like all uni students .. we all have to interview pple at least once in our life time.. lol as i was doing my fpy research(writing a case study) i came across this article:Being human, interview subjects are unique. But I have noticed a few underlying similarities that suggest some basic types of subjects who might require certain responses. My typology is one example; many others are possible. After you gain experience as an interviewer and case writer, you may want to develop your own.

1. The Resister. Some interview subjects participate at the behest of their superiors. Others present some information readily, but become shy when the interviewer asks probing questions. Whatever the source of the interviewee's reluctance, the writer will find that setting an explicit contract of behavior is invaluable. Reassuring an interviewee that the case will be not be released without a suitable disguise, that he or she will have the right to review it before publication, or that it will not be published until some stipulated time can often overcome potential blocks.

2. The Paper Doll. Some interviewees want to cooperate, but in conversation (perhaps about uncomfortable moments of decision), they speak stiffly. Their words are flat and without "juice." One technique to overcome this problem is to ask that the interviewee go over an episode several times requesting more detail each time. "What did he say then?" "What did you think?" For the first several iterations, you may get analysis instead of story. I suggest that you keep asking simple, factual questions and back away from the "whys." Questions that call for analysis steer the interview subject are thoughts away from the guts of the story-and that's where the energy is.

3. The Fountain. Some interviewees can drench the case writer with their loquaciousness. They enjoy the attention, have near-total recall, and love to talk. In these situations, I suggest focusing on distinct threads in their conversation-aspects that you think you can use in the case. Try to concentrate on these and let the rest" of the stream flow by. When the informant wanders off the topic, interrupt gently with a remark like, "Could we get back to that later? Right now, can you remember what Constance said right after you asked her to come up and write her question on the board?"

4. The Innocent. Occasionally, case subjects become so involved in telling their stories that they provide too much personal information-intimate details about themselves, families, or students. Academics can be open and candid. Sometimes they fail to see potential problems that airing such material might raise in class. The ethics of case writing dictate that the writer give thought to such sensitivities, even if the case interview subjects do not. It is the writer's job to protect sources and make every reasonable attempt to ensure that their stories will appear only in a form and a venue that cannot hurt them. Given the choice between writing a juicy case that might embarrass an interview subject and writing no case at all, drop the case.

5. The Painted Window. Some people have so indelibly acquired the habit of analyzing that they have lost the ability to reconstruct the data on which they based their assessments. They remind me of painted shop windows: there may be a lot going on behind the surface, but you can't see it. Packaged insights like, "Jeremy behaved inappropriately when his opinion was questioned in class" do not make good case material. As an interviewer, you hope that a subject can reconstruct dialogue and action-something more like, "Jeremy jumped up and shook his fist at Seth when Seth said, 'Look, Jeremy, shouting doesn't prove nuclear power is unsafe."'

i find the painted window particularly interesting..lol