%0-"=)41<)<1>-#-87:<%0-"=)41<)<1>-#-87:<
'74=5- =5*-: :<1+4-
(0)<;88 887:<=61<1-;)6,0)44-6/-;16<0-&;-7.)(0)<;88 887:<=61<1-;)6,0)44-6/-;16<0-&;-7.)
-;;)/16/88);)"=)41<)<1>-#-;-):+0%774-;;)/16/88);)"=)41<)<1>-#-;-):+0%774
#7+17=-67#74,E6
!014188;&61>-:;1<A):*=:/
*=-67:74;<)..=615):*=:/,-
6<2-#G,-:!:7.:
!014188;):*=:/&61>-:;1<F<
:7-,-:;<)..=615):*=:/,-
7447?<01;)6,),,1<176)4?7:3;)<0<<8;6;=?7:3;67>)-,=<9:
!):<7.<0-1/:)<176$<=,1-;75576;
#-+755-6,-,!1<)<176#-+755-6,-,!1<)<176
=-67#74,E6##G,-:(0)<;88 887:<=61<1-;)6,0)44-6/-;16<0-&;-7.)-;;)/16/
88);)"=)41<)<1>-#-;-):+0%774
%0-"=)41<)<1>-#-87:<
0<<8;,717:/
%01;:<1+4-1;*:7=/0<<7A7=.7:.:--)6,78-6)++-;;*A<0-%0-"=)41<)<1>-#-87:<)<$&(7:3;<0);*--6
)++-8<-,.7:16+4=;17616%0-"=)41<)<1>-#-87:<*A)6)=<07:1B-,),5161;<:)<7:7.$&(7:3;7:57:-
16.7:5)<17684-);-+76<)+<6;=?7:3;67>)-,=
(0)<;88 887:<=61<1-;)6,0)44-6/-;16<0-&;-7.)-;;)/16/88);)(0)<;88 887:<=61<1-;)6,0)44-6/-;16<0-&;-7.)-;;)/16/88);)
"=)41<)<1>-#-;-):+0%774"=)41<)<1>-#-;-):+0%774
*;<:)+<*;<:)+<
%01;):<1+4-->)4=)<-;<0-=;-7.<0-878=4):7*14--;;)/16/88(0)<;88);)?)A<7
+76,=+<9=)41<)<1>-:-;-):+0?1<0/-7/:)801+)44A,1;8-:;-,;)584-;%0:7=/0<0-=;-7.)+);-;<=,A7.
)<167-@8)<?1>-;):7=6,<0-/47*-?-;07?07?<:),1<176)45-<07,;7.9=)41<)<1>-16<-:>1-?16/?-:-
),)8<-,)6,->74>-,<0:7=/0<0-=;-7.<01;)8841+)<17616,16/;;=//-;<<0)<(0)<;881;)>)4=)*4-
<774.7:+76,=+<16/9=)41<)<1>-:-;-):+0?1<0;8-+1C+),>)6<)/-;7>-:7<0-:;)6,'7!;,=-<71<;
.)5141):1<A)576/;<<0-<):/-</:7=8)6,1<;D-@1*4-*4-6,16/7.>1,-7)=,17)6,?:1<<-6.7:5;7.
+755=61+)<176!):<1+=4):4A1<;=;-76;5):<8076-;4-,<716<-:)+<176;<0)<?-6<*-A76,:-/=4):.)+-<7
.)+-16<-:>1-?;<0=;)447?16/=;)++-;;67:5)44A764A/)16-,16-<067/:)80A;<=,1-;(014-<01;+)6*-)
/)1616<-:5;7.*=14,16/:)887:<)6,16+:-);-<0-,-8<07.,)<)+744-+<1761<)4;7*:16/;6-?+0)44-6/-;
16<-:5;7.-6;=:16/,)<)9=)41<A16<-:8:-<16/676>-:*)4+=-;)6,-6;=:16/01/0-<01+)4;<)6,):,;
-A?7:,;-A?7:,;
(0)<;88);A6+0:767=;16<-:>1-?;,1/1<)4-<067/:)80A/-7/:)801+)44A,1;8-:;-,;)584-;76416-
9=)41<)<1>-:-;-):+0
:-)<1>-75576;1+-6;-:-)<1>-75576;1+-6;-
%01;?7:31;41+-6;-,=6,-:):-)<1>-75576;<<:1*=<17676+755-:+1)4$0):-413-6<-:6)<176)4
1+-6;-
%01;):<1+4-1;)>)14)*4-16%0-"=)41<)<1>-#-87:<0<<8;6;=?7:3;67>)-,=<9:>741;;
The Qualitative Report 2022 Volume 27, Number 12, 2961-2976
https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2022.5329
WhatsApp? Opportunities and Challenges in the Use of a
Messaging App as a Qualitative Research Tool
Rocio Bueno-Roldan
1,2
and Antje Röder
1
1
Philipps-Universität Marburg, Germany
2
University of Barcelona, Spain
This article evaluates the use of the popular Mobile Messaging App (MMA)
WhatsApp as a way to conduct qualitative research with geographically
dispersed samples. Through the use of a case study of Latino expat-wives
around the globe, we show how traditional methods of qualitative interviewing
were adapted and evolved through the use of this application. Findings suggest
that WhatsApp is a valuable tool for conducting qualitative research with
specific advantages over other MMAs and VoIPs due to its familiarity amongst
the target group and its flexible blending of video, audio, and written forms of
communication. Particularly its use on smartphones led to interactions that went
beyond regular face-to-face interviews, thus allowing us access normally only
gained in ethnography studies. While this can be a gain in terms of building
rapport and increase the depth of data collection, it also brings new challenges
in terms of ensuring data quality, interpreting non-verbal cues and ensuring high
ethical standards.
Keywords: WhatsApp, asynchronous interviews, digital ethnography,
geographically dispersed samples, online qualitative research
Introduction
Online interviews represent a relatively new normality in today’s researchers
experience due to the pandemic. In fact, it is not rare to listen to conversations between
colleagues, who were planning in-situ research, commenting with disappointment that now
they must do their qualitative data gathering on-line. This was not our case. Given that our
sample was geographically dispersed, the presented study was planned and executed online
from the beginning. Here, we aspire to show researchers the positive experience of working
with Apps (in this case WhatsApp) and open an invitation to consider different types of on-line
encounters that may produce data that is as valid and even richer than personal in-situ data (see
O´Connor & Madge, 2018 on face-to-face encounters as the “golden standard”).
Internet, Mobile Messaging Apps, Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) and other
mobile technologies are increasingly becoming popular tools in research that complement or
even replace face-to-face encounters. They typically offer the possibility of voice, message,
file exchange and video calling almost anywhere in the world at no or low cost (Deakin &
Wakefield, 2013; Lo Iacono et al., 2016). Despite the “digital divide” that affects mostly people
from developing countries and women in particular (ITU, 2020; see also Madge & O’Connor,
2004), there is now widespread use of smartphones, with growing proportions of the global
population having access to relevant technologies (ITU, 2020; World Bank, 2016). Even in
developing countries, the great majority of homes have easier access to mobile devices than to
basic services (World Bank, 2016, p. 2). In fact, it is predicted that by the end of 2025 there
will be a total of 5.8 billion mobile subscribers around the Globe (GSMA, 2019).
2962 The Qualitative Report 2022
The particular strength of MMAs, VoIPs and similar platforms for research purposes
lies in the ability to study geographically dispersed samples without the need to travel
extensively, which is not always a possibility due to budget or time constraints (Deakin &
Wakefield, 2013; Hanna, 2012; Madge & O’Connor, 2004; O’Connor & Madge, 2018, Panter-
Brick et al., 2021). Given the growing mobility as part of globalization processes (Gatti, 2009),
and the need to adapt to extensive travel restrictions in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic
(Lobe et al., 2020), socially distant mobile methods (i.e., methods for which mobile devices /
services are central to the data collection; see Boase, 2020, p. 113) are imperative to keep up
with highly mobile groups, such as international migrants, refugees or expat professionals
(Deakin & Wakefield, 2013). Thus, it is necessary to consider to what extent new mobile
technologies, such as WhatsApp, offer a viable alternative to face-to-face interaction in this
research field.
A major concern of research to date has been whether established qualitative methods
of data collection can be successfully adapted to the use of internet (Deakin & Wakefield, 2013;
Holmes, 2009; Lobe et al., 2020), VoIPs (Baron, 2020; Lo Iacono et al., 2016;) and Mobile
Instant Messaging Applications (Chen & Neo, 2019; Kauffman, 2020; Kaufmann & Peil, 2020)
while establishing rapport and gathering high quality data. In relation to video conferences,
discussions have largely focused on the advantages and disadvantages of using Skype as a tool
for conducting interviews (Deakin & Wakefield, 2013; Hanna, 2012; Lo Iacono et al., 2016).
Research has found online interviews to be a valid option, producing reliable data and
facilitating in-depth encounters, rather than being a secondary choice to face-to-face interviews
(Deakin & Wakefield, 2013; Madge & O’Connor, 2004). While in principle, WhatsApp can
be used for interviewing remotely just like Skype or Facetime, it offers additional features that
merit consideration as they have important consequences for the research process.
To date, the messaging app, WhatsApp, has been discussed in the literature as a tool for
telemedicine before (Giordano et al., 2017) and after Covid-19 (Sharawat & Panda, 2021;
Tourkmani et al., 2021), as a training/communication tool in the health sciences (Arroz et al.,
2019; Henry et al., 2016; Raiman et al., 2017), as a method for gathering qualitative data on
health research (Arroz et al., 2019; Fardousi et al., 2019; Henry et al., 2016) and in relation to
its use in education and distance learning (Cetinkaya, 2017; Kenchakkanavar & Hadagali,
2015; Madge & O’Connor, 2004; Mistar & Embi, 2016). In the social sciences, WhatsApp has
been studied as a tool for remote in-group communication, specifically using WhatsApp’s
instant messaging feature, between researchers and assistants (Jailobaev et al., 2021), as a
survey tool to request consent and communicate with Syrian refugee youth and their parents
(Panter-Brick et al., 2021), as a valid digital method for messaging interviewing (MIMI)
(Kaufmann & Peil, 2020) and focus groups research (Chen & Neo, 2019). In all these, the
familiarity and expertise of the participants within the App seemed to be a key element in using
WhatsApp as a useful and accessible tool for communicating while educating, asking for
consent, providing support, boosting team building and providing good quality data. We aim
with this article to build on the existing literature that evaluates the validity of WhatsApp as a
method for qualitative data gathering in the social sciences by demonstrating how
videoconferences through the app evolved to quasi-ethnography and by discussing our
asynchronous use of written message and audio note features (written -audio note interview)
for interviewing geographically dispersed samples.
We draw on experiences gathered within a qualitative research project on how race,
class and gender intersect in the migratory experiences of a highly mobile and geographically
dispersed group to outline how the combination of features offered by WhatsApp, as well as
the familiarity of participants with the application as part of their everyday communications,
offer the potential for insights that may even go beyond those obtained in once-off interviews.
At the same time, we discuss challenges that arise in the practical implementation as well as
Rocio Bueno-Roldan and Antje Röder 2963
methodological and ethical implications involved in such an approach. We do so by firstly
describing the specific case study that forms the empirical basis for these methodological
considerations. Secondly, we provide an overview of the ways in which WhatsApp was used
within the project, highlighting various advantages and disadvantages of the different features
for qualitative research purposes. Finally, we address the main challenges of building rapport
and engaging in interaction when using MMAs and reflect on ethical challenges of this method.
Case Study: Latino Expat Trailing Spouses Across the Globe
The research presented here is a case review analysis of how we used WhatsApp as part
of a qualitative study with Latino expat wives around the globe. The literature on expatriates
and their so-called “accompanying spouses” typically focuses on the experience of Western
expatriates living in non-Western countries (Arieli 2007; Fechter, 2016; Fechter & Walsh,
2010; Leonard, 2010a, 2010b, 2013; Lundström, 2010, 2012; Lundström & Twine, 2011;
Wang, 2013). By focusing on Latino expats, the study aimed to dissect how this group
negotiated their own position between economic privilege, gendered expectations, and ethnic
discrimination. The term “expats” here refers to what has been classically defined as
“corporate expatriates,” that is, individuals who have been relocated by a company to a country
of which they do not hold citizenship and where they are legally working and temporarily
residing (McNulty & Brewster, 2018, p. 17). Sampling was purposive, with the use of personal
contacts, snowball methods, and via approaching people in international chat groups on
Facebook. Using mobile methods allowed contacting a much wider range of participants than
would have been feasible if only face-to-face interviews had been conducted. This was not only
because of the geographical dispersion of the target group across the globe, but also because
most of the participants had very busy lifestyles as they were high-skilled international
professionals, business entrepreneurs, and/or because their motherhood duties kept them on the
run. In general, the sample had a very privileged lifestyle economically, including their day-
to-day privilege “to stay connected” (Madge & O’Connor, 2004), even those living in less
developed countries. It is important to consider that the target group is placed at the privileged
side of the digital divide, with all participants having easy access to the technologies required
(good internet connection, a laptop, tablet or phone with built-in camera, phone, and speakers)
and extensive experience in using them (Lobe et al., 2020). The methodological reflections in
this contribution therefore cannot be transferred directly to other contexts in which these
conditions are not met.
We draw here on the data from 42 interviews with Latino expat wives in their thirties
and forties that were held between Jan 2018 and April 2021. Participants who were not able to
participate in face-to-face interactions were given the option to select the method that they felt
most comfortable with. Participants’ preferences quickly emerged favoring WhatsApp over,
for example, Skype (i.e., not all participants had an active Skype account), which soon became
the main communication channel. Having the participants choose the communication channel
was crucial in gathering good quality data as introductions or tutorials were not needed (see
also Thunberg & Arnell, 2021).
Participants’ relatively young age also played an important role in method preferences
versus other forms of communication (see Aguado & Martinez, 2020). For them, WhatsApp
was a tool they used daily as it is a popular messaging service in Latin America and for
Hispanics living abroad, which they use to communicate with friends and family in their home
country (Smith & Anderson, 2018). They were thus able to collaborate with the researcher in
a more natural form (see also Kaufmann, 2020).
Our experiences suggest that this, in addition to the interviewer having a similar ethnic
and social class background to the interviewees, were important pre-conditions for bringing
2964 The Qualitative Report 2022
out the advantages of this approach. It allowed the interviewer to be perceived as part of the
in-group, “getting in and getting along” (see Mayorga-Gallo & Hordge-Freeman, 2016, p. 378
on gaining access) with the participants with almost no difficulties. Of the 42 total interviews,
25 interviews were conducted through WhatsApp: using audio only (7), video conference (10),
written and voice notes (5), and a combination of Skype video conference with written and
voice notes (3). The rest of the interviews (17) are a combination of in-person, Skype,
Facebook, Google Hangouts and phone call interviews. Our analysis here draws firstly on the
transcription of all interviews. We compared how interviews proceeded across the different
forms of interviewing in length, insight, clarity, and rapport. Additionally, participants were
asked directly how they found the process, especially those using the written and voice note
method, as this was a novelty for us, and we wanted to understand their subjective experience
of participating in research of this kind. We grouped observations with particular attention to
how interactions between interviewer and respondents were shaped by technology, with
specific focus on how we used the App, what disadvantages and benefits were generated by
different aspects of the App, and how the sample responded to the way the App was used. We
compare this with the challenges that arise when doing interviews with regular phone calls and
via video conference calls that have been discussed more widely in the previous literature.
The Use of WhatsApp for Research Purposes
The Mobile Instant Messaging app WhatsApp was launched in 2009, free of charge and
advertising. Its VoIP system similar to Skype and Facetime allows the possibility of doing
phone and video calls connecting people across large distances via internet on real-time
connection (Lo Iacono et al., 2016). Additionally Mobile Instant Messaging (MIM) allows
users the exchange of not only messages but also videos, files, voice notes and other digital
products (Kaufmann, 2020), thus allowing both synchronous and asynchronous
communication. WhatsApp is one of the top five most downloaded Mobile Instant Messaging
applications (Aguado & Martinez, 2020) with reports showing two thousand million daily users
worldwide by 2020 (Kemp, 2020). Contrary to Skype, which was initially targeted at desktop
users, WhatsApp is primarily used on mobile devices (Baron, 2020) and it is widely used
among mobile groups to maintain contact with family and friends across the globe (Kauffman,
2020; Montag et al., 2015; Smith & Anderson, 2018).
Three features of the application were used in the research project: (1) video-voice
conference call, (2) voice phone call, and (3) written and voice notes. Frequently,
communication blended all three forms. The video/voice conference mimics other video
conferencing applications, while the voice phone call is very similar to a regular phone call.
Voice calls were only used by request of the participants or when internet connection was poor,
proving to be a useful alternative when video calls failed. More commonly, video calls were
conducted and took on their own dynamic, as is further discussed below. Given that the general
benefits and challenges of interviews via video conference have already been discussed in the
literature (Deakin & Wakefield, 2013; Hanna, 2012; Lo Iacono et al., 2016), the focus here will
be primarily on differences compared to previous research due to the highly mobile and flexible
use of the application on respondents’ smartphones, the use of asynchronous communication
(i.e., written and voice notes), and on the blending of different forms of communication that
emerged throughout the research process.
Being Part of Everyday Life – How Online Interviews Evolved
Personal one-to-one online interviews were planned at the beginning of the project due
to the geographic dispersal of the sample. Participants were found to be highly comfortable
Rocio Bueno-Roldan and Antje Röder 2965
with the online interview format, which, in the case of WhatsApp, quickly took on a different
dynamic to “regular” video interviews described in the previous literature, for example via
Skype (Deakin & Wakefield, 2013; Lo Iacono et al., 2016). Respondents would hold their
phones, put on some earphones, and answer the questions while performing everyday life tasks.
Suddenly the interviewer found herself accompanying the interviewees while driving to pick
up their kids, watering plants, walking in the park with their dogs, and attending to their babies.
Having a little peek into the participants’ lives made a link between their discourse and their
everyday practices and redefined both the interviewer’s and participants’ sense of place and
presence (Aguado & Martinez, 2020). This did not happen while doing interviews on Skype,
which felt more rigid, perhaps due to its association with desktop rather than smartphone use.
In contrast to what Lo Iacono et al. (2016) reports about Skype interviews, where typically only
face and neck were visible, the interviews through WhatsApp showed participants walking,
moving, or resting. Similar observations are made regarding phone interviews by Holt (2010),
where participants would take their phones everywhere around the house as it allowed them
flexibility. This same flexibility was perceived in our research, with the added feature of the
camera and the fact that mobile users are used to holding their phone close to their bodies
(Kaufmann, 2020), which allowed capturing the participants’ movements and surroundings.
The way participants placed and held their smartphones allowed visual observation of their
homes, cars and places of their everyday life to the point that, at times, it felt more like a brief
ethnographic observation than purely an interview.
This is illustrated well in the case of an interview that was held with a Mexican expat
housewife, who had to pick up her baby in an hour and was preparing food. She asked the
researcher if she would mind her cooking during the interview, the researcher agreed to it. She
put on some earphones, set her cellphone aside and started cooking. It was clear she had done
that before (cooking while video chatting). On the screen, one could see from the countertop
of her kitchen straight into her living room. The interview evolved around her experience as
an accompanying wife in Germany while she was chopping vegetables and adding them to the
frying pan. Similarly, in many other interviews, the researcher was able to greet children,
partners, and even dogs. She was able to see gardens, living rooms, kitchens, and even toilets.
Many times, participants could have asked the interviewer to wait (as one would do in a
personal interview). However, most respondents took the researcher along, as they would do
with their family and friends. Contrary to what one may expect in terms of technology creating
a distance between interviewer and the participant, it opened a window beyond what we (as
researchers) normally get to see in a regular in-person interview, which would have probably
been held at some neutral location, showing that “the digital world is essentially inseparable
from today’s research” (Paulus & Lester, 2022, p. 2). It seems that at least for this target group,
their smartphone and messaging applications are such familiar technologies that this led to a
friendly informality despite the geographical distance, impacting data generation from audio
only to a deeper digital (almost in-situ) experience. This allowed us to contextualize our
findings with observational data, particularly on their physical living conditions and family
situation that were relevant for our understanding of their privilege but also the challenges they
reported. It also changed our perspective on our use of WhatsApp as a research tool, as it
created an easy going, relaxed and friendlier atmosphere in comparison to other Apps and data
gathering methods. It also led to the need to reflect carefully on our concerns around ethics and
personal data in this context, which are discussed further below.
Asynchronous Interviewing: The Written-Voice Note Interview
In addition to the synchronous online interviews described above, another approach that
emerged during the research process was asynchronous interviewing. This consisted of sending
2966 The Qualitative Report 2022
questions in a text message and then waiting for the participants to answer on audio, or, less
frequently, in written messages. The “written- voice note” interview was also used for asking
previous participants of face-to-face or online interviews for clarification on their previous
comments. The transcribed answer was later attached to the formal interview. This mode was
not planned for at the beginning but emerged within the project as a solution to interviewing a
particularly busy participant who regularly moved between different time zones. The “written-
voice note interview” was agreed on as it would allow her to answer whenever she had a chance
in between other commitments. Having shown to be a useful alternative in some cases, it was
later on used for other participants in similar situations. The initial participant was a highly
skilled professional woman and mother of two children, who was constantly in meetings and
traveling to several parts of the world. Her life was very rich in terms of expat migration
experiences and privilege, and she was an important case for the study. This meant two choices:
either set a day and time and do a very quick interview, or, as the researcher suggested, the
participant would receive the questions by written message and would be able to answer
whenever she was free through a voice message. The interviewee started answering while
commuting from plane to plane, while going to her job or preparing dinner. This went on for
months (the participant sometimes even took a week for answering), and the interview became
friendly and open to the point she felt comfortable giving some insights into her marital life
and the struggle of being a woman in business. At the end of the interview when asked her how
she found it, she answered:
I think that this way of interviewing on one hand simplifies the process against
having to write. Writing seems to be the heaviest. Because as I do many
magazine interviews and all that, writing is always exhausting. When doing it
by voice it seems very personal to me, I feel very comfortable. But it is true that
perhaps the thread is lost a little, I think that the best thing is a face to face or
directly do a telephone hour. Uhmmm the other thing is that, doing it like this,
it also gives you a lot of time to think about your answer, maybe elaborate it a
little more. Has advantages and disadvantages. […] Written it seems to me, like
they say here (in Spain) a pain in the ass (laughs). It is much more formal, and
(…) the intention, is much lost.
(Hilda)
Her comments capture quite well some of the advantages and disadvantages of such an
approach. Written responses require the willingness and ability to formulate ideas in sufficient
detail, and place a higher burden on participants, as is widely acknowledged in research for
example on the use of open-ended questions in survey questionnaires (Züll, 2016). This
challenge is addressed here by the option to send voice notes, which makes it less time
consuming and gives the feeling of co-presence (Aguado & Martinez, 2020) making a method
that could seem cold and distant more enjoyable, as the respondent notes. She also captures
two other main concerns: one is the flow of the interview, the other one the opportunity to
reflect more on the answers given. The latter does not necessarily have to be a disadvantage,
as Burtt (2020) argues based on a study using written interviews with prisoners maintaining
innocence in England and Wales. The longer timespan participants had to reflect on their
answers led to meaningful narratives and “highly self-revelatory” experiences (Burtt, 2020),
an observation that e-mail asynchronous interviewing (James, 2016) and our study with
WhatsApp confirms. Because we were aware that “software can influence the knowledge
produced within a research project” (Kauffmann & Tzanetakis, 2020, p. 940), we carefully
compared the transcribed data from the asynchronous interviews to that obtained through face-
to-face and video interviews. Data obtained through the asynchronous method was almost
Rocio Bueno-Roldan and Antje Röder 2967
twice as long (56,26 minutes and 614 transcribed lines average) as face-to-face interviews (36
min, 322 lines average), with subjects being mostly active during the time of the interviews
(while face to face, skype and other methods proved to be more static) and covering all
pertinent subjects. As this interview type lasted for at least a couple of days and both parts had
more time to reflect about the questions and to build rapport, these interviews were more
emotionally charged (e.g., they cursed and talked more about issues in their private life), more
descriptive (more detailed answers in general), and with deeper insight that provided
substantial depth of information in comparison to other interview types. In the few cases where
answers were short or unclear, the researcher would listen to the audio again and make another
question to go deeper in the matter, having also had more time to reflect on follow up question.
Interviewees found it to be a comfortable and convenient experience. In addition, the audio
answering format would appear to allow for more spontaneous responses than written replies,
as participants are less likely to edit. If they do not like an answer, they may delete it entirely;
but it is not feasible to edit only parts of a voice note as one could easily do with a written
response.
The asynchronous written-voice note interview, in which questions were sent written
and answers received through audio, appears to depend strongly on the participants’
commitment and their interest in the study to keep the flow going. This flow may not be quite
as natural as in a synchronous interview but, given that the interviewer listening to the incoming
audios equally has the chance to reflect more on the answers given, they can relate to what was
previously said and adapt their further questions where relevant. There is thus some trade-off
between spontaneity and the opportunity to tailor questions more thoroughly, with this type of
interview being placed between a written and a “regular” synchronous interview in this regard.
Establishing Rapport through WhatsApp
As in other research, a major concern was to encourage mutual self-disclosure while
creating a warm environment where opinions can be expressed without restrictions on a subject
(Marvasti, 2004). Previous research on online interviews shows that participants feel more
open to participate, are less inhibited, and provide more direct reflexive answers in comparison
to face to face interviews, especially in on-line interviews that do not use video (Deakin &
Wakefield, 2013; Madge & O’Connor, 2004; Sullivan, 2012; Thunberg & Arnell, 2021) and
when the possibility of future face-to-face encounters are small (Walther, 1996). Even
asynchronously, messaging apps have shown to maximize affective connection (Aguado &
Martinez, 2020). Our findings suggest that the use of WhatsApp for qualitative interviews does
not appear to be a disadvantage in terms of personal disclosure when used with a population
that is familiar with the application. In a way, the researchers took advantage of the
opportunities that emerged by using WhatsApp and mobile devices with participants who, as
migrants, are skillful users that constantly check out their devices to maintain a connection with
family and friends (Kauffman, 2020). This made the device and the App a highly personal,
social tool integrated into their daily routines (Boase, 2020), creating an environment in which
participants felt comfortable and open to answer personal questions, even on difficult or highly
personal matters.
As outlined above, the interviewer gained insights that went beyond those of regular
interviews due to the fact that respondents were using their smartphones to do video
conferences as they do in everyday life. According to previous literature this may be boosted
by the interviewer sharing many personal characteristics with participants (Kauffmann &
Tzanetakis, 2020; Mayorga-Gallo & Hordge-Freeman, 2016; Stephens, 2007). Here, the
personal characteristics and experiences of the interviewer allowed a point of contact with
interviewers’ background: being a Latino migrant woman, “Morena” (= women whose skin
2968 The Qualitative Report 2022
color is situated at “nearly all points in the color continuum with the exception of white persons
with light hair color” [Telles, 1995, p. 1609]), expat wife and mother. More subtle aspects were
also at play, especially when face-to-face interaction was not feasible, such as her tone of voice
and certain use of language that characterized her as part of the Mexican upper-middle class
(see also Holt, 2010, and Holmqvist, 2021 on elite interviews). This was a type of admission
process that granted the interviewer “insider” status (Kaufmann & Tzanetakis, 2020), allowing
the interviewer to obtain substantial access to participants’ lives when talking about lifestyle in
the country of origin, ethnic or racial discrimination abroad, and the struggles of living outside
the home country.
The following quote from one of the interviews on the topic of possible discrimination
of Latino expats illustrates this:
I am going to tell you something that I did not tell you before, when they finally
accepted the residency procedure, they told us that everything was already paid.
I mean, we had negotiated well. The company had already pre-paid the
residency procedure, which is very expensive, and the racist gringo (from HR),
the swears just refused to accept. And what they were saying to my husband,
when my husband started to kind of threaten them by saying -Well this is the
last year that I stay if you don’t give me the residency-. The gringos told him
that, they said, -Well, if you go, where are you going to go? You will have to
return to Mexico-. As if Mexico was the worst thing in the world that could
happen to us.
(Amanda)
Interviewees were comfortable enough to make jokes, occasionally swear, or make politically
incorrect comments. The last quote shows a participant confident enough to share “something
she didn´t tell before” like a confession, she swore and shared her personal views by calling
the American a “racist gringo.” This openness can be found through all of the interviews held
through WhatsApp, and to a greater extent during asynchronous interviewing in comparison to
interviews held through more conventional methods. Overall, it seemed that the anonymity of
recruiting participants through social media and the opportunity of being heard by a peer
through a familiar channel (and in some cases, not being directly facing the interviewer) created
an environment in which participants would feel confident enough to yell, swear, share their
divorce stories, claim feminist fights and discuss racial discrimination.
Reading Non-Verbal Cues
Non-verbal cues, such as voice and gestures, bring richness to qualitative data (Lo
Iacono et al., 2016). On this matter, a video conference would be the nearest way to mimic a
face-to-face interview, as facial gestures and body language can be appreciated on the screen.
However, this was not always possible due to internet quality or participants’ request, leaving
no choice but to work with audio only. Also, using video on a smartphone, seemed to encourage
a less static view (as discussed above) allowing us to have a bigger view of the surroundings
and less of the interviewee, as it depended on how a respondent is positioned towards the
camera.
Working with audio only required additional skills from both the interviewer and the
interviewees to compensate the loss of subtle non-verbal cues (see Madge & O’Connor, 2004).
The tone of voice became more crucial in interpreting what was being said and how it was
intended. It seemed that since respondents were very used to communicating via MIMs, they
knew how to modulate their tone to ensure that their feelings were expressed well at a distance.
Rocio Bueno-Roldan and Antje Röder 2969
They additionally made expert use of emojis, gifs, stickers, capital letters, videos, exclamation
marks and other resources within MIM messages to replace non-verbal and verbal expressions
(see Aguado & Martinez, 2020, and Sugiyama, 2015, on reading expressions on Apps).
According to Aguado and Martinez (2020), this repertoire of multimedia expressions, rather
than lacking cues, must be considered as “multi-cue” that plays a role in expressing the user’s
personal identity (Aguado & Martinez, 2020, p. 444). Overall, our observations confirm what
has been found in other research on the use of communication technology amongst migrants.
As constant mobile platforms users, they are quite aware that emotions do happen online and
are keen on expressing them, managing them, and translating them into multimedia (see
Beneito-Montagut, 2011, p. 727 on emotions and multimedia techniques). Thus, much rests on
the ability of the interviewers to read and interpret these nonverbal cues, which was aided by
having a similar background, speaking the native language and being familiar with the
experiences referred to.
New Ethics for New Methods?
In contrast to other types of social media, research through WhatsApp uses information
that is not publicly posted. Rather, it is private data directly obtained from living individuals
with their consent, similar to regular interview data with the same considerations for informed
consent, privacy and data protection (Moreno et al., 2013). Interviews did not touch on any
potentially illegal or stigmatizing topics; the sample was not part of any vulnerable population
and researchers did not use any mobile digital traceable data. However, similar to the Mobile
Instant Messaging Interview (MIMI; Kaufmann & Peil, 2020), we could not provide any
assurance that the user’s data would be secure on part of WhatsApp as service provider
1
. The
main difference primarily occurred because of the way in which interviewees allowed access
to participants’ lives through their smartphones, which blurred the lines between an interview
and ethnographic methods. While only audio was recorded (and therefore no “accidentally
revealed” visual data was used) and transcribed, the interviewer nevertheless got some quite
intimate insights into people’s lives via the use of smartphone cameras. In a particular
interview, one of the kids, a 2-year-old, requested being taken to the restroom. The mother told
the interviewer that she was going to take her as the kid was learning to go by herself. She took
the phone with her before the interviewer could say anything, as the following except shows:
Carmen: (while commenting on the interview, her daughter interrupts and requests going to
the toilet) wait, she’s learning to go to the bathroom and it’s like now or now, this ... (she takes
the phone to the bathroom, I can see the white corridors and the second floor of the house on
the camera. Arriving at the white bathroom she puts the phone with the camera looking at the
ceiling for privacy) ... so it was kind of a complicated year in that regard (...) (to her daughter
who wanted to flush the W.C.) wait, wait! we will throw that away later love, come.
Daughter: but mommy!
Carmen: ok, ok, ok, let’s throw the pee (laughs)
Interviewer: nothing happens, I also have children
-flushing sound-
Daughter: goodbye pipi!
Carmen: goodbye pipi! (laughs)
Even though the camera was looking at the ceiling as a way of having privacy, the
participant still took the phone. This would certainly have never happened in a face-to-face
1
There is a present debate on WhatsApp’s, as part of the Facebook corporation, administration of user’s data.
2970 The Qualitative Report 2022
interview, where the interviewee would surely have asked the interviewer to remain waiting at
a neutral place, in this case the tool (the mobile phone with camera) and the software chosen
by both researcher and participant directly impacted the research outcome (see Paul & Lester,
2022 on technology tools choice reflections). Similar to what happens, for example, with
posted breastfeeding and menstruation pictures in social media, the observation was
problematic not because users are posting it, who view it as normal/natural; but by the receiving
part, the interviewer, an external spectator (Highfield & Leaver, 2016). In the case of our
research, the interviewer instinctively tried to normalize the fact that she was being part of
something very private by exclaiming “nothing happens, I also have children.” While this kind
of access to people’s lives was certainly never forced within the research process, one has to
consider to what extent this was what people signed up for when consenting to their
participation in an interview. Most important, researchers need to take into account that during
on-line communications the control over the interaction decreases (Lobe et al., 2020). In this
case, it seemed that the participant´s familiarity with the technology for their everyday
communication with family and friends led them to adopt the same approach within interviews,
even though they did not have a personal relationship with the interviewer. As participants felt
more comfortable in taking their smartphones with them everywhere during the interviews,
conversations became richer as they started portraying visually their everyday lives and places.
The method of the interview changed unintentionally, and the interviewer went from being a
mere interviewer to also being an observer and (although not in body) “be” on the field (see
also Airoldi, 2018 for online ethnology and digital fields). This method of qualitative data
collection was no longer only a semi-structured in-depth online interview, but it involved
events, places and identities that, by being taken into account in the transcriptions, could be re-
consulted and become part of the analysis (Gatson & Zweerink, 2004). As exciting as it was
for the interviewer to suddenly see people’s “natural habitat” and have a peek into participants’
lives, boundaries were easily crossed (see also Gatson & Zweerink, 2004, on online
boundaries). And while this is on the one hand an achievement in terms of gaining access and
establishing rapport, it raises the question to what extent such data should be used, and how it
can be ensured that people do not show more than they would like to if they gave it a second
thought.
As interviewing through software applications is relatively new, there is an extensive
and compelling need to develop an “ethnography for the internet” (Airoldi, 2018, p. 663) as
there is a lack of clear guidelines to date regarding privacy issues and borders between what is
public and what is private (Airoldi, 2018; Beneito-Montagut, 2011; Highfield & Leaver, 2016;
Holmes, 2007). Researchers planning on using video conference tools should be aware,
however, that ethical issues are likely to arise, particularly when participants use mobile
devices and when researchers are actually successful in establishing rapport with their
participants. It remains ambiguous to what degree the interviewer may be rendered invisible
due to the familiarity of the smartphone and the app. We also know little about the extent to
which the awareness of being watched and watching had an effect on the participants’ behavior
and on the researcher´s attitudes, as everything she saw, heard and felt finally was redirected
into her final work (Hordge-Freeman, 2018). Researchers planning on using similar methods
are encouraged to reflect in advance on whether and how they will include such observations
gained into their data and analysis and develop strategies to ensure that boundaries are not
crossed. Our approach included only recording audio for later transcription and taking field
notes on any additional observations. Researchers may also wish to create greater awareness
amongst participants of how much the researcher is actually able to see in a video conference,
and what they plan to do with this information, to ensure that the consent that is given is truly
informed. Because most of the interviews were held before Covid-19 outbreak, neither the
Rocio Bueno-Roldan and Antje Röder 2971
interviewer nor the participants were aware of the possibility of using a background to keep
their privacy (Lobe et al., 2020).
Conclusions
In this paper we attempted to show, through our own work with a sample of 42 Latino
expat wives, the benefits and challenges that arise when conducting synchronous and
asynchronous (written and voice notes) online interviews through WhatsApp. Most
importantly, though, this is a reflection on how the digital world shaped our data gathering
process, by choosing this particular digital communication channel (Paulus & Lester 2022).
Clearly, for a geographically dispersed sample, alternatives to face-to-face interaction are
crucial to ensure that such research can be carried out in a timely and affordable manner.
Overall, the data gathered through the different ways of using WhatsApp was meaningful, and
similar in length and sometimes even more detailed and insightful in comparison to other –
more static – video conferencing tools and face-to-face interviews. A key element to the
research was the use of smartphones for video calls, which opened the door to the interviewees’
world beyond regular interviews, bringing with it, however, additional ethical implications.
Smartphone-based applications appear to offer a good alternative to the more established
techniques of doing interviews via more static VoIPs (Deakin & Wakefield, 2013; Hanna,
2012; Lo Iacono et al., 2016), overcoming some, though not all of their limitations in relation
to establishing rapport and non-verbal clues. In saying this, however, it is important to consider
that the success of gathering meaningful data in the project was also based on a combination
of other factors: firstly, having the participants to choose the communication channel as a key
factor to gather good quality data (see Paulus & Lester, 2022, on agency over technology use).
Second, the similarity and connection established by the interviewer and the interviewee. Third,
the characteristics of the group, which in the case of our sample was a highly mobile group,
very keen on the use of WhatsApp and familiar with the technologies that they already used
regularly to stay connected with family and friends. For other target groups, other smartphone
applications offering similar features may be more commonly used and would therefore be
preferable. Further research will be needed to determine to what extent such methods can be
applied successfully with groups that do not use such applications as part of their day-to-day
communication, or where there is a greater social distance between interviewer and
interviewee.
Equally, further research on using asynchronous interview techniques with voice notes
or a combination of audio and written messages would be useful as this appears to be a
promising technique for target groups that cannot commit to a longer once-off interview, or
when researchers explicitly want to encourage deeper reflections as they would in written
interviews (see Burtt, 2020). Compared to written messages, voice notes place a lower response
burden on respondents, increasing the chances for longer answers and more regular exchanges.
In terms of spontaneity, they appear to occupy a middle ground between the direct interaction
in a synchronous interview and a written answer. As this method evolved only as a by-product
of the case study here, its use needs to be explored more systematically in future studies to
establish its benefits and limitations in greater detail. Lastly, when planning a project, the
particular ethical issues that arise in such research need to be taken into account, with digital
boundaries often being more (or at least differently) blurred than in “real life.” It should be
anticipated that interviewers may get more than just a simple interview and will need to develop
strategies to ensure data protection and observance of high ethical standards.
2972 The Qualitative Report 2022
References
Aguado, J. M., & Martínez, I. J. (2020). The message is the medium. Mobile instant messaging
apps in the mobile communication ecosystem. In R. Ling, L. Fortunati, G. Goggin, S.
S. Lim & Y. Li (Eds.), Oxford handbook of mobile communication and society (pp.
439–454). Oxford University Press.
Arieli, D. (2007). The task of being content: Expatriate wives in Beijing, emotional work and
patriarchal bargain. Journal of International Women's Studies, 8, 16-38.
Airoldi, M. (2018). Ethnography and the digital fields of social media. International Journal
of Social Research Methodology, 21(6), 661-673.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2018.1465622
Arroz, J. A., Candrinho, B. N., Mussambala, F., Chande, M., Mendis, C., Dias, S., & Martins,
M. de R. O. (2019). WhatsApp: A supplementary tool for improving bed nets universal
coverage campaign in Mozambique. BMC Health Services Research, 19, 86.
Baron, N. S. (2020). Talking, reading, and writing on smartphones. In L. Rich, L. Fortunati, G.
Goggin, S. S. Lim, & Y. Li (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of mobile communication and
society (pp. 408-424). Oxford University Press.
Beneito-Montagut, R. (2011). Ethnography goes online: Towards a user-centered methodology
to research interpersonal communication on the internet. Qualitative Research, 11, 716-
735. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794111413368
Boase, J. (2020). Mobile methods: The collection of social scientific data on–and with–mobile
media. In R. Ling, L. Fortunati, G. Gog-gin, S. S. Lim, & Y. Li (Eds.), The Oxford
handbook of mobile communication and society (pp. 113–128). Oxford University
Press.
Burtt, E. (2020). When access is denied: Conducting an interview through letter writing.
Qualitative Research, 19(5), 1-16. DOI: 10.1177/1468794120936123
Cetinkaya, L. (2017). An educational technology tool that developed in the natural flow of life
among students: WhatsApp. International Journal of Progressive Education, 13(2), 29-
47.
Chen, J., & Neo, P. (2019). Texting the waters: An assessment of focus groups conducted via
the WhatsApp smartphone messaging application. Methodological Innovations, 12(3),
1–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/2059799119884276
Deakin, H., & Wakefield, K. (2013). Skype interviewing: reflections of two PhD researchers.
Qualitative Research, 15(5), 603–616. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794113488126
Fardousi, N., Douedari, Y., & Howard N. (2019). Healthcare under siege: a qualitative study
of health-worker responses to targeting and besiegement in Syria. BMJ Open 9:
e029651. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029651
Fechter, A. M. (2016). Between privilege and poverty: The affordances of mobility among aid
worker children. Asia Pacific Migration Journal, 25(4), 489-506.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0117196816674397
Fechter, A. M., & Walsh, K. (2010). Examining ‘expatriate’ continuities: Postcolonial
approaches to mobile professionals. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 36(8),
1197-1210. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691831003687667
Gatson, S. N., & Zweerink, A. (2004). Ethnography online: ‘Natives’ practicing and inscribing
community. Qualitative Research, 4(2), 179-200.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794104044431
Gatti, E. (2009). Defining the Expat: The case of high-skilled migrants in Brussels. Brussels
Studies, 28. https://doi.org/10.4000/brussels.681
Giordano, V., Koch, H., Godoy-Santos, A., Dias-Belangero, W., Esteves Santos Pires, R., &
Labronici, P. (2017). WhatsApp Messenger as an adjunctive tool for telemedicine: An
Rocio Bueno-Roldan and Antje Röder 2973
overview. Interactive Journal of Medical Research, 6(2), 11.
https://doi.org/10.2196/ijmr.6214
GSMA. (2019). The mobile economy (Report). https://data.gsmaintelligence.com/api-
web/v2/research-file-download?id=39256194&file=2712-250219-ME-Global.pdf
Hanna, P. (2012). Using internet technologies (such as Skype) as a research medium: A
research note. Qualitative Research, 12(2), 239-242.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794111426607
Henry. J. V., Winters, N., Lakati, A., Oliver, M., Geniets, A., Mbae, S. M., & Wanjiru, H.
(2016). Enhancing the supervision of community health workers with WhatsApp
mobile messaging: Qualitative findings from 2 low-resource settings in Kenya. Global
Health: Science and Practice, 4, 311-325. https://doi.org/10.9745/GHSP-D-15-00386
Highfield, T., & Leaver, T. (2016). Instagrammatics and digital methods: Studying visual
social media, from selfies and GIFs to memes and emoji. Communication Research and
Practice, 2(1), 47-62. https://doi.org/10.1080/22041451.2016.1155332
Holmes, S. (2009). Methodological and ethical considerations in designing an Internet study
of quality of life: A discussion paper. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 46(3),
394-405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2008.08.004
Holt, A. (2010). Using the telephone for narrative interviewing: A research note. Qualitative
Research, 10(1), 113-121. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794109348686
Hordge-Freeman, E. (2018). “Bringing your whole self to research”: The power of the
researcher’s body, emotions, and identities in ethnography. International Journal of
Qualitative Methods, 17(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406918808862
Holmqvist, M. (2021). Creating and upholding an elite community: ‘Consecrating exclusion’
in Djursholm, Sweden. The Sociological Review, 69(5), 956-973.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0038026121991786
ITU. (2020). Measuring digital development. Facts and figures 2020 (Report). International
Telecommunication Union.
https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Documents/facts/FactsFigures2020.pdf
Jailobaev, T., Jailobaeva, K., Baialieva, M., Baialieva, G., & Asilbekova, G. (2021). WhatsApp
Groups in social research: New opportunities for fieldwork communication and
management. Bulletin of Sociological Methodology/Bulletin de Méthodologie
Sociologique, 149(1), 60–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/0759106320978337
James, N. (2016). Using email interviews in qualitative educational research: Creating space
to think and time to talk. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education,
29(2), 150-163. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2015.1017848
Kaufmann, M., & Tzanetakis, M. (2020). Doing Internet research with hard-to-reach
communities: Methodological reflections on gaining meaningful access. Qualitative
Research, 20(6), 927–944. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794120904898
Kaufmann, K. (2020). Mobile methods: Doing migration research with the help of
smartphones. In K. Smets, K. Leurs, M. Georgiou, S. Witteborn & R. Gajjala (Eds.),
The Sage handbook of media and migration (pp. 167–179). Sage.
Kaufmann, K., & Peil, C. (2020). The Mobile Instant Messaging Interview (MIMI): Using
WhatsApp to enhance self-reporting and explore media usage in-situ. Mobile Media &
Communication, 8(2), 229–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050157919852392
Kemp, S. (2020). Digital 2020: October global statshot (Report online).
https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2020-october-global-statshot
Kenchakkanavar, A. Y., & Hadagali, G. S. (2015). Use of WhatsApp among the research
scholars of Karnatak University, Dharwad: A study. International Research: Journal
of Library & Information Science, 5(3), 548-561.
Leonard, P. (2010a). Organizing Whiteness: Gender, nationality and subjectivity in
2974 The Qualitative Report 2022
postcolonial Hong Kong. Gender, Work and Organization, 17(3), 340-358.
https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1468-0432.2008.00407.x
Leonard, P. (2010b). Work, identity and change? Post/colonial encounters in Hong Kong.
Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 36(8), 1247-1263.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13691831003687691
Leonard, P. (2013). Making Whiteness work in South Africa: A translabour approach. Women's
Studies International Forum, 36, 75-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2012.08.003
Lo Iacono, V., Symonds, P., & Brown, D. H. K. (2016). Skype as a tool for qualitative research
interviews. Sociological Research Online, 21(2), 103–117.
https://doi.org/10.5153/sro.3952
Lobe, B., Morgan, D., & Hoffman, K. A. (2020). Qualitative data collection in an era of social
distancing. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19, 1-8.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406920937875
Lundström, C. (2010). White ethnography: (Un)comfortable conveniences and shared
privileges in field-work with Swedish migrant women. NORA—Nordic Journal of
Feminist and Gender Research, 18(2), 70–87.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08038741003755467
Lundström, C. (2012). “Mistresses” and “maids” in transnational “contact zones”: Expatriate
wives and the intersection of difference and intimacy in Swedish domestic spaces in
Singapore. Women's Studies International Forum, 36, 44–53. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.wsif.2012.09.002
Lundström, C., & Twine, F. W. (2011). White migrations: Swedish women, gender
vulnerabilities and racial privileges. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 18(1), 67
–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350506810386085
Madge, C., & O’Connor, H. (2004). Online methods in geography educational research.
Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 28(1), 143–152.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0309826042000198710
Marvasti, A. B. (2004). Qualitative research in sociology. Sage Publications.
Mayorga-Gallo, S., & Hordge-Freeman, E. (2017). Between marginality and privilege: Gaining
access and navigating the field in multiethnic settings. Qualitative Research, 17(4),
377–394. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794116672915
McNulty, Y., & Brewster, C. (2018). The concept of business expatriates. In Y. McNulty & J.
Selmer (Eds.), Research handbook of expatriates (pp. 21-60). Edwar Elgar.
Mistar, I. B., & Embi, M. A. (2016). Student’s perception on the use of WhatsApp as a learning
tool in ESL classroom. Journal of Education and Social Sciences, 4, 96-104.
Montag, C., Błaszkiewicz, K., Sariyska, R., Lachmann, B., Andone, I., Trendafilov, B., Eibes,
M., & Markowetz, A. (2015). Smartphone usage in the 21st century: Who is active on
WhatsApp? BMC Research Notes, 8, 331. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-015-1280-z
Moreno, M. A., Goniu, N., Moreno, P. S., & Diekema, D. (2013). Ethics of social media
research: Common concerns and practical considerations. Cyberpsychology, Behavior
and Social Networking, 16(9), 708–713. https://doi.org/ 10.1089/cyber.2012.0334
O´Connor, H., & Madge, C. (2018). Chapter 24: Online interviewing. In N. G. Fielding, R. M.
Lee & G. Blank (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of online research methods (pp. 416- 434).
SAGE Publications Ltd.
Panter-Brick, C., Dajani, R., Hamadmad, D., & Hadfield, K. (2021). Comparing online and in-
person surveys: Assessing a measure of resilience with Syrian refugee youth.
International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 25(5), 703-709.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2021.1919789
Paulus, T. M., & Lester, J. M. (2022). Doing qualitative research in a digital world. Sage
Publications.
Rocio Bueno-Roldan and Antje Röder 2975
Raiman, L., Antbring, R., & Mahmood, A. (2017). WhatsApp Messenger as a tool to
supplement medical education for medical students on clinical attachment. BMC
Medical Education, 17(1), 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-017-0855-x
Sharawat, I. K., & Panda, P. K. (2021). Caregiver satisfaction and effectiveness of
teleconsultation in children and adolescents with migraine during the ongoing COVID-
19 pandemic. Journal of Child Neurology, 36(4), 296–
303. https://doi.org/10.1177/0883073820968653
Smith, A., & Anderson, M. (2018). Social media use in 2018. Available at:
www.pewresearchcenter.org
Stephens, N. (2007). Collecting data from elites and ultra elites: Telephone and face-to-face
interviews with macroeconomists. Qualitative Research, 7(2), 203–216.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794107076020
Sugiyama, S. (2015). Kawaii meiru and Maroyaka neko: Mobile emoji for relationship
maintenance and aesthetic expressions among Japanese teens. First Monday: Peer-
Reviewed Journal of the Internet, 20(10).
https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/download/5826/4997
Sullivan, J. R. (2012). Skype: An appropriate method of data collection for qualitative
interviews? The Hilltop Review, 6(1).
https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/hilltopreview/vol6/iss1/10
Telles, E. E. (1995). Who are the Morenas? Social Forces, 73(4), 1609-1611.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2580461
Tourkmani, A., J ALHarbi, T., Rsheed, A. M. B., Alrasheedy, A. A., ALMadani, W.,
ALJuraisi, F., AlOtaibi, A. F., AlHarbi, M., AlAbood, A. F., & Alshaikh, A. A. I.
(2021). The impact of telemedicine on patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes
mellitus during the COVID-19 pandemic in Saudi Arabia: Findings and implications.
Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X20985763
Thunberg S., & Arnell L. (2021). Pioneering the use of technologies in qualitative research –
A research review of the use of digital interviews, International Journal of Social
Research Methodology, 25(6), 757-768.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2021.1935565
Walther, J. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal and
hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research and Practice, 23(1), 3-43.
https://doi.org/10.1177/009365096023001001
Wang, L. K. (2013). Unequal logics of care: Gender, globalization, and volunteer work of
expatriate wives in China. Gender & Society, 27(4), 538–560.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243213483877
World Bank. (2016). World Development Report 2016. Digital Dividends. International Bank
for Reconstruction and Development. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-0671-1
Züll, C. (2016). Open-ended questions. GESIS Survey Guidelines. Mannheim, Germany:
GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.15465/gesis-
sg_en_002
Author Note
Rocio Bueno-Roldan is currently a PhD candidate of Sociology at Philipps-Universität
Marburg, in Cotutelle with the University of Barcelona. Please direct correspondence to
Prof. Dr. Antje Röder is currently Professor for Empirical Social Research at Philipps-
Universität Marburg. Please direct correspondence to roeder@staff.uni-marburg.de.
2976 The Qualitative Report 2022
Copyright 2022: Rocio Bueno-Roldan, Antje Röder, and Nova Southeastern
University.
Article Citation
Bueno-Roldan, R., & Röder, A. (2022). WhatsApp? Opportunities and challenges in the use of
a messaging app as a qualitative research tool. The Qualitative Report, 27(12), 2961-
2976. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2022.5329
