Enriching qualitative research by engaging peer interviewers: a case study

Abstract

Engaging peer-interviewers in qualitative inquiry is becoming more popular. Yet, there are differing opinions as to whether this practice improves the research process or is prohibitively challenging. Benefits noted in the literature are improved awareness/acceptance of disenfranchised groups, improved quality of research, and increased comfort of participants in the research process. Challenges include larger investment in time and money to hire, train, and support peerinterviewers, and the potential to disrupt peer recovery. We illustrate, through case study, how to engage peer-interviewers, meet potential challenges, and the benefits of such engagement. We draw upon our experience from a qualitative study designed to understand men's experiences of problem gambling and housing instability. We hired three peers to conduct semi-structured qualitative interviews with 30 men from a community-based organization. We contend, that with appropriate and adequate resources (time, financial investment), peer-interviewing produces a positive, capacity building experience for peer-interviewers, participants and researchers.

The impact of using peer interviewers in a study of patient empowerment amongst people in cancer follow‐up

“…While he did not believe that this had affected the interview itself, he did mention that it had affected him emotionally. As this shows, the practice of involving peer interviewers poses some important questions about the emotional impact on already potentially vulnerable interviewees or their interviewers . While the interviewees in the Empowerment study generally focused on the positive impact of shared experiences, it is thus also important to consider the risk of any potential distress these may bring.…”

“…The benefits reported from this process are that the shared experiences of peer interviewers and research participants may facilitate access to groups that are hard to reach, minimize potential power imbalances, and help research participants feel more relaxed, open and honest . Peer interviewers may be able to strike up a better rapport with participants and may furthermore be able to bring new and different perspectives to the interviews due to their own personal experience of the topic being researched . However, researchers have also acknowledged some of the potential challenges of peer interviews, particularly the relative inexperience of peer interviewers of interview techniques, the potential distress caused by interviewing people in similar situations and the logistics and time involved …”

“…Peer interviewers may be able to strike up a better rapport with participants and may furthermore be able to bring new and different perspectives to the interviews due to their own personal experience of the topic being researched . However, researchers have also acknowledged some of the potential challenges of peer interviews, particularly the relative inexperience of peer interviewers of interview techniques, the potential distress caused by interviewing people in similar situations and the logistics and time involved …”

“…13 However, researchers have also acknowledged some of the potential challenges of peer interviews, particularly the relative inexperience of peer interviewers of interview techniques, the potential distress caused by interviewing people in similar situations and the logistics and time involved. 8,12,14 Both benefits and challenges of peer interviews are most often described from the perspectives of researchers and peer interviewers, for example. [15][16][17][18] Not much is known about how interviewees experience peer interviews and whether they feel that it makes a difference to the interview.…”

Non-disabled Space Invaders! A Study Critically Exploring the Scholarly Reporting of Research Attributes for Persons With and Without Disability

“…5.00 1 3 knowledge ability rigor "Having an interviewer with lived experience has advantages as they are familiar with the realities of the topic being examined, unlike researchers without lived experience, who may have blind spots regarding the context of the topic (Devotta et al, 2016)" (Birken & Harper, 2017, p. 410).…”