Interaction in qualitative questionnaires: From self-report to intersubjective achievement

Meike Wernicke; Steven Talmy

doi:10.1515/applirev-2017-0030

Article

Interaction in qualitative questionnaires: From self-report to intersubjective achievement

Meike Wernicke and Steven Talmy

Published/Copyright: May 9, 2017

Published by

Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Submit Manuscript Author Information Explore this Subject

From the journal Applied Linguistics Review Volume 9 Issue 4

Abstract

Survey questionnaires are among the most widely-used research methods in applied linguistics, adopted for everything from large-scale quantitative studies measuring social-psychological variables to qualitative studies that solicit participant views on a range of different topics. Despite the variety of purposes that survey questionnaires are used for, the most common approaches to analysis of the data they yield involve content analysis using descriptive or inferential statistics and/or enumeration of emergent themes. The study reported in this article conceives of questionnaire data in notably different terms: as occasioned (conditionally-relevant responses sequentially-projected by a question), recipient-designed (devised for the research context and researcher), and thus, as thoroughly interactional phenomena (Drew 2006; Sacks 1992). The study examines the identity construction of French as a second language (FSL) teachers on a professional development sojourn in France, drawing on a data-set in part comprised of participants’ open-ended responses to a 48-item questionnaire concerning whether their “confidence as French language teachers” increased as a result of their involvement in the sojourn. However, rather than conceiving of participants’ answers as revelations of changes in their interior states, the study draws on insights from conversation analysis and membership categorization analysis to examine how “confidence” was recruited as a discursive resource to “do being” a particular kind of L2 French teacher. We demonstrate how the presence and problematics of a (French) native-speaker archetype for the FSL teachers was in part formulated through close analytic attention to both the sequential and categorial features of researcher/respondent interactions occasioned by one open-ended response item in the questionnaire. This alternative approach to analyzing questionnaire data offers important insights about L2 teacher identity. It also addresses more fundamental questions concerning the discursive and interactional basis of ostensibly non-interactional research methods like survey questionnaires. Additionally, the insistence on an explicit methodological framing of the research process promotes greater theoretical and methodological consistency, and of particular importance, a significantly expanded conception of and accounting for researcher reflexivity.

Keywords: survey questionnaires; conversation analysis; membership categorization analysis; French teacher identity; researcher reflexivity

References

Aldridge, Jill, Barry Fraser & Tai-Chu Huang. 1999. Investigating classroom environments in Taiwan and Australia with multiple research methods. Journal of Educational Research 93. 48–62.10.1080/00220679909597628Search in Google Scholar

Atkinson, J. Maxwell & John Heritage. 1984. Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Baker, Carol. 2003. Ethnomethodological analyses of interviews. In James A. Holstein & Jaber F. Gubrium (eds.), Inside interviewing: New lenses, new concerns, 395–412. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.10.4135/9781412984492.n19Search in Google Scholar

Bayliss, Doreen & Marie-Josée Vignola. 2000. Assessing language proficiency of FSL teacher candidates: What makes a successful candidate? Canadian Modern Language Review 57. 217.10.3138/cmlr.57.2.217Search in Google Scholar

Bayliss, Doreen & Marie-Josée Vignola. 2007. Training non-native second language teachers: The case of anglophone FSL teacher candidates. Canadian Modern Language Review 63. 217–244.10.3138/K2U7-H14L-5471-61W0Search in Google Scholar

Berry, Roger. 1990. The role of language improvement in in-service teacher training: Killing two birds with one stone. System 18. 97–105.10.1016/0346-251X(90)90032-ZSearch in Google Scholar

Bradburn, Norman M., Seymour Sudman & Brian Wansink. 2004. Asking questions: The definitive guide to questionnaire design. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Search in Google Scholar

Braun, V., & V. Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2). 77–101.10.1191/1478088706qp063oaSearch in Google Scholar

Briggs, Charles. 1986. Learning how to ask: A sociolinguistic appraisal of the role of the interviewer in social science research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139165990Search in Google Scholar

Briggs, Charles. 2007. Anthropology, interviewing, and communicability in contemporary society. Current Anthropology 48. 551–580.10.1086/518300Search in Google Scholar

Brown, James Dean. 2009. Open-response items in questionnaires. In Juanita Heigham & Robert Croker (eds.), Qualitative research in applied linguistics: A practical introduction, 200–219. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230239517_10Search in Google Scholar

Bucholtz, Mary & Kira Hall. 2005. Identity and interaction: A sociocultural linguistic approach. Discourse Studies 7. 585–614.10.1177/1461445605054407Search in Google Scholar

Cashman, H. 2005. Identities at play: Language preference and group membership in bilingual talk in interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 37. 301–315.10.1016/j.pragma.2004.10.004Search in Google Scholar

Cicourel, Aaron V. 1964. Method and measurement in sociology. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe.Search in Google Scholar

Cicourel, Aaron V. 1982. Interviews, surveys, and the problem of ecological validity. American Sociologist 17. 11–20.Search in Google Scholar

Creswell, James 2007. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions, 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Search in Google Scholar

Denzin, Norman K. & Yvonna S. Lincoln (eds.). 2011. The SAGE handbook of qualitative research, 4th edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Search in Google Scholar

Deschambault, Ryan. 2011. From “analytic nuisance” to interactional resource: Re-viewing small stories within interviews in a mixed methods study. Journal of Pragmatics 43. 3080–3090.10.1016/j.pragma.2011.03.013Search in Google Scholar

Dörnyei, Zoltán. 2003. Questionnaires in second language research: Construction, administration, and processing. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Search in Google Scholar

Drew, Paul. 2006. When documents “speak”: Documents, language and interaction. In Paul Drew, Geoffrey Raymond & Darin Weinberg (eds.), Talk and interaction in social research methods, 63–80. London: SAGE.10.4135/9781849209991.n5Search in Google Scholar

Drew, Paul. 2013. Turn design. In Jack Sidnell & Tanya Stivers (eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis, 131–149. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781118325001.ch7Search in Google Scholar

Fitzgerald, Richard & William Housley (eds.). 2015. Advances in membership categorisation analysis. London: SAGE.10.4135/9781473917873Search in Google Scholar

Freebody, Peter. 2004. Qualitative research in education. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.10.4135/9781849209670Search in Google Scholar

Gardner, Robert, Paul Tremblay & A. Anne-Marie Masgoret. 1997. Towards a full model of second language learning: An empirical investigation. Modern Language Journal 81. 344–362.10.1111/j.1540-4781.1997.tb05495.xSearch in Google Scholar

Goodwin, Charles. 2000. Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 32. 1489–1522.10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00096-XSearch in Google Scholar

Hammond, Kay. 2006. More than a game: A critical discourse analysis of a racial inequality exercise in Japan. TESOL Quarterly 40. 545–571.10.2307/40264543Search in Google Scholar

Hayano, Kaoru. 2012. Question design in conversation. In Jack Sidnell & Tanya Stivers (eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis, 395–414. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781118325001.ch19Search in Google Scholar

Heritage, John. 1984. Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Search in Google Scholar

Hester, Stephen & Peter Eglin (eds.). 1997. Culture in action: Studies in membership categorization analysis. Washington, DC: International Institute for Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis & University Press of America.Search in Google Scholar

Holstein, James & J. Gubrium. 1995. The active interview. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.10.4135/9781412986120Search in Google Scholar

Jackson, Kristin & William Trochim. 2002. Concept mapping as an alternative approach for the analysis of open-ended survey responses. Organizational Research Methods 5(4). 307–336.10.1177/109442802237114Search in Google Scholar

Johnson, Robert & Larry Christensen. 2013. Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches, 5th edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.Search in Google Scholar

Kanno, Yasuko & Christian Stuart. 2011. Learning to become a second language teacher: Identities-in-practice. Modern Language Journal 95. 236–252.10.1111/j.1540-4781.2011.01178.xSearch in Google Scholar

Lapkin, Sharon, Alina MacFarlane & Larry Vandergrift. 2006. Teaching French as a second language in Canada: Teachers’ perspectives research report. Ottawa: CASLT/ACPLS.Search in Google Scholar

Leung, Constant, Roxy Harris & Ben Rampton. 1997. The idealised native speaker, reified ethnicities, and classroom realities. TESOL Quarterly 31. 543–560.10.2307/3587837Search in Google Scholar

Mackey, Alison & Susan Gass. 2005. Second language research: Methodology and design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Search in Google Scholar

McNeill, Patrick & Steve Chapman. 2005. Research methods, 3rd edn. New York, NY: Routledge.10.4324/9780203463000Search in Google Scholar

Miller, Elizabeth. 2011. Indeterminacy and interview research: Co-constructing ambiguity and clarity in interviews with an adult immigrant learner of English. Applied Linguistics 32. 43–59.10.1093/applin/amq039Search in Google Scholar

Murdoch, George. 1994. Language development provision in teacher training curricula. ELT Journal 48. 253–265.10.1093/elt/48.3.253Search in Google Scholar

O’Cathain, Alicia & Kate Thomas. 2004. “Any other comments?” Open questions on questionnaires-a bane or a bonus to research? BMC Medical Research Methodology 4(25).10.1186/1471-2288-4-25Search in Google Scholar

O’Dwyer, Laura & James Bernauer. 2014. Quantitative research for the qualitative researcher. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.10.4135/9781506335674Search in Google Scholar

Paltridge, Brian & Aek Phakiti. 2015. Research methods in applied linguistics: A practical resource. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.Search in Google Scholar

Phillipson, Robert. 1992. ELT: The native speaker’s burden? ELT Journal 46. 12–18.10.1093/elt/46.1.12Search in Google Scholar

Pomerantz, Anita & John Heritage. 2012. Preference. In Jack Sidnell & Tanya Stivers (eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis, 210–228. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781118325001.ch11Search in Google Scholar

Potter, Jonathan & Alexa Hepburn. 2005. Qualitative interviews in psychology: Problems and possibilities. Qualitative Research in Psychology 2. 1–27.10.1191/1478088705qp045oaSearch in Google Scholar

Prior, Matthew. T. 2014. Re-examining alignment in a “failed” L2 autobiographic research interview. Qualitative Inquiry 20(4). 495–508.10.1177/1077800413513730Search in Google Scholar

Rampton, Ben. 1990. Displacing the “native speaker”: Expertise, affiliation, and inheritance. ELT Journal 44(2). 97–101.10.1093/eltj/44.2.97Search in Google Scholar

Raymond, Geoffrey. 2003. Grammar and social organization: Yes/no interrogatives and the structure of responding. American Sociological Review 68(6). 939–967.10.2307/1519752Search in Google Scholar

Reddy, M. 1979. The conduit metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language about language. In A. Ortony (ed.), Metaphor and thought, 284–324. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Richards, Keith. 2003. Qualitative inquiry in TESOL. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave MacMillan.10.1057/9780230505056Search in Google Scholar

Rissel, Dorothy. 1995. Learning by doing: Outcomes of an overseas summer project for teachers. Foreign Language Annals 28. 121–133.10.1111/j.1944-9720.1995.tb00774.xSearch in Google Scholar

Roulston, Kathryn. 2010. Reflective interviewing: A guide to theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.10.4135/9781446288009Search in Google Scholar

Roulston, Kathryn. 2011. Interview “problems” as topics for analysis. Applied Linguistics 32. 77–94.10.1093/applin/amq036Search in Google Scholar

Sacks, Harvey. 1972. On the analyzability of stories by children. In J. J. Gumperz & D. Hymes (eds.),Directions in sociolinguistics: The ethnography of communication, 325–345. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Search in Google Scholar

Sacks, Harvey. 1992. Lectures on conversation: Volumes I & II. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel Schegloff & Gail Jefferson. 1974. A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language 50. 696–735.10.1353/lan.1974.0010Search in Google Scholar

Salvatori, Michael & Alina MacFarlane. 2009. Profile and pathways: Supports for developing FSL teachers’ pedagogical, linguistic, and cultural competencies (CASLT Research Series).Ottawa, ON: Canadian Association of Second Language Teachers.Search in Google Scholar

Schegloff, Emanuel. 2007. Sequence organization in interaction: Volume 1: A primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511791208Search in Google Scholar

Schegloff, Emanuel & Harvey Sacks. 1973. Opening up closings. Semiotica 22. 289–327.10.1515/semi.1973.8.4.289Search in Google Scholar

Scholl, Juliann, Jacquee Wilson & Patrick Hughes. 2011. Expression of patients’ and providers’ identities during the medical interview. Qualitative Health Research 21. 1022–1032.10.1177/1049732310393748Search in Google Scholar

Shrum, Judith & Eileen Glisan. 2009. Teacher’s handbook: Contextualized language instruction, 4th edn. Toronto: Heinle.Search in Google Scholar

Sidnell, Jack. 2011. Conversation analysis. Malden, MA: Wiley.10.1093/obo/9780199772810-0062Search in Google Scholar

Silverman, David. 2004. Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice. London, UK: SAGE.10.4135/9781848608191Search in Google Scholar

Stivers, Tanya. 2008. Stance, alignment, and affiliation during storytelling: When nodding is a token of affiliation. Research on Language and Social Interaction 41(1). 31–57.10.1080/08351810701691123Search in Google Scholar

Stokoe, Elizabeth. 2012. Moving forward with membership categorization analysis: Methods for systematic analysis. Discourse Studies 14(3). 277–303.10.1177/1461445612441534Search in Google Scholar

Talmy, Steven. 2009. Resisting ESL: Categories and sequence in a critically “motivated” analysis of classroom interaction. In H. T. Nguyen & G. Kasper (eds.), Talk-in-interaction: Multilingual perspectives, 181–213. Honolulu, HI: NFLRC.Search in Google Scholar

Talmy, Steven. 2010. Qualitative interviews in applied linguistics: From research instrument to social practice. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 30. 128–148.10.1017/S0267190510000085Search in Google Scholar

Talmy, Steven. 2011. The interview as collaborative achievement: Interaction, identity, and ideology in a speech event. Applied Linguistics 32. 25–42.10.1093/applin/amq027Search in Google Scholar

Talmy, Steven. 2014. Toward an interpretivist turn in L2 Studies. In Jan H. Hulstijn, Richard F. Young & Lourdes Ortega (eds.), Bridging the gap. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 36(3). 23–29.10.1017/S0272263114000035Search in Google Scholar

Talmy, Steven & Keith Richards. 2011. Theorizing qualitative research interviews in applied linguistics. Applied Linguistics 32. 1–5.10.1093/applin/amq045Search in Google Scholar

Tashakkori, Abbas & Charles Teddlie (eds.). 2010. SAGE handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research, 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.10.4135/9781506335193Search in Google Scholar

Toerien, Merran & Sue Wilkinson. 2004. Exploring the depilation norm: A qualitative questionnaire study of women’s body hair removal. Qualitative Research in Psychology 1. 69–92.Search in Google Scholar

Wagner, Elvis. 2015. Survey research. In Brian Paltridge & Aek Phakiti (eds.), Research methods in applied linguistics: A practical resource, 83–99. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.Search in Google Scholar

Watson, Rod. 1997. Some general reflections on “categorization” and “sequence” in the analysis of conversation. In Stephen Hester & Peter Eglin (eds.), Culture in action: Studies in membership categorization analysis, 49–75. Washington, DC: International Institute for Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis & University Press of America.Search in Google Scholar

Watson, Rod. 2015. De-reifying categories. In Richard Fitzgerald & William Housley (eds.), Advances in membership categorisation analysis, 23–50. London: Sage.10.4135/9781473917873.n2Search in Google Scholar

Wernicke, Meike. 2017. Navigating native speaker ideologies as FSL teacher. Canadian Modern Language Review, 73(2). https://doi.org/10.3138/CMLR.295110.3138/cmlr.2951Search in Google Scholar

Willig, Carla & Wendy Stainton-Rogers. 2007. The SAGE handbook of qualitative research in psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.10.4135/9781848607927Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2017-05-09

Published in Print: 2018-10-25

You are currently not able to access this content.

Articles in the same Issue

https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2017-0030

Keywords for this article

survey questionnaires; conversation analysis; membership categorization analysis; French teacher identity; researcher reflexivity