Advertisement

Interest Groups & Advocacy

, Volume 3, Issue 2, pp 174–187 | Cite as

Let’s talk! On the practice and method of interviewing policy experts

  • Jan Beyers
  • Caelesta Braun
  • David Marshall
  • Iskander De Bruycker
Original Article

Abstract

This article sheds light on the practice and method of expert interviewing in research projects on interest group politics. We first discuss the rationale of interviewing as a data collection instrument, arguing that a careful combination and cross-validation of behavioral and observational data improves the quality of interviews as well as provide a means to validate existing unobtrusive data sources. Moreover, this approach makes it possible to conduct a comprehensive analysis based on both behavioral and observational data sources. Subsequently, we discuss several methodological and practical issues to avoid biases associated with interviewing. One of the key observations from our experience with INTEREURO is that establishing a robust interview project on the role of interest groups in public policymaking rests largely on careful preparation. Thus, most work needs to be situated before the effective interview takes place, and our key objective is to clarify the importance of this preparatory stage.

Keywords

interest groups INTEREURO European Union expert interviews survey methodology 

References

  1. Baumgartner, F.R., Berry, J.M., Hojnacki, M., Kimball, D.C. and Leech, B.L. (2009) Lobbying and Policy Change: Who Wins, Who Loses, and Why. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berkhout, J. and Lowery, D. (2008) Counting organized interests in the European union: A comparison of data sources. Journal of European Public Policy 15 (4): 489–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beyers, J., Dür, A., Marshall, D. and Wonka, A. (2014) Policy-centred sampling in interest group research: Lessons from the INTEREURO Project. Interest Groups & Advocacy 3 (2): 160–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Burnham, P., Gilland Lutz, K., Grant, W. and Layton-Henry, Z. (2004) Research Methods in Politics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  5. Dexter, L.A. (1970) Elite and Specialized Interviewing. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Dorussen, H., Lenz, H. and Blavoukos, S. (2005) Assessing the reliability and validity of expert interviews. European Union Politics 6 (3): 315–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fowler, J.H., Heaney, M.T., Nickerson, D.W., Padgett, J.F. and Sinclair, B. (2011) Causality in political networks. American Politics Research 39 (2): 437–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Goldstein, K. (2002) Getting in the door: Sampling and completing elite interviews. PS: Political Science and Politics 35 (4): 669–672.Google Scholar
  9. Gray, V. and Lowery, D. (2000) The Population Ecology of Interest Representation. Lobbying Communities in the American States. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  10. Greenwood, J. and Dregger, J. (2013) The transparency register: A European vanguard of strong lobby regulation? Interest Groups & Advocacy 2 (2): 119–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Halpin, D.R. and Jordan, G. (2011) The Scale of Interest Organization in Democratic Politics. Data and Research Methods. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  12. Heinz, J.P., Laumann, E.O., Nelson, R.L. and Salisbury, R.H. (1993) The Hollow Core. Private Interests in National Policy Making. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Kluever, H. (2012) Lobbying in the European Union: Interest Groups, Lobbying Coalitions, and Policy Change. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Knoke, D., Pappi, F.U., Broadbent, J. and Tsujinaka, Y. (1996) Comparing Policy Networks. Labor Politics in the US, Germany and Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Laumann, E.O. and Knoke, D. (1987) The Organizational State. Social Choice in National Policy Domains. Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  16. Leech, B.L. (2002) Asking questions: Techniques for semi-structured interviews. PS: Political Science and Politics 34 (4): 665–668.Google Scholar
  17. Lowery, D. (2012) Interest organization populations: The demands of the scale of analysis and the theoretical purpose of counting. In: D.R. Halpin and J. Grant (eds.) The Scale of Interest Organization in Democratic Politics. Data and Research Methods. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 44–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mahoney, C. (2008) Brussels versus the Beltway. Advocacy in the United States and the European Union. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Nownes, A.J. (2012) Numbers in a niche: A practioner’s guide to mapping gay and lesbian groups in the US. In: D.R. Halpin and J. Grant (eds.) The Scale of Interest Organization in Democratic Politics. Data and Research Methods. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 99–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Peabody, R.L., Hammond, S.W., Torcom, J., Brown, L.P., Thompson, C. and Kolodny, R. (1990) Interviewing political elites. PS: Political Science and Politics 23 (3): 451–455.Google Scholar
  21. Schuman, H. and Presser, S. (1981) Questions and Answers in Attitude Surveys: Experiments on Questions Form, Wording, and Context. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  22. Schwarz, N., Groves, R.M. and Schuman, H. (1998) Survey methods. In: D.T. Gilbert, S.T. Fiske and G. Lindzey (eds.) The Handbook of Social Psychology, Vol. 14th edn. New York: McGraw-Hill, pp. 143–179.Google Scholar
  23. Sudman, S., Bradburn, N.M. and Schwarz, N. (1996) Thinking about Answers: The Application of Cognitive Processes to Survey Methodology. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  24. Thomson, R. (2006) Comparing of expert judgments with each other and with information from Council documentation. In: R. Thomson, F.N. Stokman, C.H. Achen and T. König (eds.) The European Union Decides. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press 329–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Warntjen, A. (2012) Measuring salience in EU legislative politics. European Union Politics 13 (1): 168–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Macmillan Publishers Ltd 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jan Beyers
    • 1
  • Caelesta Braun
    • 2
  • David Marshall
    • 3
  • Iskander De Bruycker
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceACIM – Antwerp Centre for Institutions and Multilevel Politics, Universiteit AntwerpenAntwerpBelgium
  2. 2.Department of Political Science and Public AdministrationVu University AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Department of Political Science and SociologyUniversity of SalzburgSalzburgAustria

Personalised recommendations