Response to Eileen Porter?s Commentary on “Problematic interviewee behaviors in qualitative research."

UNCG Author/Contributor (non-UNCG co-authors, if there are any, appear on document)
Mona M. Shattell, Associate Professor (Creator)
The University of North Carolina at Greensboro (UNCG )
Web Site:

Abstract: As noted by Thorne (1997), formal critique plays a role not only in pressing knowledge forward but also in sustaining our humility. We are indeed humbled by the comments of our colleague regarding the rationale, method, and substance of our study. Although the commentator provided rich food for thought, and we agree with some of her points, we respectfully challenge others. First, we address one misunderstanding on her part. She alluded to our failure to link “two professed interests”; however, our article addressed only one topic: potentially problematic interviewee behaviors. This topic surfaced in nursing literature in a 1992 article by Hutchinson and Wilson on validity threats in interviews. Although scholars might argue with Hutchinson and Wilson?s designation of certain behaviors as “problematic,” we found their discussion intriguing and shared their concern about the possibility of such behaviors threatening the validity of interview data. We wondered how prevalent such behaviors were; however, Hutchinson and Wilson did not present data regarding prevalence, nor could we locate any studies during an extensive literature search. In response to the commentator?s question, “What were the authors? reasons for focusing on interviewee behaviors?” the answer is simple: We decided that an important first step would be exploring the frequency and nature of problematic interviewee behaviors.

Additional Information

Western Journal of Nursing Research, 27(2), 205-209.
Language: English
Date: 2005
Critique, Problematic interviewee behaviors

Email this document to