For my most recent research project, I dove into the world of online fundraising by conducting two fascinating interviews. My goal? To understand what really happens when people encounter those donation requests in their social media feeds. Beyond just learning about giving patterns, I wanted to explore the whole ecosystem of online community support – including that tricky territory of “slacktivism.” I chose to interview complete strangers rather than friends or family to get fresh, unbiased perspectives, and mixed things up by doing one interview over call and another in person.
First things first – I needed to find people who’d at least seen some online fundraising campaigns floating around on their social media. I reached out through Messenger – social media messaging service – introducing myself and laying out what I hoped to learn. Of course, I made sure to get their approval to record our conversations and promised to keep everything strictly for my academic work.
The Differences Between Two Interviews
Here’s where things got interesting. Having one interview online and one in person showed me just how different these experiences can be.
My first interview felt a bit like trying to have a heart-to-heart through a window. To break the ice, I started with some casual conversation and made sure to nod and smile plenty – those little signals that say “I’m really listening!” At first, I got a lot of short answers, kind of like text messages. So I had to dig deeper with follow-up questions like “What makes you pause before donating?” That’s when the real conversation started flowing.
The in-person interview was a whole different experience. Being able to read body language and pick up on those subtle cues made everything feel more natural. When my interviewee paused to think about “slacktivism,” I could tell they were really thinking it over, so I gave them space. The conversation felt like catching up with an old friend, leading to some really honest insights about how social media sometimes encourages lazy activism.
The in-person format allowed for spontaneity – side conversations and unexpected insights that might never have emerged in a more structured online setting. However, the virtual interview had its own advantages, particularly in keeping us focused on specific topics. I found myself developing different skills for each format: in person, it was about reading subtle cues and going with the flow, while online, it was about creating warmth and connection through a screen.
Conclusions
These interviews taught me invaluable lessons about the art of interviewing. I learned that flexibility isn’t just helpful – it’s essential. Each participant came with their own communication style, and my job was to adapt and create an environment where they felt heard and understood.
Perhaps the most challenging lesson was recognizing and setting aside my own biases. When discussions turned to topics like slacktivism, where I admittedly had strong opinions, I had to consciously step back and listen with an open mind. This exercise in neutrality led to much richer, more honest conversations than if I had let my own views color the discussion.
One of the most surprising aspects of this project was how much the format affected the quality and nature of responses. In person, people were more likely to share personal stories and emotional reactions, while the online format often led to more analytical, thought-out responses. Neither was better or worse – they just offered different windows into people’s thoughts and feelings about online fundraising.
Here are my key takeaways from conducting these interviews:
- You have to switch up your style based on whether you’re meeting online or in person:
- Online calls need more structured questions and clear visual cues
- In-person interviews allow for more natural conversation flow
- Each format has its own strengths and challenges
- Really listening makes all the difference:
- Pay attention to what’s not being said
- Watch for body language and tone changes
- Use follow-up questions to dig deeper into interesting points
- Give people time to think and express themselves
- Keeping personal opinions in check is crucial:
- My role was to understand, not judge
- Had to stay neutral when discussing controversial topics
- Let interviewees share their honest thoughts without leading them
- Focused on collecting their genuine perspectives
- Building trust matters:
- Started with easy questions to help people feel comfortable
- Made sure they understood how their information would be used
- Showed genuine interest in their experiences
- Created a safe space for honest discussion
This project went far beyond just completing an assignment – it equipped me with practical skills that will serve me well in both academic and professional settings. I developed a deeper understanding of qualitative research methods and learned how to gather meaningful insights while maintaining ethical standards.
The experience sharpened my ability to:
- Build rapport quickly with strangers
- Adapt communication styles based on different mediums
- Listen actively and respond thoughtfully
- Analyze responses for deeper meaning
- Structure findings in a coherent narrative
Looking ahead, these skills will be invaluable for future research projects and professional situations where understanding human behavior and motivation is key.
How about online fundraising?
What interested me most was how these interviews revealed the deeply personal nature of online giving. Behind every decision to donate – or not donate – lies a complex web of experiences, beliefs, and emotions. Some participants shared touching stories about campaigns that moved them to action, while others expressed thoughtful skepticism about the effectiveness of online fundraising.
This journey into understanding online fundraising and community engagement has taught me valuable lessons about how people approach digital giving. Through these interviews, I’ve gained meaningful insights into what motivates people to donate online, what makes them think twice, and how they view the whole concept of social media activism. The experience really opened my eyes to how important it is to adapt interview styles based on the setting – whether that’s through a screen or face-to-face. It’s also shown me the real value of truly listening to what people are saying and being mindful of my own preconceptions.
I’m excited to take these new skills forward into my future academic work and professional life. Not only has this project improved my ability to conduct meaningful research, but it’s also helped me become better at presenting clear, well-supported arguments while maintaining a balanced perspective. Perhaps most importantly, I’ve developed a much deeper appreciation for qualitative research methods and gained confidence in my ability to effectively communicate findings, whether I’m speaking to someone or putting thoughts on paper.