Trying and then Shifting Mindset from “Why” to “How” in Qualitative Research
Conducting qualitative research has always been about uncovering deeper human experiences, understanding the subtle, and often complex, behaviours, beliefs, and decisions of participants. When I first started as a field researcher, I often asked “why” questions. “Why do you think that way?” or “Why did you choose this option?” It made sense to me because I believed that by understanding their motivations, I could get to the root of their decisions.
However, over time, I began to realise that asking “why” wasn’t always yielding the kind of rich, open dialogue I hoped for. What I really wanted was for them to open up and share without feeling judged. So I started exploring another angle — asking “how” instead of “why.” This simple shift made all the difference.
But before I dive deeper into this shift, it’s important to clarify that moving from “why” to “how” doesn’t mean abandoning “why” questions altogether. The “why” mindset still has a crucial role in qualitative research. Asking “why” can provide direct answers that explain the motivations or reasoning behind certain decisions. It’s particularly useful when you need to understand the deeper context behind choices or behaviours that are directly tied to the research question. However, the key is to recognise when the use of “why” might limit the openness of the conversation.
In some cases, “how” can serve as an alternative to encourage a more open and safe environment for participants. “Why” questions can sometimes feel confrontational, even unintentionally, making participants feel like they are being judged. By shifting to “how” questions, we create a more neutral space where participants can explain their actions without feeling defensive.
When I shifted my focus to asking “how” questions, such as, “How do you approach this situation?” or “Can you walk me through how you typically handle that?” the whole dynamic changed. Instead of feeling like they needed to explain themselves, participants felt more comfortable sharing the steps they took, the context of their decisions, and their thought processes. It didn’t feel like an interrogation anymore; it felt more like a conversation where I was genuinely curious about their experiences.
For example, when I ask someone, “How did you manage that situation?” they don’t just give me a one-word answer. They dive into the details. They start explaining what they did, how they approached it, and even what challenges they faced along the way. It’s not just about the final decision or outcome; it’s about the process. This way, I get to see how their lived experience influences their choices, without making them feel like they’re being judged.
James P. Spradley’s Insights: From Meaning to Use
This shift aligns closely with something I read in James P. Spradley’s Ethnographic Interviews. He emphasises the importance of asking about the “use” of language or actions, rather than trying to extract abstract meanings or motivations. When we ask someone “what do you mean by that?” we might unintentionally come across as judgmental, or we might be imposing our own interpretations on their words. Instead, by asking how phrases or behaviours are applied in everyday life, we’re encouraging participants to share real, lived experiences, and that’s where the true cultural insights lie.
Don’t ask for meaning, ask for use. Beginning ethnographers often become over concerned with meanings and motives.
(James p spradley , Ethnographic Interviews)
It’s like when I started asking “how” questions in my own interviews. I was no longer asking participants to explain themselves; I was asking them to show me how they experience the world. This not only made the conversations flow more naturally, but it also gave me a much richer understanding of their perspectives. I wasn’t imposing my own framework onto their responses; I was letting them guide the conversation in a way that felt authentic to them.
One of the key insights from Spradley’s work is how easily questions about meaning can carry implicit judgments. If you ask someone to explain their reasoning, it can feel like you’re questioning their ability to communicate, or that they’ve failed to make themselves understood. I’ve definitely seen this in my own research. Asking “why” can sometimes sound like, “Why did you do that, and not something else?” which can put participants on the defensive. But when I ask “how,” I’m showing them that I’m interested in their process, not judging their choices.
like, “What do you mean by that?” and “ Why would you do that?” These questions contain a hidden judgmental component. Louder than words, they seem to shout, “You haven’t been clear; you haven’t explained adequately; you are hiding the true reasons for what you told me. “ Ethnographic interviewing differs from most other approaches by the absence of probing “why” and “what do you mean” questions.
(James p spradley , Ethnographic Interviews)
This shift in approach helped me build better rapport with participants. They felt more at ease, knowing that I wasn’t trying to challenge their decisions, but rather, I was genuinely interested in how they arrived at them. This also encouraged more authentic, detailed responses, allowing me to collect richer data.
When participants feel comfortable, they’re more likely to share openly. And when you ask “how” instead of “why,” the answers tend to be more detailed and actionable. Spradley’s advice to focus on the “use” of phrases or behaviours plays into this as well. Asking about application — how something is done — provides a clearer picture of the cultural context in which these actions take place.
For instance, in a recent project, I was studying team collaboration tools in the workplace. Instead of asking, “Why do you prefer this tool?” I shifted the focus to, “How do you use this tool when you’re collaborating with your team?” What followed was a detailed description of how they organised their workflow, the way they shared tasks, and even the social dynamics at play in their team. All of this gave me deeper insights than I would’ve gained from just focusing on “why.”
One technique Spradley highlights is restating what participants have said and asking them to clarify how they use certain phrases or concepts in context. I’ve adopted this into my own practice, and it’s been incredibly useful. If a participant says something like, “I usually take the lead in meetings,” I might follow up by asking, “So when you say you take the lead, how does that usually play out?” This encourages them to reflect on their own behaviour and articulate their actions more clearly.
By focusing on the process — the “how” — participants tend to reveal not just what they do, but how their actions are shaped by their environment, relationships, and cultural norms. It’s a small adjustment in the way I ask questions, but the impact on the quality of the data I gather is profound.
Asking for use is a guiding principle that underlies all ethnographic interviewing. When combined with restating and making repeated explanations, ethnographic interviews usually move quickly through the stage of exploration.
(James p spradley , Ethnographic Interviews)
Conclusion: The Power of “How” in Research
This shift from “why” to “how” has fundamentally changed the way I approach qualitative research. By focusing on how people act, interact, and navigate their world, I’m able to uncover deeper insights into their lived experiences. Not only does this make the research process more enriching for me, but it also honors the voices and perspectives of the participants. I’m not asking them to justify their actions; I’m asking them to share how they move through their world, and that makes all the difference.
James P. Spradley’s ethnographic approach has been an invaluable guide in this shift. By prioritising the practical use of language and behaviours over abstract meanings, I’ve been able to gather data that feels more authentic, more grounded in reality, and more reflective of the cultures I’m studying. In the end, this shift to “how” isn’t just about improving my research — it’s about fostering deeper connections with the people I’m learning from.
This explanation now highlights that the shift from “why” to “how” doesn’t invalidate the importance of “why” questions. Instead, it presents “how” as a complementary approach that fosters a more open, comfortable environment for participants.
