Research and Source Management
Expert Interview Question Bank
Prepare interview questions that elicit verifiable expertise, mechanisms, practical detail, evidence, uncertainty, counterexamples, and usable context.
Free editable Markdown · Interviewers, researchers, and editors ·
Accessible HTML preview
Blank template
The downloaded file contains the same fields in editable Markdown.
Scope and expertise questions
- Role question
- [What part of this subject do you work with directly?]
- Experience boundary
- [Which settings, populations, or decisions does that cover?]
- Term definition
- [How do you define the key term in this context?]
- Conflict question
- [Are there affiliations or interests readers should know?]
- Knowledge limit
- [Which part should be answered by another source?]
Reasoning and evidence questions
- Mechanism
- [What happens between the action and the claimed result?]
- Decision process
- [Which signals or tradeoffs guide the choice?]
- Evidence
- [What public source or observation supports this?]
- Measurement
- [How would someone know whether it worked?]
- Example
- [Can you describe an approved or anonymized instance?]
- Counterexample
- [When did the expected result not occur?]
- Alternative explanation
- [What else could account for the observation?]
Limits and close
- Boundary condition
- [Where does this advice not apply?]
- Disagreement
- [What would a qualified peer challenge?]
- Changed view
- [What evidence has altered your position?]
- Future uncertainty
- [What cannot yet be predicted responsibly?]
- Source follow-up
- [Documents, data, or referrals promised]
- Summary check
- [Restate the main point for correction]
- Attribution check
- [Name, title, quotation, and review agreement]
How to use this template
- Define the research question, the guest's relevant role, and what the interview must add beyond desk research.
- Choose a short sequence covering scope, mechanism, evidence, application, and limits.
- Prepare follow-ups that request definitions, examples, counterexamples, measurements, and sources.
- During the interview, mark uncertainty, off-record boundaries, quotations, and promised verification material.
- Close by restating key points, confirming attribution, and recording post-interview checks.
Establish the boundary of expertise
Begin by asking what part of the subject the guest works with directly, for how long, and in what setting. Distinguish research, operational responsibility, professional judgment, and secondhand knowledge. Relevant experience may be narrow and still valuable. Ask about affiliations, funding, or commercial interests that readers would need to understand. This opening lets you route later questions appropriately and prevents a polished response outside the speaker's field from receiving the same weight as firsthand expertise.
Move from conclusion to mechanism
When an expert states that an approach works, ask what happens, in what sequence, under which conditions, and how the outcome is recognized. Request an example with enough detail to understand the decision but without confidential identifiers. Ask what evidence supports the claim and whether the expert can point to a public document, dataset, standard, or calculation. Useful follow-ups include “What would you measure?”, “What is the most common wrong assumption?”, and “What alternative explanation would you test first?”
Invite uncertainty and disconfirmation
Experts can add exceptional value by describing limits. Ask where the advice fails, which groups or environments were not studied, what evidence would change the view, and where qualified peers disagree. Do not frame uncertainty as weakness or pressure the guest toward a definitive prediction. Before ending, summarize the most important points back to the speaker, verify technical terms and names, and list promised materials. Record which statements are observation, interpretation, and recommendation so the draft can retain those distinctions.
See the fields in context
Fictional example: repair-café battery sorting
Sam Iro and the Hilltop Repair Café are invented. No real safety instruction should be inferred from this scenario.
- Expertise boundary: The fictional guest coordinates intake but refers technical battery handling to a qualified specialist.
- Mechanism question: What information lets the intake team route an item without opening it?
- Evidence question: Is there a current public checklist the article can cite and readers can verify?
- Counterexample: When did the usual intake description fail to identify the correct route?
- Limit captured: The interview will describe communication workflow, not offer electrical or hazardous-material advice.
Frequently asked questions
How many questions fit a one-hour interview?
It depends on depth, but a focused set of eight to twelve major questions with follow-ups is often more useful than a long list rushed without clarification.
Should leading questions ever be used?
Avoid wording that embeds the desired answer. If testing a specific claim, state its source and invite correction, alternatives, and limits rather than asking the guest to endorse it.
What if the expert cannot provide a public source?
Record the statement as expert interpretation or observation, verify checkable parts elsewhere, and decide whether the article can responsibly use it with that limitation.
Can AI generate all interview questions?
AI may assist with brainstorming under an approved process, but a person should tailor scope, detect false premises, protect sensitive topics, and conduct accountable follow-up.