The Qualitative Interview: Contemporary Success as Scientific Challenge?

The Qualitative Interview has become the most frequently used qualitative research method to make sense of our lives. At the same time we observe two opposite trends. On the one hand, we observe a new wave of (conservative) evidence‐based research and on the other hand, a stronger (modernist) focus on reflexivity and postmodernism. Both the conservative and the modernist arguments work in favour of the interview, but in opposite directions. Then, we also find those who rather focus on the theoretical concerns about the analytic status of interview data. In this perspective the worry is that the success of the interview method may undermine the quality of qualitative research. This way we are left us with a paradox: the success of the interview method may pose a threat to the credibility of qualitative research and the risk of a “qualitative” backlash. What are the conflicting arguments and what are the epistemological background leading to the contemporary conflict over this method? In what ways do these arguments pose a threat to the status and the quality of qualitative research? Are there any ways out?