Hi all,

Can anyone advise of any 'shortcuts' in relation to transcription of interveiws, other than paying a typist to do it!
What is the general consensus in relation to the notion that there is a lot to be gained from doing the transcription oneself - from the greater understanding of the interviewee's preceptions?


I am interviewing a complement of thirty persons for my research, with a list of 29 questions. some of the questions require further on the spot questioning to clarify the interviewee's answers, or elaboration of points they make.
I am interested in others' experience in this regard.

thank you,

Murt.:-(

Hi Murt

Transcription, the joys! No real short-cuts that I know of. Paying for transcription undoubtedly saves a reseracher's sanity but I do agree with the argument that doing it yourself keeps you close to the data. Also, listening back can prompt further questions and occasional eureka moments.

I used grounded theory and Strauss and Corbin (1990, 2008) advise that full transcription can be 'relaxed' as the process unfolds. What I did when my interviewee really went off on a tangent was put that info into the transcript and note at what point it ocurred so as to be able to re-visit if necessary - I never had to though! There's not a whole lot in any method book I have with advice re: transcription.

In hindsight I'm sorry I didn't get a footpedal to help with the transcription as the pause button on my recorder was small and it definitely slowed me down. I did look into one but it turned out I should have got it at the same time as my recorder as not all pedals are compatible with all recorders. I downloaded free softward 'Expresscribe' which I used for a bit - you can use the onscreen buttons along with a footpedal (which I borrowed for a time). In the end though, like most things, I went back to the original way of doing things. 60 interviews of between 40 mins and an hour long later and I was tearing my hair out.

My advice is keep up with your transcription from the start otherwise it will haunt your dreams!

I agree with the 'do it yourself' method. I ended up having to do all of my interviews solo. There were times that it did prompt memories of other things that were surrounding the interviews and potentially useful. Also, hearing the voice inflections, changes in the rhythm, etc. helped to cement them in my mind. I found that as I (re)read over them for the umpteenth-million time, I could hear their voices and how they tried to bring out important points that plain text just didn't reveal.
As far as tricks go:
Get some software that allows you to slow down the playback. Being able to cancel out background, high-frequency noise (e.g. air conditioners) is another helpful feature. I am not an insanely quick typist, but I found I could keep up with 50% playback speed pretty easily. Also, coming up with symbols/shorthand for important moments (laughs/pauses/etc) helps LOADS.

get yourself 'transcription buddy' its free to download from www.download.com there's a free 30 day trial. But Sneaks' no.1 tip = if you uninstall and reinstall then you get a new 30 days. SSSSHHHHH I didn't tell you that ;-)

Once installed, you can upload your mp3s or whatever, and thne go to the 'view' menu, where you can set 'automatic pauses' - means you never have to press play or pause again! and you can adjust the speed of the voice etc. Its genius.

:$

Many thanks for your prompt reply, Sneaks - I promise Iwon't tell anyone!

Many thanks to you both, WanderingSage and Ady. I have taken on board your valued comments and advices, and am more leaning towards transcribing individualy - despite the fact that initially it appears to me that an hour of interview time seems to equate with 7/8 hours of transcription time. As I am working full-time and doing Ph D (subject = Charity Governance in Ireland) part-time, I am just essentially looking for the most efficient, though 'valuable to the research' route through this part of the studies.

Just seems painful after completing my 1st interview and commencing the transcription immediately. I do accept also that keeping up with the transcription makes more sense rather than waiting untiil later is important. I particularly like the idea of use of shorthand!


How disruptive did you find the process to the normal reading and writing involved in the Ph D process?

Thanks agin to all for your generous advice.

Murt.

i reckon, once you get fast at typing (which you will when transcribing), a 1 hour interview should take no more than 2 and a half hours, maybe less.

======= Date Modified 01 Jul 2011 07:18:54 =======
======= Date Modified 30 Jun 2011 12:38:42 =======
I'm a pretty quick typist but I'm not sure if I ever managed to do an hour interview in an hour and a half. Perhaps if I totted up the actual time typing it would be 90 mins but I found it next to impossible to do it at one or two sittings. Some days were good, some not so good and it often depended on the quality of the recording. There are conventions in relation to shorthand but if you're not already familar with them, I would suggest just adapting your own. You're bound to have your own shorthand 'squiggles' which only you understand but as it's you that's going to be analysing them, no matter! It might be different at postdoc level if you were collecting and analysing data as part of a team. Then I think you would need to agree on shorthand issues beforehand.

Keep tipping away at them and you will break the back of them. Try to get a start on an interview as soon as possible after recording it. Even if you don't finish it, transcription has started. On a few occasions I did more than one interview in the same day. My advice here is to make sure you identify your interviewee at the start of the interview ON the tape. For example "so Murt, tell me about your experiences in charitable NGOs". I found this useful when listening back to the tapes.

It's all part of the wonderful qualitative methodological experience ;-)

Edit: sorry didn't answer your question about reading etc: tbh it probably was disruptive but it's as necessray as reading in that it's part of your project so you just have to try to fit it all in. It's a good thing to do when you're not up to reading but feel that you should be doing something. Keep a list of your interviewees and scratch them off as you transcribe.

I agree with the others, it is laborious but I found it really worthwhile transcribing by own interviews. I did 46 of more than 2 hours each, so I really do sympathise! I had software that played back my recordings at about 50% of the speed, but I found I did better writing longhand (well not longhand but a combination of qords and invented shorthand squiggles) than typing, though i am generally a fast typist. It just flowed better somehow. I then either typed them oup myself afterwards, or asked my OH to type them up exactly as I had written them to help me out which was great. I found writing with a pencil was easier. Worth a try?

I am currently transcribing so I can sympathise! One thing I do strongly urge you NOT to do: don't fail to correctly label or mention on the recording the person's name, then leave the recording for a year while on maternity leave and come back to it and expect to remember anything about it at all! ;-) I think I am going to get a pedal too as I used to be an audio typist and I found this way easier even than using specialist software. I also would decide if you are going to transcribe everything. I decided quite early on that (in line with my research) some of the recordings would not need to be used and so it wouldn't be necessary to transcribe those bits.

I transcribed my interviews myself, too. I had 40 of them, about 1 hour long each.
I had the added difficulty that the interviews were in my language (Greek) and I had to transcribe them in Greek and then translate them in English, so double the workload....
I am also working FT and doing a PT PhD, so I can sympathise.
It was a great advantage for me to have transcribed the interviews myself (does that sentence make sense?????) as now I know exactly what everybody said and how they said it. So writing is easier....

Hello if you are not willing to get yourself stressed so the best option is to do it through a transcription software. You would a lot of transcription software details

I am a Senior Research Fellow working with a DST funded project in an ICAR institute in Chennai from September-2011 to till now. At the time of my joining, my principal investigator of the project did not have guideship to supervise me. (His application for guideship was in process in University of Madras). So, due to the suggestion by my principal investigator, I have started my research work on the joining day. After one year only my guide got guideship and I registered my Ph.D programme in University of Madras. when my application accepted for provisional registration, almost one and half year is passed. I have already completed all my field works and stated thesis writing. As all of we know, I can submit my thesis when the attendance reaches two years because I have completed M.Phil degree. But the fact is even the completion of total works, I have to wait for another one and half year for submission due to late registration.
I heard somewhere that UGC has announced "If somebody works as a research fellow in stipendiary basis and wants to register his/her Ph.D, The date of his/her joining in project can be considered as his/her joining date in Ph.D". Is it true? If you have answer to this, please let me know and give the proof. It will be very useful for me to complete my Ph.D ealier. can i get it?.......
M.Vijay
Senior Research Fellow
CIBA, Chennai