In addition to what others have already said: It's hard to say without seeing the detailed critique of the reviewers, but I wouldn't be surprised if what is at the heart of it are differing understandings of synchronicity/asynchronicity in digitally augmented communication. While it doesn't specifically refer to interviews, you might be interested in Erika Darics' work in this area: http://www.academia.edu/2570192/The_blurring_boundaries_between_synchronicit... Best, Johnny. Dr J W Unger Lecturer and Academic Director of Summer Programmes Department of Linguistics and English Language Lancaster University LA1 4YL e-mail: j.unger@lancaster.ac.uk<mailto:j.unger@lancaster.ac.uk> tel: +44 1524 592591 Follow me on Twitter @johnnyunger<http://twitter.com/#!/johnnyunger> On 18 Aug 2013, at 14:46, Jenny Davis <jdavis4@neo.tamu.edu<mailto:jdavis4@neo.tamu.edu>> wrote: Hi all, Long time lurker and responder, first time inquirer. I am working on an R&R for a paper in which I use both FtF and IM interviews. I am aware of the literature that talks about the strengths and weaknesses of IM as an interview mode, but one of the reviewers says that IM does not constitute an interview at all, but merely a question/answer session. I want to address this critique adequately. Is anyone familiar with specific articles/books that make this argument and/or push back against it? Thanks!! Jenny L. Davis Assistant Professor Department of Sociology & Anthropology James Madison University email: Davis5JL@jmu.edu<mailto:Davis5JL@jmu.edu> Twitter: Jenny_L_Davis Blog: Cyborgology.org<http://Cyborgology.org> _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org<mailto:Air-L@listserv.aoir.org> mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/