The document discusses elite interviewing methods in political science. It provides an overview of a symposium on the topic including short essays from various authors. The contributors explore how elite interviews are conducted and how interview subjects are treated differently than general population interviews.
The document discusses elite interviewing methods in political science. It provides an overview of a symposium on the topic including short essays from various authors. The contributors explore how elite interviews are conducted and how interview subjects are treated differently than general population interviews.
The document discusses elite interviewing methods in political science. It provides an overview of a symposium on the topic including short essays from various authors. The contributors explore how elite interviews are conducted and how interview subjects are treated differently than general population interviews.
The document discusses elite interviewing methods in political science. It provides an overview of a symposium on the topic including short essays from various authors. The contributors explore how elite interviews are conducted and how interview subjects are treated differently than general population interviews.
he following essays are based on presentaTcourse tions given by the authors during a short on elite interviewing, held at the 2001 APSA meeting in San Francisco. The short course, sponsored by the Political Organizations and Parties organized section of the APSA, drew nearly 100 participants. The term elite interviewing generates some confusion and disagreement, as some researchers use elite to refer to the socioeconomic position of the respondent, whereas for others it has more to do with how the respondent is treated by the interviewer. There is an interaction between these two situations, as political scientist Lewis Dexter pointed by out in his book, Elite Beth L. Leech, and Specialized InRutgers University terviewing: In standardized interviewingthe investigator defines the question and the problem; he is only looking for answers within the bounds set by his presuppositions. In elite interviewing, as here defined, however, the investigator is willing, and often eager to let the interviewee teach him what the problem, the question, the situation, is.Partly out of necessitythis approach has been adopted much
more often with the influential, the prominent
and the well-informed than with the rank-andfile of a population. For one thing, a good many well-informed or influential people are unwilling to accept the assumptions with which the investigator starts; they insist on explaining to him how they see the situation, what the real problems are as they view the matter (pp. 67).
The essays presented here for the most part
focus on interviews of people in decisionmaking or leadership rolesmembers of Congress, members of parliaments, top-level bureaucrats, party leaders, and interest group leaders. More broadly speaking, however, elite interviewing can be used whenever it is appropriate to treat a respondent as an expert about the topic at hand. One of the essays on these pages, for example, involves interviews with activists, who while not elites in the socioeconomic sense of the word, are experts in their field and treated as such by the interviewer. There have been relatively few resources in the discipline for training students and other researchers about the methodological challenges and informational benefits of conducting interviews with elite subjects. It is our hope that the short course and these essays help further discussion of these topics.
Contributors to this symposium
Joel D. Aberbach is professor of political science and policy studies and director of the Center for American Politics and Public Policy at UCLA. He is also co-chair of the International Political Science Associations Research Committee on Structure and Organization of Government. He can be reached at [email protected]. Bert A. Rockman is director and professor in the School of Public Policy and Management at Ohio State University. He is co-editor of the journal, Governance, and is the co-author with Joel D. Aberbach of In the Web of Politics: Three Decades of the U.S. Federal Executive (Brookings, 2000). He can be reached at [email protected]. Jeffrey M. Berry is the John Richard Skuse, Class of 1941 Professor of Political Science at Tufts University. His most PSOnline www.apsanet.org
recent book is The New Liberalism
(Brookings Institution Press, 1999). He can be reached at [email protected]. Kenneth Goldstein is an associate professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. He is the author of Interest Groups, Lobbying, and Participation in America and a number of journal articles and book chapters on televison advertising, participation, and survey methods. He can be reached at [email protected]. Polina M. Kozyreva is head of the department of social stratification at the Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences. She is a specialist on survey research methods and has contributed to numerous edited volumes, including Public Opinion and Regime Change: The New Politics of Post-Soviet Societies (Westview Press, 1993).
663
Beth L. Leech is an assistant professor of political science
at Rutgers University, where her research and teaching interests focus on the roles of interest groups and the news media in policy formation. She organized the short course on elite interviewing at the 2001 APSA Annual Meeting. She can be reached at [email protected]. Sharon Werning Rivera is an assistant professor of political science at Hamilton College, where she teaches in the areas of comparative politics, democratic transitions, and the politics of Russia and Eastern Europe. She can be reached at [email protected].
664
Eduard G. Sarovskii is a senior researcher at the Institute
of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences. He specializes in the social structure of contemporary Russian society and has published widely on the issue of social stratification. Laura R. Woliver is a professor in the department of government and international studies at the University of South Carolina, where she is also interim director of the Womens Studies Program. Her latest book, The Political Geographies of Pregnancy (University of Illinois Press, 2002) includes materials from person to person in-depth interviews. She can be reached at [email protected].