When we hear about the results of opinion polls on TV, the question often arises: “Who is the interviewer?” Let's understand the terminology.
Interviewers in sociology are people who interview respondents or interview other people who fall under a certain sample. In this case, not the entire population is polled, but only those categories of citizens who meet certain criteria. The selection is made by gender, age, social status, income level, education, etc., depending on the goals and objectives of the study. Accordingly, those people who fell under such a sample are called respondents. In other words, interviewers are those who interview, and respondents are those who are interviewed.
At the same time, this definition does not quite explain: who is the interviewer? The fact is that in sociology there are several methods of conducting research. In mass surveys, when it is required to interview a large number of respondents (about 1200-2400people), usually resort to an interview, an individual survey. Then the interviewer finds the respondent and conducts a personal conversation with him, asking questions recorded in the questionnaire (or interview form, in sociological terms). This conversation is called an “interview.”
Another technique - a group focused interview, or focus group - involves working with a limited number of respondents, approximately 8-12 people. In this case, the conversation is recorded on a dictaphone or video, the recording from which is then decrypted. The task of the interviewer (moderator) in this case is to try to “talk” the focus group participants, to get them to answer the questions as accurately and frankly as possible.
Thus, answering the question "Interviewer - who is this?", we can say that this is a person who collects and systematizes information. He does not analyze the received data, but is responsible for their objectivity, as well as compliance with the standards fixed in the research program.
Working as an interviewer in this regard is akin to the work of an amateur psychologist. If the interviewer cannot “talk” the respondent, does not force him to speak frankly (and this is very difficult, given the volume of work on conducting mass surveys), then such an interviewer can be considered incompetent. In this case, he is fined or even completely removed from the "field".
In principle, the answer to the question "Interviewer - who is this?" lies in the plane of the functional "connection" with other participants in sociological research. So, if a sociologist and analystwork individually (develops the scope of work, calculations, creates a questionnaire and draws up a sample, writes a report), then the interviewer works in a team.
Let's say a door-to-door survey. Of course, you can interrogate yourself, but usually they work in pairs for each address. Which, in principle, is understandable: a man may not be opened, but a girl almost always. 30-50 questionnaires are handed out. With an average pace and a simple questionnaire, 10-15 people can be interviewed.
It turns out that the respondent and the interviewer are sui generis dialectical opposites to each other: the task of one is to save the maximum amount of information, while the task of the other is to obtain the necessary amount of information. Therefore, effective work is obtained only when they quickly find mutual psychological contact. And this is the professionalism of the interviewer.
