A methodological guide to using and reporting on interviews in conservation science research
A methodological guide to using and reporting on interviews in conservation science research
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/2041-210x.12828
复制
发表时间：
2018-01-01
影响因子：
6.6
通讯作者：
Mukherjee, Nibedita
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Young, Juliette C.;Rose, David C.;Mukherjee, Nibedita
访谈是保护研究中广泛使用的方法。它们是灵活的，允许从相对较小的样本量进行深入分析，并将研究的重点放在参与者的观点上。虽然访谈是一种流行的方法，但针对其使用提出了一些批评意见，包括抽样策略、问题选择和分析方式缺乏透明度。在这篇文章中，我们分析了访谈在旨在为保护做出决策的研究中的使用。通过对227篇论文的结构化回顾，我们探索了在保护决策的背景下，访谈在哪里、为什么以及如何被使用。回顾表明，访谈是一种广泛使用的方法，用于广泛的目的。这些措施包括获取关于具体保护问题的生态和/或社会经济信息，了解利益攸关方的知识、价值观、信仰或决策过程，以及加强研究设计和产出。然而，这项审查发现了一些令人担忧的问题。研究人员没有全面报告他们的采访方法。具体地说，研究结果表明，研究人员没有提供为什么访谈是最合适的方法的理由，没有引导访谈(因此问题可能设计得很差)，没有概述伦理考虑，没有提供明确的分析指南，也没有批判性地审查他们对访谈的使用。根据审查的结果，我们提供了一份详细的清单，旨在针对希望在其研究中使用访谈的保护研究人员(无论是否有使用该方法的经验)，以及期刊编辑和审稿人，以确保访谈方法的稳健性。
Interviews are a widely used methodology in conservation research. They are flexible, allowing in-depth analysis from a relatively small sample size and place the focus of research on the views of participants. While interviews are a popular method, several critiques have been raised in response to their use, including the lack of transparency in sampling strategy, choice of questions and mode of analysis. In this paper, we analyse the use of interviews in research aimed at making decisions for conservation. Through a structured review of 227 papers, we explore where, why and how interviews were used in the context of conservation decision making The review suggests that interviews are a widely used method for a broad range of purposes. These include gaining ecological and/or socio-economic information on specific conservation issues, understanding knowledge, values, beliefs or decision-making processes of stakeholders, and strengthening research design and output. The review, however, identifies a number of concerns. Researchers are not reporting fully on their interview methodology. Specifically, results indicate that researchers are: failing to provide a rationale as to why interviews are the most suitable method, not piloting the interviews (thus questions may be poorly designed), not outlining ethical considerations, not providing clear guides to analysis and not critically reviewing their use of interviews. Based on the results of the review, we provide a detailed checklist aimed at conservation researchers who wish to use interviews in their research (whether experienced in using the methodology or not), and journal editors and reviewers to ensure the robustness of interview methodology use.