questions are asked, always repeat the response to the respondent,
before writing it down, while the respondent must give consent that it is correct,
otherwise the researcher deals with the interviewer’s conclusions;
• always make sure that the respondent use the relevant frame of reference when he/she
responds;
• do not probe, unless instructed to do so by the researcher;
• refrain from using examples other than appear on the questionnaire, unless the
researcher has affirmed it;
• use one’s own personality to ask the questions, but be careful in cases where the
phrasing of a question is critical for the validity thereof, as the interviewer must stick to
the original phrasing of the question;

676 Journal of Public Administration • Vol 41 no 3.1 • October 2006

 • show interest in responses, but do not be curious, keep interviews as clinical as
possible and do not laugh or be too curious on (for you) unexpected responses;
• do not partake in discussions that flow from the topic of the survey or from responses,
remember, the questioner should have no opinion on matters, only the respondent has

• do not show any reaction or emotion to responses from the respondent.

an opinion;

The unstructured interview

An unstructured interview could take place in various settings, i.e. in the form of a one-
on-one interview or a group interview (i.e. focus group discussion) where the interviewer,
except for a broad topic announcement, asks no specific questions. The respondent has the
freedom to talk about anything within this broad topic. The discussion is usually taped or
through notes written down on the content of the discussion. The researcher would analyse
the content of the discussion after the discussions when he/ she searches for the essential
content that reflects on the purpose of the study. The unstructured interview technique
is often used in the historical procedure (i.e. Service delivery by municipalities to the
community), or in the case study procedure (i.e. The development of a new Constitution
for South Africa).
Instruments for unstructured interviews
Unstructured instruments are designed to probe extensively in order to extract as much
as possible information from the respondent on a specific topic. Unstructured instruments
are sometimes also chosen for preliminary and exploratory studies when the research goal
includes the discovery of relevant issues. Using this instrument, the researcher has a goal
in mind that guides the direction of the remarks made by the respondent, but does not
limit the respondent to response options to specific questions. The unstructured interview
technique requires highly trained and proficient interviewers and the data emanating from
the instrument requires complex data analysis.
Do’s and don’ts during unstructured interviews
• avoid questions/probing that would provoke a “yes” or “no” response;
• the golden rule – the shorter the question, the longer the response;
• do not intrude on the respondent’s privacy;
• show a interest as a tool for further probing;
• use body language to create a relaxed atmosphere;
• use body language to show further interest. e.g. nod of head;
• use silences to extract more information on a specific statement;
• be sensitive for mannerisms that might irritate the respondent;
• make sure that you know the research topic well;
• keep eye contact with the respondent;
• if notes are made, do not let the writing interrupt the natural flow of the discussion;
• always ask permission to tape the conversation before doing so;
• conduct interviews in a place where the respondent could feel safe to air his/her views;
• inform the respondent of the topic of the discussion and make a firm appointment;

D.B. Jarbandhan & De Wet Schutte

677
 • always confirm the appointment the day before the discussion;
• prepare psychologically for the interview through role-playing facilitation.
The semi-structured interview
A typical semi-structured interview is an interview that uses a questionnaire with only
or various open ended questions that would mould the respondent’s frame of reference,
whilst at the same time giving him/her the freedom to respond in whatever way he/ she
feels like to respond. This means, whatever the respondent wants to say as an answer to a
question, would be accepted as a response.
It should be noted that in practice, some structured questionnaires could include
semi-structured and/or even unstructured questions. However, this does not mean that it
was an unstructured or semi-structured interview, but only that some questions have to
be treated as such during the structured interview.
Instruments for semi–structured interviews
This type of instrument is helpful in exploratory research as well as when considering pilot
surveys before the finalisation of a questionnaire (Bless and Higson-Smith, 1995:110). In
addition, the semi-structured instrument is appropriate when a researcher is certain as
to what he/she wants to know, but still wants to leave some room for exploration as the
interview proceeds.
Situation during the face-to-face interview
As mentioned, the face-to-face interview could be employed as part of the data collection
technique using from structured to unstructured measuring instruments. It is important
to note that unless the interviewer made prior contact with the respondent and made an
appointment for the interview, knocking at a door to fill in a questionnaire means that you
are an uninvited guest and a positive impression during the first contact is vital for the
respondent’s participation in the survey. It is exactly because of this that some respondents
refuse the interviewer entry into the house. Therefore, one of the most important elements
in the armour of the interviewer is not to provoke negative first impressions. The interviewer
must always remember that first impressions from the side of the respondent are important.
Researchers must also take note of this when they select interviewers to work in certain
communities. Therefore the interviewer should not play a role in eroding the validity
and reliability of responses given by a particular respondent. Congruency on as many as
possible elements like age, gender, ethnic group and language. between the interviewer and
respondent is advisable. So, do not overstay your welcome. Experience also teaches that an
interviewer that is too well known in a community might not be able to get truthful answers
from respondents, especially if the questions deal with sensitive issues. Thus, in some
cases where congruency does not fully exist, it might enhance the validity and reliability
of the responses. However, because of the fact that the interviewer deals with verbal
communication, matching should always at least be sought on the issue of language.
Turning to the duration of interviews, it should be noted that long interviews often
result in a lower response rate, an increase in neutral responses and/or stereotyping in

678 Journal of Public Administration • Vol 41 no 3.1 • October 2006

data collection purposes. Though this article did not venture into the different question
types or data collection techniques, it is sufficient to state that doing one thing right in
a research project does not mean that the end result would produce valid and reliable
information. Proper scientific research involves a series of decisions built on the principles
that underlies the different procedures. The aim of this article was to address some of the
issues pertaining the interview as a data collection technique within the parameters of
surveys. However, one issue is clear. One of the most important, but sometimes neglected
areas that determine the quality of any information collected in surveys using the interview
data collection technique, lies with the quality of the contact between the researcher and
the respondent, whether it is via be self-administrative questionnaires or unstructured
face-to-face interviews.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Moser, C.A. 1958. Survey methods in social investigation. London: William Heinemann Ltd.
Babbie, E. 1994. The Practice of Social Research. (7th Edition). Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing
Company.
Babbie, E. 1992. The Practice of Social Research. Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Bless, C. and Higson-Smith, C. 1995. Fundamentals of Social Research Methods. An African
Perspective. (2nd Edition). Kenwyn: Juta and Kie.
De Vos, A.S. (ed.) 2000. Research at grass roots: A primer for the caring professions. Pretoria: Van
Schaik.
Welman, J.C. and Kruger, S.J. 2001. Research Methodology. Cape Town: Oxford University Press.

D.B. Jarbandhan & De Wet Schutte

681