Key informant interviews are a stalwart of qualitative research, particularly policy-focused research. So ubiquitous is this research method that it is sometimes taken for granted that key informants indeed have important knowledge and value. This commentary interrogates the emphasis that is sometimes placed on key informant interviews over other qualitative research methods, asking important questions including: why are these informants “key,” and who says they are “key”? This article uses a feminist lens to analyze key informant interviews, suggesting that the power and privilege surrounding key informants might inadvertently lead to key informant interviews being less participatory and more infused with vested interests than researchers might admit. Within the hierarchy of research methods, key informant interviews may be positioned as producing more valuable knowledge because of the status and expertise of the person being interviewed. Their “expert” status may lead to assumptions that key informants understand and represent their communities. This article draws attention to the gendered consequences of prioritizing the knowledge of key informants, contrasting this with feminist perspectives on knowledge production which value the voices and perspectives of “ordinary” community members. This article also points to the methodological advantages which power-holders benefit from when they participate in key informant interviews compared to focus group discussions or surveys, advocating for greater community voice (especially women’s voice) through in-depth interviews with “ordinary” women and increased critical analysis of the limits of key informant interviews.

关键的受访者访谈是定性研究的坚强后盾，尤其是针对政策的研究。这种研究方法无处不在，以至于有时重要的举报人确实具有重要的知识和价值，这是理所当然的。这篇评论质疑了有时将重点放在关键线人访谈上而不是其他定性研究方法的问题，提出的重要问题包括：这些线人为什么是“关键”，谁说他们是“关键”？本文使用女权主义的视角来分析关键线人访谈，这表明关键线人周围的权力和特权可能会无意间导致关键线人访谈的参与性下降，而注入的既得利益却比研究人员所承认的多。在研究方法的层次结构中，由于受访者的身份和专业知识，关键线人访谈可能会定位为产生更多有价值的知识。他们的“专家”身份可能导致关键的线人理解并代表其社区。本文提请注意优先考虑关键信息提供者的性别后果，并与重视知识生产的女权主义者的观点形成鲜明对比，女权主义者的观点重视“普通”社区成员的声音和观点。本文还指出，与焦点小组讨论或调查相比，掌权者参加关键知情人访谈时从中受益于方法论上的优势，