The Controversy Over Detailed Interviews-An Offer for Negotiation

Abstract

FROM the beginning, public opinion research has been badgered by the problem of “depth.” Does a simple answer to a simple question really reveal a man's opinion? The controversy, if such it may be called, has grown not only between the critics and the pollsters, but among the pollsters themselves. Two philosophies of research have arisen; one wedded to so-called depth interviewing, the other content with more objective methods of research. In this article Dr. Lazarsfeld looks searchingly at the potential schism. His conclusion is that the difference between the two schools, though valid, need not be crucial; there is, in his opinion, a half-way house. Paul F. Lazarsfeld is Director of Columbia University's Office of Radio Research, and a consultant on problems of public opinion research to various private and government organizations. His writings on radio research are well known to readers of the QUARTERLY.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 179 citations exist upstream.