In modern literature, you can find several options for collecting primary information of a sociological nature. Among them are the analysis of documents, various polls. Often used and observation. We are interested in the survey method - this is the interviewer’s communication with the respondent. Moreover, all questions have already been drawn up in advance.
Typically, communication is conducted to identify the primary information that is necessary to solve the tasks assigned to the interviewer. Often questions are asked to several people. After all, the purpose of the survey is not at all the study of a specific individual. You can also use questionnaires to collect information - this is a method very similar to interviewing. Everything happens in writing only. There, too, there are pre-worded and recorded questions. From the foregoing, we can conclude that the survey is the receipt of primary information from several respondents to solve the tasks.
How accurately and extensively people answer the questions depends both on the respondent’s knowledge and on the interviewer, who creates the whole atmosphere for communication. In fact, these are the two most influential factors. Also important is the time and venue, the presence in the same room of unauthorized persons, which can significantly interfere with the process.
There is an expert survey - this is essentially the same interview as described above. This method has a wider scope. Usually in its course problems of a rather complicated nature are solved. This requires not just interviewers, but serious experts who can immediately capture the necessary information. The respondents are also more senior people - directors of companies, observers, officials, etc. Usually, an expert survey requires the participation of about 20-30 people. Often this method helps to understand the problems of large companies, to find out the causes of their occurrence. In principle, directors and owners of firms can conduct such interviews themselves, but if they are incompetent in this matter, then it is better to entrust this to professionals. They have the opportunity to conduct research from the very roots, that is, from compiling the questions themselves to processing all the information collected.
Often, an expert survey is compared with a large case study, and yet it is. Interviewers do quite a bit of work until they get a solution to a particular task. The professionalism of the person asking the questions is very important here, he needs to create the most comfortable environment for the respondent so that he can open himself in the greatest possible way and answer all the questions posed honestly and unambiguously. That is why this method is not common on the Internet. Sometimes they are spent for money, but respondents should not think about it initially, they need to set themselves up to the fact that his opinion is very important for solving a particular problem, that the interviewer is interested and meaningful to communicate with him. For the interview, only a competent person who knows this or that field to which the task belongs is selected. For example, experienced cultural workers, labor activists, and event organizers can answer leisure questions.
An expert survey can be conducted in person or in absentia. The disadvantage of the first form of interview is that both people spend quite a lot of time. Also, a lot of resources are then spent on processing all the data collected. In order not to waste precious time, they use correspondence questionnaires, but it is worth noting that an in-person meeting provides more complete information for the tasks assigned. After all, then an expert can get not only a verbal answer to a question, but also “read” non-verbal messages, which are also very important.