The Art of Conducting Semi-structured Interviews

When researchers want to understand not just what people think, but why they think it, they turn to qualitative methods that go beyond tick-box questionnaires. Among these, semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions stand out as two of the most widely used and adaptable tools in communication research. They sit in a productive middle ground – structured enough to keep inquiry focused, yet flexible enough to follow the conversation wherever the data leads. Understanding how to use them well is a core skill for any researcher working in journalism, media studies, or the social sciences.

What is a semi-structured interview? 🔗

According to the SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods, a semi-structured interview is a qualitative data collection strategy in which the researcher asks informants a series of predetermined but open-ended questions, with no fixed range of responses expected. Unlike structured interviews – which follow a rigid script – or fully unstructured conversations, semi-structured interviews consist of a dialogue between researcher and participant guided by a flexible interview protocol, supplemented by follow-up questions, probes, and comments. This format allows the researcher to collect open-ended data and explore participant thoughts, feelings, and beliefs on a particular topic in depth.

The result is an interview that feels less like a formal interrogation and more like a purposeful conversation. Some questions are planned in advance; others emerge from the conversation itself. This balance helps researchers stay focused on their research questions while remaining open to unexpected insights participants bring up on their own.

The interview guide: your most important tool 🔗

At the heart of every semi-structured interview is the interview guide – a schematic list of questions, themes, or topics the interviewer intends to explore. This guide serves the useful purpose of exploring respondents more systematically and comprehensively while keeping the interview focused on the desired line of inquiry. It typically includes a core question and several associated sub-questions, refined further through pilot testing before actual data collection begins.

A well-designed guide has a clear structure: an introduction, a substantive middle, and a closing section. Questions should be phrased in plain language, and any topic changes should be well signposted so the conversation flows naturally. Crucially, the interview guide may be very specific with carefully worded questions, or it may be a looser list of topics – and the researcher may move back and forth through the list based on the participant’s responses.

Open-ended questions and probing 🔗

The power of a semi-structured interview lies in the types of questions it uses. Questions should be kept simple, neutral, and flexible, avoiding leading language – especially on sensitive topics where participants might feel pressure to answer a certain way. Some questions seek concrete details; others invite narrative. For instance, instead of asking “Was your experience positive?”, a researcher might ask “How would you describe your overall experience?” – the latter invites elaboration rather than a one-word answer.

Follow-up probes are equally important. In addition to questions directly related to the concepts under investigation, semi-structured interviews use a variety of probes that elicit further information or build rapport through the researcher’s use of active listening skills. A well-timed “Can you tell me more about that?” or “What did you mean when you said…?” can unlock a level of insight that no pre-written question could have anticipated.

Why choose semi-structured interviews over other formats? 🔗

The semi-structured interview is more powerful than other types for qualitative research because it allows researchers to acquire in-depth information and evidence from interviewees while maintaining the focus of the study. It also allows flexibility and adaptability in a way that fully unstructured interviews – where direction is not fully considered – do not. This makes it particularly well-suited for communication research, where understanding nuanced human experiences, motivations, and perceptions is the goal.

The defining characteristic of semi-structured interviews is their flexible and fluid structure – unlike structured interviews, which contain a fixed sequence of standardized questions. This flexibility means the interview can be shaped by the participant’s own understandings, allowing unexpected themes to emerge naturally, which a more rigid format would likely suppress.

The SAGE Encyclopedia of Social Science Research Methods notes that the interviewer has an active, reflexive, and constitutive role in the process of knowledge construction – and that it is the interaction between interviewer and interviewee, not just the answers given, that should be analyzed. This makes the researcher not just a passive recorder, but an active participant in meaning-making.

Focus group discussions: when the group becomes the data 🔗

While individual semi-structured interviews capture personal perspectives, focus group discussions (FGDs) take a different approach – they harness the power of group interaction to generate richer, more socially situated data. A focus group involves a moderator asking questions and leading a group of typically 6 to 12 pre-screened participants through a discussion focused on a particular topic, with group members encouraged to talk with one another, share anecdotes, and build on each other’s responses.

The group dynamics of focus groups can stimulate creative thinking and the generation of new ideas – making them particularly useful in fields such as product development, policy-making, and program design. In journalism and communication research, FGDs are frequently used to gauge public reactions to media content, communications campaigns, or emerging social issues.

The “group effect” and why it matters 🔗

One of the most distinctive features of FGDs is what researchers call the group effect. Group members engage in a kind of “chaining” or “cascading” effect – where talk links to, or tumbles out of, the topics and expressions preceding it. One participant’s comment triggers a memory or reaction in another; disagreements surface that might never have emerged in a one-on-one setting; collective language develops organically as participants find shared ways to describe common experiences.

According to Morgan (1997), group dynamics help reveal collective perspectives and social norms that are often hidden in one-on-one settings. When participants react to others’ comments, new themes and ideas often emerge that may not be uncovered in isolated individual interviews. This makes FGDs an especially effective tool for exploratory research, where the goal is to map the terrain of opinion before designing a larger study.

The role of the moderator 🔗

The quality of a focus group discussion depends heavily on the person running it. The moderator’s role involves balancing control over the conversation while allowing natural discussions to evolve – guiding it enough to stay on course without leading the group toward a predetermined conclusion. A skilled moderator draws out quieter voices, manages dominant participants, and ensures the discussion remains productive and respectful.

The challenges here are real. Dominant participants may monopolize the discussion, while quieter individuals may hesitate to contribute – meaning the data may not fully represent the diversity of perspectives within the group. Groupthink – where participants conform to a dominant opinion rather than expressing their individual views – is another known risk that careful moderation must actively counteract.

Planning and conducting the interview: a step-by-step approach 🔗

Conducting effective semi-structured interviews requires both a relational focus – including active engagement and curiosity – and practiced skill in interviewing technique. Researchers from the BMJ Family Medicine journal identify key steps including: determining the purpose and scope of the study, identifying participants, considering ethical issues, planning logistics, developing the interview guide, establishing trust and rapport, conducting the interview, and analysing the resulting data.

One underappreciated step is pilot testing the interview guide. Running one or two trial interviews with people similar to your target participants can expose ambiguous questions, identify missing topics, and improve the overall flow of the conversation. The interview guide evolves over the course of the research and can be adjusted according to the interviewees – an iterative quality that is central to the semi-structured approach.

During the interview itself, establishing rapport early is essential. The quality of a semi-structured interview depends to a large extent on the interviewer’s attitude of empathy and attentive listening, which enables them to make the most appropriate use of their question grid. Interviews should not be conducted with a transactional question-answer approach but should instead be unfolding, iterative interactions between researcher and participant.

Ethical considerations: non-negotiable responsibilities 🔗

Working with human participants means research ethics are not an afterthought – they are a foundational requirement. Ethical guidelines in research, such as obtaining informed consent and ensuring confidentiality, trace back to the Nuremberg Code of 1947, created to protect human rights after WWII. In the context of semi-structured interviews and focus groups, three principles stand out above all others.

Informed consent 🔗

Informed consent is often cited as the “cornerstone” of research ethics – its intent being that participants enter research voluntarily, with a full understanding of what their participation entails. This means participants must be told the purpose of the study, how their data will be used, that participation is voluntary, and that they may withdraw at any time without penalty. Participants should be supplied this information prior to commencement, coupled with a clear statement empowering them to withdraw at any given time without prejudice.

However, ethical researchers recognise that consent is not a one-time transaction. Because semi-structured interviews sometimes venture into unexpected territory, ethical behaviour in qualitative research interviews requires a reflexive and emotive human response to the individual and the circumstances – with consent regarded as an agreement that is continuously renegotiated throughout the research relationship.

Confidentiality and anonymity 🔗

Researchers are responsible for protecting the identities of their participants and ensuring that personal information is not disclosed – this often means anonymizing data or using pseudonyms in reports. There are several effective strategies to protect personal information, including secure data storage, removal of identifying components, biographical detail amendments, and pseudonyms for names of individuals, places, and organizations. In focus group settings, the complexity increases: a researcher can ensure their own confidentiality practices, but cannot fully control what participants share with each other outside the group.

Sensitivity to power dynamics 🔗

Semi-structured interviewing sometimes implies a particular approach to research ethics whereby the power relationship between interviewer and interviewee is equalized as much as possible, giving the interviewee plenty of opportunity to tell their story in their own way. Yet precisely because this approach builds rapport and trust, the data generated can become very personal and sensitive. Maintaining respondent confidentiality while presenting rich, detailed accounts of social life presents unique challenges that are not always adequately addressed in standard ethics guidelines. Researchers must be prepared to navigate these tensions thoughtfully.

Limitations to keep in mind 🔗

Semi-structured interviews and FGDs produce rich, contextually detailed data – but they are not without limitations. Results from small, purposively selected samples cannot be statistically generalized to larger populations. Small sample sizes make findings difficult to generalize, and groupthink in FGDs means influential members may discourage dissenting views from being shared. Interviewer bias is another concern: the researcher’s tone, posture, or choice of follow-up questions can subtly shape participant responses in ways that are difficult to eliminate entirely.

These limitations do not diminish the value of the methods – they simply underscore the importance of transparency in reporting. Researchers should clearly describe their methodology, acknowledge the boundaries of their findings, and where possible, triangulate qualitative data with other sources to strengthen overall validity.

What do you think? If you were designing a study to understand how young people consume news on social media, would you choose semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions, or a combination of both – and what would guide that decision? And given that semi-structured interviews rely so heavily on the skill of the researcher, how should journalism and communication programs better prepare students to conduct them responsibly?

References

1. https://methods.sagepub.com/ency/edvol/sage-encyc-qualitative-research-methods/chpt/semistructured-interview
2. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6910737/
3. https://delvetool.com/blog/semi-structured
4. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4194943/
5. https://know.fife.scot/__data/assets/pdf_file/0028/177607/KnowHow-Semistructured-interviews.pdf
6. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/358893176_Semi-structured_Interview_A_Methodological_Reflection_on_the_Development_of_a_Qualitative_Research_Instrument_in_Educational_Studies
7. https://methods.sagepub.com/ency/edvol/the-sage-encyclopedia-of-social-science-research-methods/chpt/semistructured-interview
8. https://www.simplypsychology.org/what-is-a-focus-group.html
9. https://atlasti.com/guides/qualitative-research-guide-part-1/focus-groups
10. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focus_group
11. https://atlasti.com/guides/interview-analysis-guide/focus-group-interviews-research
12. https://sciencespo.hal.science/hal-04087970v1/document
13. https://atlasti.com/guides/interview-analysis-guide/ethics-of-interviews
14. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12910-020-00538-7
15. https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7102/10/8/206
16. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4263394/
17. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2805454/