Skip to main content
Verso combines controls during the interview with review after it. The goal is a sample that is relevant, complete, and usable for analysis. During fieldwork, screeners and quotas control who enters each part of the sample. Open questions can use focused follow-up guidance, and optional low-engagement checks can respond when an answer is too thin to explore. After an interview, quality assessment helps researchers find sessions that deserve attention, such as unusually short participation, weak recordings, or limited engagement. Researchers can inspect the transcript and recording, then decide whether an interview should remain in the analysis. Editors record that decision in Interviews. While a study is live, or for as long as a listed interview still waits for a decision, the list shows each completed interview’s quality score with the first issue found, and a Review column with Approve and Reject. The quality cell also carries flags read from the study’s own numbers rather than from a model: Speeder when the interview is among the thinnest of the study, or carries almost nothing whatever the rest of the study looks like, Straight-lining when a rating grid was answered with the same value throughout. Click the quality cell to open Quality Check in the right-hand panel: all flagged issues and their supporting quotes, the consistency, richness, authenticity and relevance scores with explanations, interview metrics, and where the interview sits among the rest of the study. Where answer-level checks ran, the panel also lists the answers that came back garbled or off the question, any personal data typed into a form field by where it sits, and a rating that contradicts what the participant said; a listed answer opens at its place in the transcript once the interview’s answers are on screen. Click a quote that matches exactly one answer to open Interview at that passage. Quotes repeated across answers remain readable without a link. Missing evidence is labelled explicitly. The same tab sits on the interview’s own page, which the panel’s expand button opens. Approving confirms the participant earned their incentive; rejecting asks for a reason, suggests the issues the check flagged, and lets you choose whether the interview stays in the analysis while going unpaid, or also leaves the study. Interviews run as rehearsals can be marked as tests, which keeps them readable while excluding them from every count. A decision can be changed for as long as it has gone nowhere: approved, rejected, back to undecided, or marked a test. Where a recruitment panel pays the participant, it is told as soon as you decide and cannot reverse it, so decisions are confirmed first and stand. The same controls sit at the top of each interview’s own page. Automated checks support triage. They do not replace research judgement. Review early interviews closely, document exclusion decisions consistently, and consider whether a pattern points to the guide, recruitment source, or participant experience.

Monitoring fieldwork

Spot issues while recruitment is still running.

Screener and quotas

Keep the sample aligned with the research plan.