# Citing expert interviews — from transcript to bibliography > Citing expert interviews is more than a formal question: transcripts, GDPR, anonymisation, and the precise reference format in APA, MLA, and Chicago — with examples. Acurio · 2026-06-18 · Expert interviews, Qualitative research, Citation, Thesis, Bachelor, Master You have three hours of interview material on tape, the transcript runs to forty pages — and now you face the question of how to cite this in your bachelor's or master's thesis. Unlike with books or journal articles, there is no single standard that does the work for you. Form, data protection, and anonymisation all interlock, and every mistake is visible: to reviewers, in the plagiarism report, and in the worst case in front of an ethics committee. This guide walks you through all four layers — preparation, in-text citation, bibliography, appendix — and the typical pitfalls. ## Before the first citation: four duties Before you use a single statement from the interview in your text, the source has to be academically defensible. Four steps are non-negotiable: 1. **Recording with documented consent.** Written, before the conversation. The form names the purpose (your thesis), retention period, anonymisation level, right of withdrawal. Any methodologically serious department has templates. 2. **Full transcript.** Verbatim, at minimum for the passages you cite, in practice the entire conversation. With timestamps every 30 seconds so every statement remains traceable. 3. **Anonymisation.** Names, companies, places, and identifying details get replaced by codes (R1, R2 …) or role descriptions. Pseudonyms only if your department explicitly allows them. 4. **Secure storage.** Original recordings encrypted, not in the cloud, not in the appendix. Only the anonymised transcript ends up in the appendix. Without this foundation, every formally "correct" citation is worthless — you would be citing a source you were not entitled to collect. ## How to reference the interview in the text Regardless of style, an in-text reference has to do three things — identify the source unambiguously, mark its status (personal interview), and give the date. For direct quotes, add a line or paragraph number from the transcript. There is no "p." — transcripts have no page numbers in the classical sense. Direct quote: > "The biggest hurdle was not the technology, but acceptance within the team" (R3, personal interview, March 14, 2026, ll. 142–144). Indirect rendering: > The interviewed HR director sees team acceptance, not technology, as the central hurdle (R3, personal interview, March 14, 2026). `ll.` stands for "lines" in the transcript; some departments prefer `para.` for paragraph. Pick one and stay consistent. ## APA 7 — the most common variant APA 7 treats unpublished interviews as **personal communication**. The consequence: they do *not* appear in the reference list, but they require full information in the running text. > (R3, personal interview, March 14, 2026) Or with role: > The HR director of a mid-cap engineering firm (personal interview, March 14, 2026, ll. 142–144) confirmed … Important: the reference must be traceable to the anonymised transcript in the appendix. Practically, that means your appendix needs a contents page listing the codes (R1, R2 …) with role and date. Exactly this lets the reviewer verify the claim against the transcript. In qualitative studies with many interviews, you often see a sample overview table before the first reference ("Appendix A: Sample overview"), referenced in the methodology chapter. This is clean and speeds up verification. ## MLA 9 — interview as a standalone source MLA treats the interview as a standalone source and includes it in the Works Cited list: > Miller, Anna. Personal interview. 14 Mar. 2026. For anonymised interviews, replace the name with the code and add the role: > R3 [HR director, manufacturing]. Personal interview. 14 Mar. 2026. In-text, the code suffices: (R3) or with a line number (R3, ll. 142). If you conducted the interview yourself, no "Interview by author" tag is needed — that is implicit in a bachelor's or master's thesis. ## Chicago 17 — Notes & Bibliography Chicago handles interviews differently per variant. In the **Notes-and-Bibliography** system (humanities, history, law), the interview appears in a footnote and optionally in the bibliography. Footnote for a direct quote: > 1. R3 (HR director, manufacturing), personal interview with the author, March 14, 2026, ll. 142–144. Bibliography: > R3 (HR director, manufacturing). Personal interview with the author. March 14, 2026. In the **Author-Date** system (social and natural sciences), the short reference (R3 2026) is enough, and the interview enters the bibliography as above but with the year fronted: > R3 (HR director, manufacturing). 2026. Personal interview with the author. March 14. ## Anonymised interviews — the special case Most qualitative bachelor's and master's theses work with anonymised interviews. Three rules that go wrong too often: **Code consistency.** Once you introduce `R1` in the methodology chapter, it stays `R1` everywhere. Not "Respondent 1", not "Interview 1" — one label per person, from the appendix to the last in-text reference. **Role instead of profile.** "HR director, manufacturing, southern Germany, 47 years old, female" is no longer anonymisation, it is a profile detailed enough for re-identification. Limit yourself to the attributes actually relevant for your analysis. **Check direct quotes.** If your interviewee literally says "At BMW, we did …", replace the company in the transcript with `[large automotive manufacturer]`. Do not forget the same substitution in the quoted wording in your running text. Otherwise you defeat your own anonymisation — and that is not just embarrassing, it is a GDPR violation. ## What belongs in the appendix The appendix is the evidence base for your interviews. It contains: - **Sample overview** (table: code, role, sector, interview date, duration) - **Anonymised full transcripts** with line or paragraph numbers - **Interview guide** (the questions you asked) - **Anonymised consent form** (template plus at least one filled example) - If applicable: **category or coding scheme** of your qualitative analysis What does *not* go in the appendix: original recordings, real names, full lists of identities. These data stay under lock with you and get deleted once the grading period ends — your consent form already commits you to that. ## The most common mistakes — and how to avoid them **Mistake 1: Quote without a line reference.** "(R3, personal interview)" works for indirect reference; for direct quotes the line (or paragraph) belongs in there. Otherwise no one can verify the wording. **Mistake 2: Anonymisation in the text, real name in the transcript.** If "Anna Miller" survives in the appendix and you use "R3" in the body, the anonymisation is worthless. Anonymise the transcript itself, not the surface text. **Mistake 3: Paraphrase drifts from the transcript.** Classic: "problematic in some cases" silently becomes "fundamentally problematic" in the running argument. That is misquotation, even with the correct code. **Mistake 4: Missing sample overview.** Without a table the reviewer has to flip back to the transcript for every code — annoying enough that they will run spot checks you cannot steer. **Mistake 5: Interview as the sole source for factual claims.** An interview evidences a practice, a view, an experience — not an objective number. If your interviewee says "the sector is growing at 15 %", you need a second, published source for that. Otherwise you are citing an opinion as fact. ## Acurio checks this too Interview citations are particularly error-prone because they cannot be verified against an external source — and that is exactly why reviewers often spot the discrepancies late. [Acurio](https://acurio.ch/) compares each cited passage against the uploaded transcripts and flags places where your text claims more than the interview supports, where line references do not match the statement, or where anonymisation breaks (e.g. a company name surfaces in the quote that the code is supposed to mask). Exactly the kinds of mistakes a department finds in the final review — before they cost you a grade. --- An expert interview is the most labour-intensive source you will carry into a thesis — and at the same time the one with the least standardised form. The people who get transcript, anonymisation, and reference right do not just produce formally correct citations; they make the methodological foundation of their own work auditable. That is the point at which qualitative research stands or falls. ## Frequently asked questions ### Does an expert interview belong in the bibliography? For unpublished interviews it depends on the style. APA 7 does NOT include them in the reference list — only an in-text mention and the transcript in the appendix. MLA and Chicago do allow an entry, and in practice most European thesis programs require one. When in doubt, check your department's style sheet. ### How do I cite an anonymised interview in the text? Use the agreed pseudonym or code, a role designation instead of a name (e.g. 'HR director, mid-cap manufacturing'), and the interview date: (R3, personal interview, March 14, 2026). The same identifier appears in the appendix — so any reviewer can verify the claim against the transcript without the real name appearing anywhere. ### Do I need a consent form — even if the name is not used? Yes, always. The moment you process recordings, transcripts, or personal statements, GDPR (or your local equivalent) applies. The consent form goes in the appendix (anonymised), the original stays with you. Without consent you may not cite the interview — not even anonymously, because the processing itself would be unlawful. --- Source: https://acurio.ch/en/blog/citing-expert-interviews