ACTIVIDADES POTENCIALMENTE CONTAMINANTES DEL SUELO

There are some disadvantages to interviewing which include time-consumption, cost, the data quality, bias and emotion. Interviews themselves can take a lot of time as well as transcribing. Travelling to interviews was expensive as some interviewees did not live locally. The quality of the data often depends on the quality of the interaction and the quality of the interviewer. As Kumar notes, ‘the quality of the responses obtained from different interviews may vary significantly’ (2005:131). In regards to emotion and bias, the interviews were difficult to conduct because the case study is live. Being a live case, interviewees came into the

interviews with their own agenda and it was difficult at times to steer the interviewees in the direction that the interviewer wanted. Emotions were still very prominent with some

interviewees and they were more interested in arguing either for or against the project rather than discuss the evidence and claims-making process of which they were a part of.

Two rounds of interviews were conducted over the course of the project; six pilot interviews and eight subsequent interviews. The guiding format of the interviews was based around key

149 themes identified in the initial literature and policy review. In pilot interviews with

experienced managers, communicators and educators in the public, private and NGO sectors were explored with a view to establishing their relevance and appropriateness for future interviews. The questions did not focus on HS2 as the case study had not been chosen at this point but the key themes remained the same. It became apparent in the pilot interviews that certain questions about the nature and conceptualisation of evidence proved difficult for interviewees to answer and so the interview guide was amended. Subsequent interview guides were designed to accommodate a range of differently placed interviewees with the intention of using them flexibly in a manner suited to each individual’s specific professional role and experience. In practice the original interview schedules served only as a broad indicative framework of issues to be explored. Understood as a collaborative and interactive process, the interviews were guided both by the experiences and perceptions of interviewees as well as the researcher’s own framework. The outcome of this style of interviewing meant at times focusing down on particular issues or themes whilst at others going off on tangents to the original schedule. In discussions that explored experiences of the policy process and in more conceptual reflection over how they understood issues such as ‘evidence’, or ‘claims’, the researcher evolved a style of ‘vignette’ questioning aimed at getting them to explore real life experiences so as to avoid getting text book answers to questions (Mason, 2002; Wilks, 2004). ‘Vignette’ questions proved particularly useful in generating reflective thinking and helped ground beliefs and accounts of behaviour in particular lived contexts.

All interviews were recorded and transcribed and interviewees were offered the opportunity to receive a summary of the transcription to check for accuracy or edit if they felt this was necessary. However, no participants took the opportunity to view a summary of the transcribed material. The table below provides an example of interview topics that were discussed:

150  Motivations for being involved in the case study

 How do they conceptualise evidence?

 What types of evidence they rely on to make claims  How they negotiate evidence with one another  Utilisation of social media to present claims

Figure 3: Interview topics

6.6.3 Sampling

It is important when sampling to identify and choose participants that belong to the relevant

population of actors within HS2. The purpose is to question what is needed from the sample in terms of answering the research questions (Mason, 2002). The sample needed to provide access to data that allows the researcher to empirically and theoretically develop some arguments about claims-making within the chosen case study. Therefore, interviewees were identified by conducting an online search of organisations involved in the production and use of evidence in relation to HS2. The nature and purpose of the research was outlined in

introductory emails and fully explained to participants prior to the interviews, along with the uses intended for any data produced. The email invited them to take part in an in-depth interview and covered details pertaining to the aims of the research and broad thematic areas. Of the emails that were sent out, the response rate was somewhat lower than expected. Eight interviewees were chosen based on their position on HS2 and their role within the policy process. Two of the interviewees were contacted after being recommended by another interviewee. It should be noted that in no way were participants made to feel obliged or coerced into being involved in the research. The case study was chosen due to its

151 Speed Two was selected as a case study through a process of purposive sampling so

interviewees were initially identified on the basis of their relevance to the research questions and the theoretical and analytical framework employed.