Tag Archives: Interview

Data, Data Everywhere…


Resurfacing briefly to put up a couple of thematic maps of my interview data. I have been working on this for some weeks now. The maps below provide a general overview of my interpretation of the themes brought up by participants in their Focus Group Interviews. Over the next few weeks I’ll put up more specific maps as analysis progresses.

Thematic map of the experiences of drawing held by participants
Thematic map of the experiences of drawing held by participants


Thematic map of the experiences of environment held by participants
Thematic map of the experiences of environment held by participants

Interview Thoughts #1



Seeing as I am a good half an hour or so into transcribing the first focus group interview, I thought I might post up some of the initially interesting quotes, and then in a day or so post up my thoughts about them. I was going to post up my thoughts tonight, but it’s late, and I’m tired.

Cliff face

“Where I live, we’ve got a similar problem as the house that was bought, it’s on the river, and the water comes up now higher than the front door, so the house has had to be tanked so that it doesn’t flood every year. Now, that’s unfortunate but for, eleven months of the year, except for the three days that water comes up, it, it’s amazing. It’s the most idyllic place to live. But on those three days it’s the most inconvenient place to live, and it’s the most terrifying place to live. But, I wouldn’t give that up (pause) for, for anything, you know…”

Beach Storm

“I often think about change in all sorts of different areas and change is really, really difficult with something um, we, um tend not to prefer to confront. But, um, I mean, I think that a lot of people have said today, is actually, it will change and perhaps it’s not within our power to do anything about it. We have to accept it and do things a bit differently which is also a bit scary.”

Cliff faces

“The field is being eroded back and the soil is all full of, um, fossils, from the ice age, so, you can find, you know, shark’s teeth and all sorts of wonderful things, coming out. So it’s kind of, you know, sea’s going back, sea’s taking back, the sea’s taking back what it had before…”

Towards the Church

“But, long term, I mean, we, we have a massive impact on the environment and there comes a time when, we, you can’t beat (pause) the elements and obviously it’s not going to be the people responsible for global warming that suffer the effects of losing their house but is, sort of (pause) collectively we are having a massive impact on (pause) what happens.”

Grey Cliffs

“I’ve got some maps, Ordnance Survey maps, my other’s a great one for buying maps but there we go and, um, one of them is 19… you know, there’s a, quite a recent one then one back in the 60s. You can see the difference. Minimal, but it’s there.”





So, I want to write a bit later on today about the content of the first focus group interview that I am currently transcribing, but first off I want to think a little bit about the actual process of transcribing interviews.

Since last Sunday, I have been slowly transcribing the recording of the first focus group interview that was held on 10th May. When I say slowly, I mean, s…l…o…w…l…y. I admit, I had been putting off starting this task. I had listened to the interviews again, and found them really interesting, but the idea of sitting down and typing them out word for word, well, it didn’t fill me with enthusiasm.

I’m pretty good at putting things off and not feeling bad about it, but by Sunday afternoon it was weighing on my mind so I forced myself to sit down to the task. But, I ended up thinking about the task instead of actually doing it (a great way of procrastinating while still being able to tell yourself that you’ve started). ‘How long will it take?’ I thought about it and settled on an hour or two. Its obvious now, but at the time I wasn’t considering the fact that if it took everyone an hour and a half to say what was on the recording, it wasn’t a task that would be completed in less time than this. So, to delay things further, I turned to Google and ended up on a site called Virtual Assistant Forums. The news wasn’t good:

“I heard one hour of audio takes 4 hours to transcribe!”

“As a general rule I figure 1 hour of audio = 5 hours of transcribing”

“I average about 3 to 4 times typing to audio too – hope that helps?”

Why did they all sound so happy about this? I have over three hours of audio recordings that need transcribing, so I quickly calculated –  worst case scenario: 15 hours. My desire to start this task decreased even more. I felt that things were better when I didn’t know what was waiting ahead. Then I realised, these people were reasonably experienced transcribers. My worst case scenario estimate of five hours was probably optimistic

So, I obviously needed to do some more thinking (rather than just getting on with it). My thoughts moved on to the subject of how interviews are actually transcribed. Should I type every ‘um’ and ‘erm’ and ‘you know’ or should I aim to make it easy to read, at the risk of losing the integrity of the recording. Once more I turned to Google. This time I sought advice from that well known authority on academic interview transcription – Ehow.com:

“Start the tape.”

Easy enough. But it continued:

“Use the foot pedal to stop and restart it as you work. You can use a regular tape player and simply hit pause to stop the tape, but keep in mind that the process will take much longer this way, and be more tedious.”

Great. Who has a foot pedal unless they do this for a living? Nobody does this for a hobby right? It looked like  I would would be stopping the tape frequently. By hand. Moving on:

“You won’t be able to type as fast as people speak — even professional court reporters use shorthand — so you’ll have to stop the tape each time you fall behind.”

I can confirm, this happens a lot. I can type three words before falling behind. As soon as I hit a word consisting of more than two syllables I’m done for. To combat this Ehow helpfully suggest:

“You may want to listen first to a sentence, then pause the tape and type it.”

Which is great, except people don’t tend to talk in whole, complete sentences. Instead sentences swerve, stop, change tack, turn into questions, pause and generally often don’t make much sense when written down. For example, this is a excerpt from the focus group interview:

“What I would like to know really is, if you can obviously tell us who you are, um,  a rough indication of where you live in relation to the coast here, and (pause) I won’t say ‘what do you do for a living?’, ‘how you usually spend your time?’ shall we say and, um, and also, what made you want to take part in the project if you wouldn’t mind, so, if anyone wants to take that and  go with it? Whoever wants to go first…”

This isn’t an answer given on the fly by a participant. This is a transcription of my first question! It’s a question I had planned out and written it down, so all I had to do was read it, and still, it’s a bit of a garbled mess. What it should say is:

“Could you please tell the group a little about yourself and where you live in relation to the coast here. Can you also tell us a bit about how you spend most of your time and what your reasons were for wanting to  participate in the project. Who would like to go first?”

So what I actually meant is best expressed by the second passage, but what I actually said in the first passage is how it came out. Is the difference important? I think it is. According to the ever dependable Ehow I should:

“Transcribe the interview exactly as you hear it. There will be time later to edit grammar and content.”

So, I decided to type exactly what I hear, including the ‘ums’ the ‘ahs’ and all the pauses. Thinking about it a little more, I think that it is best to try and capture the interviews in the most accurate way I can, as it will be easier to edit ‘out’ than ‘in’ later on should I decide the manner in which somebody says something is equally as important as what they say.

Fast forward to tonight, and I am proud to announce I have so far covered 41 minutes and 31 seconds of the first interview, and have been working on it for roughly eight hours. The irony isn’t lost on me however that the hour I’ve spent working on this entry could have possibly been better spent transcribing more of the interview, about 11 minutes of the interview in fact. So it looks like I’m still indulging in procrastination, but at least I’ve made a start.


Drawing, Talking but sadly no Walking


Participant Drawing #07

It has been a while since the last update, mainly because I have been busy finishing up a module, the final optional module of the MRes in fact. The module in question was ‘Mediating the Environment’, run by Dr Julie Doyle from the School of Art, Design and Media, and looked at the ways in which environmental issues are constructed, communicated and contested by  different actors, such as the media, scientists and environmental NGOs, and through different forms of mediated communication, such as images, films, newspapers, internet and social media.  The culmination of this module was an essay that looks at how coastal erosion has been represented in the East Anglian Daily Times. I’ll post up the results when I get them.

This has meant that the main research project had mostly been put on hold for a short time, but now becomes my main focus once more. The 17th May seems a long time a go now, but that was when I ran my final research session of two in Wrentham. The session began with a series of individual drawings made by the participants in response to three questions. For each question, participants were given ten minutes to create a response. The questions were:

Please make some marks on your paper about a memorable moment from the coast walk last Saturday.

Please make some marks on your paper about one of your drawings that you made last week.

Please make some marks on your paper about one of your photos you took or objects you collected last week.

Some of the drawings made by participants are pictured below.

Reading back through my notes, my initial thoughts about how this session went were:

  • Difficult to arrange several people in a room, on individual tables, without replicating an exam-type set up.
  • This similarity was picked up by a few participants, not sure if this unsettled them.
  • The room was very quiet, little in the way of conversation.
  • A few comments were made expressing disappointment that we wouldn’t be going to the beach at any point.

Following on from this, while the participants went through to the kitchen area for refreshments, I rearranged the seating in a way that allowed all the participants to sit around two tables pushed together.

Group drawing set up

This was necessary for the following hour-long exercise, where the participants worked on two communal drawings. Two sheets of paper were placed on the tables in front of the participants, half the participants would be working on sheet 1, and the other half on the 2. Every fifteen minutes the sheets would be swapped over, so participants would constantly work on drawings that they didn’t have complete ownership over.

The participants were asked to make marks in response to only one question:

How does the Covehithe stretch of coast make you feel?

Every fifteen minutes the drawings were swapped over, and a photo was taken of each drawing. These photos will eventually be turned into animations, but for now, here are some of the drawings:

Looking at my notes from the session, I observed that:

  • There was a little initial confusion and resistance shown by the participants when set the task, but soon everyone settled down.
  • Politeness prevailed to begin with, most participants hesitated to make marks.
  • This time, in contrast to the silence of the individual drawing activity, conversation flowed freely among the participants.

The next step in the process will be to analyse all of the drawings in greater detail, and to seek some interpretations of the drawings by the participants themselves.

Following a lunch break, we concluded the day with another focus group session. The main areas covered were:

What are your thoughts and feelings about your experience of taking part in the walking and drawing activity?

What are your thoughts more generally on how you experience landscape when you are out walking or drawing in it?

What are your thoughts and feelings about your experiences of taking part in today’s drawing exercises?

What effect has making your drawings in this project had on your relationship to the coastline?

I enjoyed the discussion, many interesting ideas and topics were raised. I now have to transcribe around three hours of interviews recordings, how long this takes will no doubt determine when I next update this diary.


Talking, Walking, Drawing

Field Research
Participants working on the beach

Well, waking early on Saturday morning my hopes for reasonable weather for the day’s research activities were dealt a blow. I knew before I opened my eyes that it was  raining, as I could hear water spilling from a newly discovered overflowing blocked gutter outside the bedroom window. The rain continued while I walked my dog, and continued as I made my way up the A12. Shortly before I got to Wrentham the rain eased up but the weather remained gusty and the sky stayed leaden.

The weather didn’t help the nervous feeling I had as I waited for the person with the hall key to arrive but wasn’t completely to blame. The biggest source of my anxiety in the weeks leading up to the event, far greater than the worry of not having ever chaired a focus group before, or the fear of terrible weather disrupting the outdoor aspect of the day, was the thought that on the day my participants wouldn’t turn up. I am working to such tight deadlines that at this late stage recruiting new participants, booking a new venue, organising new research days really isn’t an option.

So it was just as well that by 10:30 all my participants were in the kitchen area of the hall getting to know each other and drinking tea and coffee!

The Focus Group Interview

I can’t go into too much detail of the focus group interview here for fear of biasing certain activities that are planned for next Saturday, but, listening to the discussion at the time, and later on listening to the recording at home, I realised that the participants had covered some interesting areas. Two of these which caught my ear were:

  • Nature/Culture distinctions and our human relationships with the nature and environment.
  • The coast as a site of conflict, both in terms of the inherent natural processes and in the terminology deployed to describe coastline management.

In a related but separate part of my studies I have been thinking a lot about the writings of Barbara Adam on Nature/Culture distinctions. The dominant discourse (certainly in the Western industrialised world) insists on a separation between humans and nature, underlined by the thought that we can overcome and triumph over all things natural. This worldview obscures and ignores the fact that as humans we are inextricably linked to, and depend upon, nature and environment for our survival. So for the participants to end up discussing whether erosion is a process that we learn to accept and live with, or whether it is something for us to overcome, was very timely.

My role in the Focus Group was to pose questions or suggest themes for discussion, by mostly I was able to sit back and observe interactions and dynamics. There were times when I would try to prompt participants, or ask them to expand on a point, or even to try to bring someone quieter into the conversation, but in general, I was willing to see where the conversation would go. The group seemed to click well, there were very few silences, and the silences that we did experience seemed to be due to the participants waiting for me to say something.

The focus group ran for around an hour an a half, after which we broke for lunch for 45 minutes before heading to the coast for the walking and drawing activity.

Participatory Field Research


Participants making their way down to the beach
Participants making their way down to the beach

While the interview was going on, the weather had quietly been improving. Until we had lunch. Then it got worse, and worse, until by 12:30 the rain was torrential.

I was considering our options. Could we walk in the rain and not draw? Could I ask participants to come an hour earlier on the 17th so we could walk then? I didn’t really know what to do. To change the plan was to fundamentally change the research. Not much time to make a decision.

And then a small patch of sky, a pale blue, appeared in the grey. And gradually got bigger. By 13:00 it was breezy but gloriously sunny. We were saved. I was saved.

Dodging the deeper puddles, participants gathered round, I handed out the sketchbooks and art packs much discussed in my last post, and we set off for the beach. I planned to hang back from the group, and let them make their own decisions as to the direction they went, when they stopped, how fast they walked, whether they stayed together or split up. My main tasks for the afternoon were to observe the way the participants decided to work, how they interacted with each other, how they engaged with the landscape and to make notes on my own thoughts regarding the progress of the field research.

Facing south towards Southwold - Participants working
Facing south towards Southwold – participants working

Once again, I can’t go into specifics at this stage for fear of influencing later activities, but I made some interesting observations relating to the different approaches to mark making, and the different approaches to positioning themselves in relation to the landscape, and the reset of the group. After an hour and a half on the beach, heavy clouds began to blow in from the south-west so I explained to the participants that we might like to consider packing up and making our way back and out of the elements.

Fine weather looking North...
Fine weather looking North…
...more dramatic weather looking South.
…more dramatic weather looking South.

Driving away from Covehithe, I passed through yet more torrential rain. The only two sunny hours of the afternoon had coincided with our visit to the beach. Perhaps I should take that as some kind of positive sign for the future of the research.


An introduction…


Over the next few months this website will be used to document and reflect upon the progress of the main research project that I am undertaking as part of my MRes in Arts and Cultural Research at the University of Brighton. This blog forms the online component of a larger Visual Research diary that  will chart the course of the research in a reflexive space that pulls together art practice and research.

My research aims to work with participants from a region of Suffolk in the United Kingdom affected by coastal erosion. As part of the research participants will take part in a combination of drawing activities and participatory field research that will help them explore and articulate their connections to, and experiences of, a disappearing coastline.

Covehithe OS Map

To help address the aims of the research, the ‘data generation’ section of the project will follow four stages:

Initial Focus Group Interview  –  The first research activity will be to carry out an initial focus group interview with the participants. The main purpose of the  interview will be to establish a baseline appreciation of how participants relate to the coastline and to discuss some of the concerns participants may have regarding the use of drawing in this research as a way of exploring their experiences.

Participatory Field Research – With participant relationship to the coastline forming an important feature of the research, it is important for us to actually engage physically with the landscape that we are investigating.  With this in mind a group walk will be carried out, during which visual and word based observations will be recorded alongside participant discussions of the coastline.

Drawing Activity – The core of the research takes the form of a communal drawing activity that will allow the participants to explore their experiences and reflections of the coastline. The purpose of the drawing activity is to attempt to visually depict coastal experiences through mark marking and erasure, techniques that can be said to represent the coastal erosion processes at work in the region. The process of creating the drawings will be recorded photographically, and a stop-motion animation of the process will be placed on this website as part of the research findings.

Final Focus Group Interview – The final focus group interview will be where participant reactions to the drawing activities will be discussed alongside encouraging participants to play a role in the interpretation of their own drawings.


This is a very brief overview of the project, and over the next weeks and months everything will be expanded and reflected upon. Right now, practical matters are dominating the research progress and it is practical matters that will be the subject of the next few posts.