Analysing the significance of silence in qualitative interviewing: questioning and shifting power relations

Abstract

In this article we analyse the significance of silence in qualitative interviews with 36 individuals interviewed about high-risk, illegal activities. We describe how silence expresses a dynamic power relationship between interviewer and interviewee. In the analysis, we focus on two different types of silence: ‘silence of the interviewee’ and ‘silence of the interviewer’. We analyse how silence functions as an interviewee’s resistance against being categorized as ‘social deviant’, how an interviewer may use silence strategically, and how silence stemming from an interviewer’s perplexity constructs significant data. We conclude that silence constitutes possibilities for interviewees and interviewers to handle the complex power at play in qualitative interviewing either by maintaining or by losing control of the situation.

Stigma and Smoking in the Home: Parents’ Accounts of Using Nicotine Replacement Therapy to Protect Their Children from Second-Hand Smoke

“…Truth may relate to power in interviews, with researchers often in control. However, this can be open to interpretation [74]. Potential researcher power to stigmatise [24], could be perceived by participants, consciously or not, and may affect disclosure.…”

Obtaining individual narratives and moving to an intersubjective lived-experience description: a way of doing phenomenology

“…As the participants were retelling their experiences, the researcher was reserved in judgement, quiet and listening, allowing the participant to have an active and dominant role in the conversation. By using silence strategically, a participant may be more explicit in the description of an experience (Bengtsson and Fynbo, 2018). Further depth to the participants' stories was obtained throughout the interview when the researcher prompted participants to elaborate on their experiences with details of a specific situation, time or moment.…”

The challenge of recruiting and engaging reluctant non-expert representatives

“…Adler and Adler (2003) include setup issues, researchers’ conduct and relational disparities among the factors influencing the respondents’ resistance during the interview. The analysis of the interview interaction can be particularly useful to understand how the disparity of power works (Bengtsonn and Fynbo, 2018) and, more broadly, to improve the quality of data (Rapley, 2006; Silverman, 2017).…”