Complete the Analysis and Interpretation Worksheet.Note: If you did not submit your transcripts in Wk 7, you will need to submit them with this assignment. Additionally, please read Ch. 9 to assist with writing memos.
1
RES/724: Qualitative Methods and Design WK 7 – Applied Practice: Interviewing
MORGAN A. BARAJAS
University of Phoenix
RES/724: Qualitative Methods And Design
INSTRUCTOR: Cheryl Anderson
06/13/2022
2
Applied Practice: Interviewing
Conducting the interviews with health professionals was an excellent exercise that guided
me in understanding other possibilities of curbing medical health misinformation. I learned that
even health professionals and researchers are prone to health misinformation. I did not expect
health professionals to fall under the trap of misinformation. However, one of the experts
mentioned that “as long as people’s beliefs about factual matters lack adequate evidence, then it
can be misinformation as well.” Every person forms certain beliefs regarding various situations;
tangible evidence backing up the beliefs distinguishes accurate health information from
misinformation.
While interviewing with the experts, I learned that health misinformation care
misinformation affects our discussions with medical professionals. I knew that health
misinformation could affect care-seeking behaviors, such as seeking inappropriate healthcare.
Still, it had not occurred to me that misinformation can affect how we approach and discuss with
medical experts. One expert educated me that health misinformation mostly occurs due to a lack
of proper understanding between causation and correlation in research findings. I evaluated their
arguments and noted that the problem of health misinformation is deeply-rooted in our system
such that we do not realize it not unless it is on end.
The primary challenge was identifying an expert. Deciding who is an expert and who is
not was a challenge because some people who have specialized in certain fields yet, do not
practice their specializations. Others have specialized knowledge and practice but do not have
much experience in the field. Deciding the best candidate to approach for the interviews was an
uphill task, which was also time-consuming. Also, although the interviews were limited to two
experts, each interview took longer than expected. I noted that to break the monotony of
3
interrogation, the interviews would sometimes turn into a dialogue and discussions, which were
not the primary intent of the exercise. The data obtained from the interviews are highly credible
because they were received directly from professionals and specialists. They shared this
information from their specialization knowledge and experience they have gained while
practising. The interviews focused on the professional’s knowledge, identified by virtue of their
specific knowledge in my field of interest, community position and status. From their feedback, I
could identify assumptions and thoughts to understand better the social reality of health
misinformation in correction facilities. Most importantly, the experts gave their opinion about the
subject of interest to help shape my practices while collecting data in the actual settings.
College of Doctoral Studies