By: Kacey Bates & Amy Mallory
Capturing stories can be a fleeting moment. It can be a surreal, contradictory experience of fast-paced, intimate disclosure from a stranger, who one never sees or interacts with again. The excitement of learning about someone’s perspective often consumes our interviewers, overshadowing the moments of learning these interviews hold. We all listen to information perceived through subjective filters, influenced by our own past memories and experiences.
While discussing and documenting the Shared Stories Lab interview process, my peer, Amy and I often relied on her interviewing and story collection experience to inform resources for student researchers to come. During our discussion, the idea for Amy to listen to a past interview through the lens of “learning moments” was born.
The following reflection is from Amy’s perspective on an interview held in 2020. Stored here in our Pressbooks Collection, the full interview is available for listening along with many others. These reflections are organized by the timestamp in which they take place. As “screenshots” of learning moments, these moments curated by Amy reflect the small moments that hold big meanings.
9:15-10:15
Here the interview involved discussing trying out trends in college that ultimately, aren’t for you. Participant admitted that they have written fan fiction pieces that they “regret” or aren’t aligned with their current genre of writing aspirations.
I quickly validated their confession by echoing that the choice “wasn’t for them,” and chuckled. The intention was to acknowledge their admission in a light-hearted way while affirming that it’s okay to not pursue things that are no longer reflective of your interests. The laughter sought to dismiss or close further discussion that the participant likely didn’t want to expand upon. Why continue speaking about something that they no longer associate themselves with?
I re-directed the conversation by offering validation as well as a summary of how the participant’s writing style has likely evolved and continues to be a journey. This move propelled the conversation forward with the potential to ask about current projects and directly sought feedback from the participant.
Why, as an interviewer, this was an ethical choice: There was a potential for abuse of power by continuing to ask about the participant’s past writing, which may have led to them disclosing something embarrassing. The participant had also already stated a boundary and comfort level when they said earlier, “I won’t get too much into it.”
14:15-15:03
Participant announced that they were in the military for a short time and that the experience was a “culture shock.” I inquired if they would like to speak more about it. Participant quickly declined, stating that “It’s not really a subject that they like to get into.” This was another example of boundary setting, though it may have appeared contradictory, given that the participant brought up the military involvement, unprompted.
However, the segue to the military announcement followed on the heels of the participant describing their brother’s volatile first-year college experience, in which he called home often and had growing pains. I commented that the participant must have witnessed their brother’s struggles, yet also saw him ultimately, overcome them. The context of the “unprompted” announcement is now understood, and a connection can be drawn to an emotional association with a time in the participant’s life when they also struggled (in the military).
There were clues to the participant’s emotional state detected in the sarcastic tone used when the participant said that “they now can get out of bed without being yelled at,” (by a superior). I again deployed laughter to deescalate the conversation and attempted validation by stating that it seemed like what the participant had learned (from the military experience) was that they now experience greater value for the ability to govern their own choices (without being commanded into action/submission).
The participant declined to speak further about their experience and stated, “Let’s just say, it didn’t end very well.” The tone of voice had an edge to it that can be heard, and the pace of speech also increased, as if to “warn and shut down” the conversation.
The phrase “Let’s just say,” is often used as a way for the speaker to cut a conversation short, when details are irrelevant or otherwise not going to be elaborated upon. The speaker knows additional information, but the listener now understands that they aren’t going to be given the whole story, though they are able to comprehend the subtext of the statement, filling in invisible blanks (without receiving actual confirmation from the speaker).
I re-directed the conversation back to the subject of the participant’s Fan Fictions and asked who they write their stories for (in terms of audience).
15:04-16:20
Here the participant disclosed that they write their stories as a form of therapy, and that the audience was namely themselves. There seemed to be an element of vulnerability in this disclosure, likely piggy-backing off the previous emotional reactivity that was generated when the participant brought up their past military experience.
I attempted validation about how writing can often be therapeutic, and that journaling is an introspective process, best honored by keeping it private. This echoed the sentiment that the participant expressed of wishing to “keep some things that they write to themselves.” Again, they chose to bring up this particular point to me. It’s important to be mindful that we, as interviewers, cannot control how a question is perceived.
Out of ethical concern, regarding some of the subtextual content that the participant seemed to be hinting at, I chose to not ask further questions that might harm them or intrude upon their privacy. It is important to never, ever exploit the participant or act in a way that abuses your power.
Some people are under the impression that they need to disclose trauma in order to be worthy. And other people find affirmation in discussing their traumas and creating safe spaces for others to also share, support, and heal.
You can only gauge which type of interviewee you have, at the moment. Accurately reading body language, deciphering tone, and analyzing language choices can all inform you about how to proceed. Be cautious, attentive, and responsible.
If a participant becomes emotional, it’s okay to ask if they’d like to take a break or stop the interview altogether. If you become emotional during an interview, first try compartmentalizing and separating your feelings from the participant’s. Practice detachment as a nod to professionalism. If that’s impossible, it’s okay to have a human moment and also request to take a break.
16:20
I attempted to re-direct the conversation by asking the participant about what they thought would help future students with transitioning to life on campus. This question ended up, inadvertently, bringing the interview “full circle,” if we remember that the participant was also a prospective BSU student. This question sought to empower the participant to identify what their needs and wishes were, while also acting to conclude the interview on a positive note.
KB: Reading through this reflection, I had a few questions for Amy about the connections she made and what this process meant.
KB: What surprised you about this exercise?
AM: What surprised me about this interview was discovering how closely I was practicing active listening with the participant. I was surprised that I was acutely attuned to the process of interviewing and able to identify subtext and emotions, as they unfolded in real-time. Correctly interpreting the interviewee’s emotions constantly informed my own choices. I was surprised by how I seemingly employed a combination of logic and intuition to re-direct questionable moments in the interview to places of empowerment and dignity for the participant, always with a firm hold on the notion of: “What is the ethical choice here that should be made?”
KB: What did you get from taking the time to reflect?
AM: What this reflection gave me was an incredible boost of confidence and self-assuredness in my own abilities and talents, as an interviewer. I don’t think that society is always very gracious about allowing people, especially women, to identify when they’re especially good at something, as this attitude is often misconstrued as arrogance. But it was a really brilliant discovery for me to realize, and it felt really good to be able to say,
“Wow, I knew what I was doing; I did do a good job.”