Contextual inquiry combines situated action with questioning
Aliases: contextual interview · in-situ inquiry · master-apprentice model
What it is
Contextual inquiry combines observation and interviewing where activity occurs. Participants perform real or near-real work while researchers ask about goals, judgments, and workarounds at suitable moments. “Doing and asking” does not mean constant interruption or a moderated usability script; questions remain anchored to situated action.
Why it happens
Tools, layout, coworkers, documents, noise, and time pressure constitute behavior and are easily omitted in retrospective summaries. Objects and events cue memory during action, and researchers can compare stated rules with practice. Questions can disrupt the workflow, so observation, brief clarification, and later probing need deliberate sequencing.
Studying it
Sample meaningful parts of the work cycle. Observe sequence, objects, collaboration, and exceptions before probing what happened and what informed a choice at natural pauses. Distinguish researcher-elicited steps from ordinary practice. Compare roles and sessions, and obtain permission for sensitive screens and bystanders.
Where it stops holding
Hazardous, private, noninterruptible, or extremely rare activity may require delayed playback or event reconstruction. Researcher presence remains reactive, and one visit is not routine. Remote screen sharing preserves digital context while omitting parts of the physical and social setting.
Applying it
- Choose periods and locations that expose real constraints rather than staging a meeting-room demonstration.
- Observe before probing and agree on no-interruption phases and safety signals.
- Separate action, context cues, explanations, and researcher interventions in notes.
- Convert findings into reproducible contextual scenarios and fact-check them with participants.