Why are interviews considered better than diary studies or content analysis?

Interviews are valued in research primarily because they allow for real-life interaction and provide a depth of detail that other methods, such as diary studies or content analysis, may not capture as effectively. The conversational nature of interviews enables researchers to explore complex topics, probe deeper into responses, and clarify any ambiguities immediately. This richness of data can reveal nuances in participant experiences, emotions, and thoughts that structured methods may overlook.

In contrast, diary studies rely on participants to record their thoughts and experiences over time, which can lead to incomplete or biased entries depending on the participant's willingness or ability to document their experiences accurately. Content analysis, meanwhile, typically deals with existing documents or media, which limits the context and personal insights that interviews can provide. These factors emphasize the significance of interviews in qualitative research, enabling researchers to engage directly with subjects and adapt their questions based on the flow of conversation.