Interviews - Structured (or Formal) interviews

These are very similar to structured questionnaires. The interviewer is given strict instructions on how to ask the questions. The interview is conducted in exactly the same way each time and the questions are pre-coded. Wilmott and Young used structured interviews in their research into the extended family in East London. Their sample consisted of 933 people. They could not do all the interviewing themselves so they employed other interviewers to help them. The interviews were formal and standardises and the questions, precise and factual. The interviewer's task was to ring the appropriate code number opposite the answer they received or, at a few points in the interview, write in a fairly short, simple reply. Each interview took between 10 minutes and half an hour.

Structured interviews are like questionnaires and involve asking a set of prepared questions that are closed-ended. These are then read out and the answers filled in by a trained interviewer. Due to the similarity to questionnaires they share many of the same advantages and disadvantages, the main differences come from the fact that structured interviews involve more interaction between the researcher and the interviewee.


Advantages:
Practical Issues - Training interviewers is relatively straightforward and inexpensive, however it is more costly than postal questionnaires. They can cover large numbers of people due to being cheap and easy to administer (though again, not as many as postal questionnaires). They are suitable for getting straightforward information about things such as job, age etc. The results are easily quantified which makes them good for testing hypothesis.
Response Rate - The large numbers you can survey increase the chances of a representative sample. People find it hard to turn down a face to face request unlike a postal questionnaire which is easy to ignore.
Reliability - If a method is reliable it can be repeated and get similar results. Structured interviews are seen as reliable as the questions are standardised and controlled by the researcher, they can be asked in the same order, with the same wording.

Disadvantages:
Type of Respondent - Those with the time and willingness to be interviewed may be untypical, this makes for unrepresentative data and undermines the validity of the finding.
Validity - A valid method provides an authentic and true picture of what is being studied. Structured questions restrict respondents, they may wish to say more but are not given the opportunity. The interviewer cannot explain questions or clarify misunderstandings. People may lie or exaggerate which may produce false data.
Inflexibility - The interviewer draws up the questions in advance to find out what they think is important. This may not coincide with what the interviewee thinks is important. This can affect validity. Like questionnaires, structured interviews only provide a "snapshot" of someone's life, it doesn't capture how people's views and opinions may change over time.
Feminist Criticisms - Graham argues that structured questionnaires and interviews are patriarchal and give an untrue view of women's experience. The researcher controlling an interview reflect the control of women by men in wider society. By not allowing the respondent to express their views, the structured interview doesn't allow women to express themselves. Feminists believe observation would be a better method to use.