AI Interview Data Quality Assessment
A meta-research coding instrument for researchers to systematically evaluate and compare data quality from AI-moderated interviews versus traditional qualitative methods. Designed for repeated use across multiple data sets. Estimated completion time: 12-15 minutes per data set evaluated.
샘플 질문
템플릿에 포함된 내용을 미리 확인해 보세요. 모든 질문은 설문 공개 전에 자유롭게 수정할 수 있습니다.
Have you conducted, supervised, or formally analyzed qualitative research data within the past 12 months?
- Yes
- No
How many years of experience do you have conducting or analyzing qualitative research?
- Less than 1 year
- 1–3 years
- 4–7 years
- 8–15 years
- More than 15 years
You are about to evaluate a set of qualitative interview data on several quality dimensions. Please have the transcript or data set you are coding readily available before proceeding. Rate each dimension based on the data set as a whole, not individual responses.
How many distinct themes did you identify in this data set?
- 1–3 themes
- 4–6 themes
- 7–10 themes
- 11–15 themes
- 16–20 themes
- More than 20 themes
Rate the extent to which respondents provided specific examples, anecdotes, or concrete details in their responses.
Rate the degree to which respondents appeared genuinely engaged with the interview process.
How confident are you that the data in this set would support reliable coding by multiple researchers?
Compared to your typical experience with traditionally moderated qualitative data, how would you rate the overall quality of this data set?
Which of the following best describes your primary professional role?
- Academic researcher / faculty
- Postdoctoral researcher
- Graduate student / research assistant
- Market research / UX researcher
- Research consultant
- Data scientist / analyst
- Research director / manager
- Other
Have you personally reviewed or coded data collected through an AI-moderated interview tool (e.g., AI follow-up probes, automated qualitative interviewing)?
- Yes
- No
Which qualitative data collection methods have you used or analyzed in the past 2 years? (Select all that apply)
- In-depth interviews (in-person)
- In-depth interviews (video/phone)
- Focus groups
- Online asynchronous discussions
- AI-moderated interviews
- Ethnographic observation
- Open-ended survey questions
- Other
Which data collection method was used to produce the data set you are currently evaluating?
- AI-moderated interview (automated follow-up probes)
- Human-moderated interview (live interviewer)
- Self-administered open-ended questions (no follow-ups)
- Mixed or hybrid method
- Unsure / not disclosed
Rate the degree to which the data set contained themes you did not anticipate before analysis.
Rate the extent to which respondents elaborated beyond the minimum required to answer each question.
Rate the degree to which responses appeared authentic and genuine rather than performative or superficial.
How confident are you that this data set provides sufficient depth to generate actionable insights or theoretical contributions?
What specific strengths or weaknesses did you observe in this data set that influenced your quality ratings? Please describe any patterns, surprising findings, or methodological concerns.
In which type of organization do you primarily conduct research?
- University / academic institution
- Market research agency
- Corporate / in-house research team
- Government / public sector
- Nonprofit / NGO
- Independent / freelance
- Other
Prior to this evaluation, how would you describe your general attitude toward AI-moderated interviewing as a qualitative research method?
Approximately how many individual responses or transcripts are in the data set you are evaluating?
- 1–5
- 6–15
- 16–30
- 31–50
- 51–100
- More than 100
Rate the level of elaboration and detail present within the themes identified.
Rate the extent to which responses included emotional, experiential, or personal content.
Rate the prevalence of satisficing behaviors (e.g., minimal answers, repetitive phrasing, off-topic responses) in this data set.
How confident are you that this data set adequately captures the range of experiences relevant to the research topic?
Rate the diversity of perspectives or viewpoints represented across the data set.
Rate the overall depth of responses in this data set.
Rate how natural and conversational the flow of the interview felt based on the data.
How willing would you be to base published research findings or strategic recommendations on this data set alone?
포함된 기능
AI 후속 질문
정형화된 설문이 놓치는 세부 내용을, 주관식 답변에 맞춰 AI가 심층 질문으로 끌어냅니다.
주의력 확인 장치
성의 없는 답변과 저품질 응답자를 걸러내는 내장 안전장치입니다.
AI가 작성한 문안
문구, 질문 순서, 분기 로직까지 AI가 연구 목표에 맞춰 작성합니다.
자동 리포트
응답이 모이면 주요 주제, 인용문, 이해하기 쉬운 요약이 자동으로 작성됩니다.
자주 묻는 질문
“AI Interview Data Quality Assessment” 템플릿에는 어떤 질문이 포함되어 있나요?
바로 사용할 수 있는 질문 29개가 포함되어 있으며, 처음 질문은 다음과 같습니다: “Welcome to the AI Interview Data Quality Assessment. This survey is a structured coding instrument designed to help you…” · “Have you conducted, supervised, or formally analyzed qualitative research data within the past 12 months?” · “How many years of experience do you have conducting or analyzing qualitative research?”. 전체 질문은 위에서 미리 볼 수 있고 모두 수정 가능합니다.
이 설문을 완료하는 데 얼마나 걸리나요?
응답자는 보통 질문 29개를 약 12분 안에 완료합니다.
템플릿을 수정할 수 있나요?
네. 설문을 공개하기 전에 모든 질문, 답변 옵션, 순서를 자유롭게 수정할 수 있습니다. 질문을 추가·삭제하거나 AI 편집기에 연구 목표에 맞춘 재구성을 요청할 수도 있습니다.
이 템플릿은 무료인가요?
네. 편집기에서 바로 열어 수정을 시작할 수 있습니다. 체험에는 계정이 필요 없으며, 무료 플랜으로 설문을 공개할 수 있습니다.
설문을 공개할 준비가 되셨나요?
이 템플릿을 편집기에서 열어 보세요. 첫 응답자가 보기 전에 모든 부분을 원하는 대로 바꿀 수 있습니다.
관련 템플릿
비슷한 주제의 다른 설문을 만나 보세요.
Stakeholder Interview Eligibility Screener
Pre-qualifies potential stakeholder interviewees by assessing role fit, recent domain involvement, and scheduling availability for 45–60 minute research sessions.
템플릿 보기AI Tool Adoption in Research Teams
A survey studying how research teams evaluate, adopt, and integrate AI tools for data collection, analysis, and reporting. This instrument measures current tool usage, evaluation criteria, adoption barriers, training experiences, data quality perceptions, and team collaboration patterns.
템플릿 보기AI Literacy Self-Assessment for Undergraduates
A validated self-assessment instrument measuring undergraduate AI literacy across five dimensions: conceptual understanding, practical skills, critical evaluation, ethical reasoning, and awareness of limitations. Estimated completion time: 10-12 minutes.
템플릿 보기AI Monitoring of Work Quality: Employee Attitudes Survey
Measures how employees feel about AI-based monitoring and quality-scoring tools at work — covering comfort, trust, fairness, and behavior change — with an AI follow-up that reconstructs one specific moment monitoring affected them instead of abstract opinions. Built for HR, legal, and workplace-technology teams evaluating or rolling out AI monitoring practices.
템플릿 보기AI Ethics Awareness Survey for Students
An academic instrument measuring student awareness of, exposure to, and attitudes toward artificial intelligence ethics. Covers concept familiarity, training exposure, ethical dilemma responses, regulation views, and willingness to prioritize ethics over convenience. Estimated completion: 8–12 minutes.
템플릿 보기인구통계 그룹별 AI 진행자 효과성
AI 인터뷰 진행자의 효과성을 인구통계 그룹별로 평가하는 경험 후 조사입니다. 전반적인 경험의 질, 인식된 공감과 이해, 문화적 민감성, 접근성, 그리고 사람 진행자와의 직접 비교를 측정합니다. 인구통계학적 조절 효과를 탐지하도록 설계되었습니다.
템플릿 보기