Preliminary Interview Analysis

Mary Gezo & James Rintamaki

Subject Recruitment

Help Givers– Easier for help receivers to find

Help Receivers – Easier for help givers to find

Interviewer Roles

No real method; Random– 2 roles:

Main interviewer Note taker / follow up questioner

Interviewing Method

Location– Participants’ house

Living room Fairly quiet On the couch Familiar and comfortable surroundings

Interviewing Method

Tools– Pen and paper– Interviewing guide– MP3 voice recorder

What Was Easy?

Gaining rapport– Comfortable setting– Initial contact– Age and culture similarities

Letting the participant talk– Silence was golden– Verifying participants’ thoughts– Other prompts

Agreeing sounds, head nods

What Was Hard?

Leading questions– Easy on paper, difficult in practice

Coherency Quick thinking

– Formulating questions on the spot– Moving to new questions

What Was Hard?

Distinguishing important topics– What’s worth pursuing?

Remembering “mid-thought” questions– Thinking of and remembering a question you want

to ask from the middle of a participants’ dialogue

General Experiences

Fun and challenging– Forces quick thinking– Interesting topic– Surprising responses

Participants’ prompt responses Experience is ideal

– Practice makes perfect

What Would We Do Differently?

Practice– Rehearse questions loud– Umm, Uhhh, Ahhh…

Overcome biases– Rid ourselves of preconceived notions that could

create leading questions– Don’t expect responses, accept them

Experience

Preliminary FindingsHelp Givers

Most enjoy helping Are associated with computers

– “I go to Tech, therefore I know computers”

Have used computers for most of their lives

Preliminary FindingsHelp Givers

Only have to be faster than the slowest person

Prefer in person or phone vs. online Teaching how to fix > just fixing

– One time job

Preliminary FindingsHelp Receivers

Fear of “breaking” Received help from friends and family

– Disliked “tech support”

Most wanted to learn – Prefer to not need help

Questions?