Participant Instructions: Formal or Casual?



Approach 1: You read all your participants the same instructions, verbatim.


Advantages to this approach

  • Everyone hears everything in exactly the same way
  • You don't forget any of the information you need to say

Disadvantages to this approach

  • A nervous participant might feel like she is taking a test and needs to listen to you to get things "right"
  • This approach might set the expectation that you are the Talker, and your participant is the Listener
  • Participants may get the message that, since you're addressing them carefully and choosing your words carefully, they should talk in the same carefully-calculated way to you.


Approach 2: You memorize what need to say to your participants, then deliver your speech.


Advantages to this approach

  • You may seem more friendly, folksy and relaxed than with a standard written speech
  • You model relaxed, free-flowing talking, which is what you want from your participant
  • If you forget something, or say something out of order, a statement from you like "Oh-I forgot to tell you..." might convey to your participant that it's OK to make mistakes in this room, and that they're not expected to be perfect.

Disadvantages to this approach

  • You may seem like you're trying to go overboard to be friendly and folksy; especially if the environment you're in is a formal-feeling lab, the folksy delivery may seem incongruous and a bit strange.
  • You may seem like you don't care all that much about precision, or that you don't expect details from your participant.
  • You might forget to say certain things.


Reflections

Clearly, both of these approaches have their advantages and disadvantages--it's up to each researcher to balance them. Personally, I side with casual approach #2.

The best data comes from active participants who are really taking charge of their session, giving criticism and feedback freely. If participants get the message that they are passive receivers of information instead of active directors of a session, it can take the entire session to reverse that dynamic. By talking in a relaxed, friendly way, you show your participants how you'd like them to speak to you--relaxed, just saying what they feel instead of worrying about exactly how it sounds or if it's "just right."

Of course, if the informal approach feels wrong to you, or makes you feel uncomfortable in any way, you shouldn't use it. Your discomfort will ultimately rub off on the participant. As an alternative, you could write your opening information down, and have the participants read it back to you. This way, they're receiving your information in a standard way, but they're in more in charge of it.