The limitations of the in-depth interviews are fairly minimal, although each can be perceived as a valid reason to avoid using this method for research. “In a nutshell, researchers should however, choose the method that answers their research questions best, taking into consideration that the more accurate the researchers are when conducting and analysing the data, the more accurate the findings would be” (Alshenqeeti, 2014). Conducting in-depth interviews are incredibly time consuming, and require additional time to transcribe and analyse the data. The process may also require comparing different interviewees, structured interviews are easier to draw comparisons from, whereas semi-structured in-depth interviews have a tendency to become more personal and thus make it harder to compare. Additionally, the smaller number of interviewees make establishing a general result from the interviews quite challenging. The effectiveness of the interview can be called into question when the subject of bias is approached. By virtue of the in-depth interview being less standardised and more free flowing, the interviewer may not be aware that they are unintentionally bringing their own bias to the interview. Furthermore, due to in-depth interviews often venturing into unrelated areas, there is a possibility that it could bring up more personal topics in the interviewees life. This runs the risk of topics such as sexual orientation, disabilities or age being brought up which are unacceptable to bring up. Ultimately, in-depth interviews carry a great number of benefits in the field, but whether they are the suitable method for any research proposal is best reserved for the topic at hand. Participant observation involves a researcher immersing themselves in a group of people for a period of time, allowing the researcher to develop a better understanding of the groups behaviour. It allows the researcher to listen and participate in conversation, thus ensuring more insight into the groups opinions or attitudes toward the matter at hand. The advantages of participant observation as a research method are multiple, there is a strong validity to this method because it produces rich data about how people really live and form opinions, which the researcher sees first hand. The researcher also gains a sense of empathy through developing personal relationships with the group. By being and living as a member of the group, the researcher is able to understand the groups viewpoints and the meaning behind their values, all of which is authentic data. There is room for flexibility with participant observation, allowing the researcher to change the direction of their research and ask questions they would not have thought to ask before. It gives them the freedom to explore different ideas or situations that may come up and help further develop their research. One of the principal advantages of using participant observation as a research method is that it allows the researcher to place themselves as a fellow member in group that would normally have more hesitati>