University of Hertfordshire Research Archive

        JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

        Browse

        All of UHRABy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitles

        Arkivum Files

        My Downloads
        View Item 
        • UHRA Home
        • University of Hertfordshire
        • Research publications
        • View Item
        • UHRA Home
        • University of Hertfordshire
        • Research publications
        • View Item

        Advantages and disadvantages of reciprocal peer-to-peer interviewing

        View/Open
        Pages_from_social_research_practice_journal_issue_10_winter_2021.pdf (PDF, 62Kb)
        Author
        Payne-Gifford, Sophie
        Brueton, Rebecca
        Hamilton, Gemma
        Clark, Tessa
        Chang, Yan-Shing
        Gang, Parenting Science
        Attention
        2299/23955
        Abstract
        The advantages and disadvantages of reciprocal peer-to-peer interviewing as a data collection approachare presented in this paper. Reciprocal peer-to-peer interviewing is a research technique whereparticipants interview each other rather than a member of a research team. Reciprocal peer-to-peerinterviewing was undertaken in a small qualitative study between healthcare practitioners to reflect onwhether, and how, their breastfeeding experiences had influenced their professional practice. Four pairsof healthcare practitioners were recruited from an online Parenting Science Gang group. They interviewedeach other via online teleconferencing which also recorded the interviews. The interviews were analysedby volunteers from the same sub-group. Benefits of the technique included: ease of building rapportand finding common ground; open discussion of difficult topics; and freeing up research organiser time.Disadvantages were: difficulties clarifying unclear interview content; an inability to redirect the interview ifit goes off-topic; and unawareness of technology failure. Social researchers are advised to weigh up thebenefits of the technique against the risks, and possibly adapt the method.
        Publication date
        2021
        Published in
        Social Research Practice
        Other links
        http://hdl.handle.net/2299/23955
        Metadata
        Show full item record
        Keep in touch

        © 2019 University of Hertfordshire

        I want to...

        • Apply for a course
        • Download a Prospectus
        • Find a job at the University
        • Make a complaint
        • Contact the Press Office

        Go to...

        • Accommodation booking
        • Your student record
        • Bayfordbury
        • KASPAR
        • UH Arts

        The small print

        • Terms of use
        • Privacy and cookies
        • Criminal Finances Act 2017
        • Modern Slavery Act 2015
        • Sitemap

        Find/Contact us

        • T: +44 (0)1707 284000
        • E: ask@herts.ac.uk
        • Where to find us
        • Parking
        • hr
        • qaa
        • stonewall
        • AMBA
        • ECU Race Charter
        • disability confident
        • AthenaSwan