The conversational, friendly, and fortuitous interview

Innovative tool in qualitative research

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.34024/prometeica.2025.32.19517

Keywords:

qualitative interview, theoretical foundation, practical application, advantages, limitations, practical guidelines.

Abstract

This article explores the Conversational, Friendly, and Fortuitous Interview (CFFI) as an innovative technical proposal for data collection in qualitative research, using the Hermeneutic Phenomenological Method as a theoretical foundation. It analyzes the distinctive characteristics of the CFFI, which differentiate it from other techniques, highlighting its ability to create an environment of trust and spontaneity for the interviewee. Through a theoretical-practical analysis, the advantages and limitations of this technique are evaluated, showing how the CFFI can delve deeper into lived experience and reveal more authentic meanings in the collected data. Finally, recommendations for its application in future studies are proposed, offering suggestions to optimize its use in various qualitative research contexts. This article contributes to the discussion on new forms of interaction in data collection, promoting greater flexibility and naturalness in the research process.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Author Biographies

  • Juan Ranulfo Cavero-Carrasco, Universidad Nacional de San Cristóbal de Huamanga

    Dr. en Ciencias Sociales por la Universidad Estadual de Campinas (Brasil) y Mg. en Antropología por la Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú. Profesor Principal en la Facultad de Ciencias de la Educación de la Universidad Nacional de San Cristóbal de Huamanga (Ayacucho, Perú). ex Director de la Escuela de Post Grado, ex Decano de la Facultad de Ciencias de la Educación y ex Rector de la Universidad mencionada. Con quince libros y numerosos artículos publicados en Perú, Chile, México y Japón. Ponente en varios eventos nacionales e internacionales, entre estos en varias congresos Iberoamericanos de Historia de la Educación Latinoamericana (Brasil, Argentina, México y Colombia).

  • Francisco Alejandro Espinoza-Montes, Universidad Nacional del Centro del Perú

    Doctor en Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo Sostenible (UNFV), Licenciado en Ciencias de la Educación, especialidad Desarrollo Ambiental (UNE), Ingeniero Zootecnista (UNCP). Calificado como investigador Renacyt por el CONCYTEC. Fui Vicepresidente de Investigación de la Universidad Nacional José María Arguedas y Rector de la Universidad para el Desarrollo Andino. Autor de artículos científicos en revistas de alto impacto (Scopus y Web of Science), con énfasis en Desarrollo Ambiental y Ciencias de la Educación. Experiencia como consultor en Investigación Formativa, Desarrollo de Competencias Investigativas. Experiencia en capacitación y asesoría en Elaboración de Proyectos de Investigación de impacto social, tecnológico y científico y Redacción de Artículos Científicos.

References

Alby, F., & Fatigante, M. (2014). Preserving the respondent’s standpoint in a research interview: Different strategies of ‘doing’ the interviewer. Human Studies, 37, 239-256.

Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (2017). Social interaction in everyday life. In Communication theory (pp. 86-101). Routledge.

Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative research journal, 9(2), 27-40.

Brinkmann, S. (2013). Qualitative interviewing. Oxford University Press, USA.

Carcary, M. (2011). Análisis de evidencias utilizando CAQDAS: perspectivas de un investigador cualitativo. Revista electrónica de métodos de investigación empresarial, 9 (1), pp10-24.

Cavero, R. & Cavero, M. (2018). Historia de la educación en Ayacucho durante los años 1980–1999. Investigación, 26(2), 11-17.

Cavero, R. (2019). La situación de maestros y estudiantes en la región de Ayacucho: 1980-1999. Investigación, 27(2), 11-19.

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research (Vol. 14). Sage.

Cresswell, J. (2013). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage

Denzin, N. K. (2012). Triangulation 2.0. Journal of mixed methods research, 6(2), 80-88.

Denzin, NK y Lincoln, YS (Eds.). (2011). El manual Sage de investigación cualitativa. Sage.

Ekman, P. (2003). Darwin, deception, and facial expression. Annals of the New York Academy of sciences, 1000(1), 205-221.

Flick, U. (2014). La gestión de la calidad en investigación cualitativa (Vol. 8). Ediciones Morata.

Fontana, A., & Frey, J. H. (2005). The interview. The Sage handbook of qualitative research, 3(1), 695-727.

Gadamer, H. G. (2013). Truth and method. A&C Black.

Gadamer, H. G., & Olasagasti, M. (1992). Verdad y método (Vol. 1). Salamanca: Sígueme.

Gergen, K. J. (2009). Realities and relationships: Soundings in social construction. Harvard University press.

Goodson, I., & Sikes, P. (2016). Techniques for doing life history. In The Routledge international handbook on narrative and life history (pp. 82-98). Routledge.

Grondin, J. (2002). Introducción a la hermenéutica filosófica. Herder.

Gubrium, J. F., & Holstein, J. A. (Eds.). (2002). Handbook of interview research: Context and method. Sage.

Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (2019). Ethnography: Principles in practice. Routledge.

Heidegger, M. (2022). Ser y tiempo. Editorial Universitaria de Chile.

Kvale, K. (2007). ¿Los pacientes con cáncer siempre quieren hablar de emociones difíciles? Un estudio cualitativo de las necesidades de comunicación de los pacientes hospitalizados con cáncer. Revista Europea de Enfermería Oncológica, 11 (4), 320-327.

Kvale, S. (1996). InterViews: an introduction to qualitive research interviewing. Sage.

Kvale, S. (2006). Dominance through interviews and dialogues. Qualitative inquiry, 12(3), 480-500.

Kvale, S. (2012). Las entrevistas en investigación cualitativa (Vol. 2). Ediciones Morata.

Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). Interviews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. Sage.

Laverty, S. M. (2003). Hermeneutic phenomenology and phenomenology: A comparison of historical and methodological considerations. International journal of qualitative methods, 2(3), 21-35.

McKenna, R. (2015). Contextualism in epistemology. Analysis, 75(3), 489-503.

Mwita, M. K. (2022). Factors to consider when using qualitative interviews in data collection. Soc Sci Humanit Educ J (SHE Journal), 3(3), 313-323.

Patton, C., Sawicki, D., y Clark, J. (2015). Métodos básicos de análisis y planificación de políticas. Routledge.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice. Sage publications.

Ponty, M. M. (1975). Fenomenología de la percepción. Península.

Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2011). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data. Sage.

Schwandt, T. A. (1994). Constructivist, interpretivist approaches to human inquiry. Handbook of qualitative research/Sage.

Silver, C., & Lewins, A. (2014). Using software in qualitative research: A step-by-step guide.

Souto, P. C. N. (2015). Creating knowledge with and from the differences: the required dialogicality and dialogical competences. RAI Revista de Administraçao e Inovaçao, 12(2), 60-89.

van Manen, M., 1990. Researching Lived Experience: Human Science for an Action Sensitive Pedagogy. Althouse Press, Ontario

Prometeica v.32

Downloads

Published

2025-03-01

Issue

Vol. 32 (2025): Prometeica - v 32 (03/2025 - 12/2025)

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Juan Ranulfo Cavero-Carrasco, Francisco Alejandro Espinoza-Montes

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Copyright: Prometeica allows the author (s) to keep their copyrights unrestricted. Prometeica allows the author (s) to retain their publication rights without restriction. Authors should ensure that the article is an original work without fabrication, fraud or plagiarism; does not infringe any copyright or right of ownership of any third party. Authors should also ensure that each one complies with the authorship requirements as recommended by the ICMJE and understand that if the article or part of it is flawed or fraudulent, each author shares responsibility.

Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0)

Prometeica - Journal of Philosophy and Sciences is governed by the licencse CC-By-NC

You are free to:

  • Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material

The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.

Under the following terms:

No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.

 

Copyright maintenance

Prometeica allows the author (s) to keep their copyright without restrictions.

Prometeica allows the author (s) to retain their publication rights without restriction.

How to Cite

Cavero-Carrasco, J. R., & Espinoza-Montes, F. A. (2025). The conversational, friendly, and fortuitous interview : Innovative tool in qualitative research. Prometeica - Journal of Philosophy and Science, 32, e19517 (1-19). https://doi.org/10.34024/prometeica.2025.32.19517
Received 2024-09-18
Accepted 2025-01-07
Published 2025-03-01