Exploring the impact of interview location on knowledge development

Abstract

In ethnographic and participatory studies, the study location is often claimed to have an obvious significance, whereas, in the methodology literature on qualitative interviews, this aspect is frequently treated as a pragmatic issue. Based on this background, there are claims that the location of an interview should be understood as a fundamental, active aspect of the research process as well as a sensitizing concept. Considering this ambition, the aim of this article is to develop further insights into how different interview locations may contribute to knowledge development regarding the issue being studied. Based upon a study on cancer survivorship and experiences from conducting interviews in three different settings, namely the participants’ home, an office on the university’s premises, and a cancer care center located at a hospital, this paper illustrates how the choice of location may have an impact and evoke insights and knowledge regarding the research issue. The interviews conducted in private homes provided insights into how life post cancer implicated a more house-bound lifestyle than before, with a risk of becoming isolated. The hospital setting yielded responses that were more mixed. While some could not stand coming there, others considered the hospital to represent safety. The third interview location, an office at the university, was the most ‘formal’ location and seemed to resonate with the participants’ present busy but exhausting work life.