Abstract: Qualitative interviewers conducting In-depth interviews (IDI’s) have a discursive choice regarding the role of the Interview guide within the research conversation. Some interviews, although guided by an interview guide or written set of questions, take place without any explicit references to the interview guide or the questions themselves, and other interviews make explicit mention of the interview guide or even use the presence of the scripted questions as a frequent tool to facilitate the type of responses that would be most helpful for a respondent to provide. This begs the question, “Is it good practice to bring the interview guide into the forefront by making it present in the discussion, or should that be avoided?”

To address this question in a data-driven way, we conducted a turn by turn secondary data analysis of a set of three transcripts from IDI’s that were intended to be up to 60 minutes long. The transcripts were chosen because the interviewers mention the interview guide to varying degrees, from occasional mentions of the guide to using the guides as an integral part of the conversation. We examined the varying roles that the interview guide and scripted questions play within these research conversations. We evaluated mentions of the guides by function; for example, rapport building, co-creating responses that are purportedly more useful for analysis, clarification of unclear responses, and maintaining politeness when follow-up questions may be undesirable. By closely examining the role that the guide plays within the research conversation, we are able to provide practical, data-driven advice for interviewer training regarding the mention of interview guides during IDI’s.