The article discusses the underrepresentation of telephone interviews in qualitative research and the prevailing bias against them. While telephone interviews are widely used in quantitative research, they are rarely discussed in qualitative contexts. The article argues that telephone interviews are often seen as less effective than face-to-face interviews due to the absence of visual cues, which is believed to hinder rapport, probing, and data interpretation. However, telephone interviews may offer advantages, such as allowing respondents to feel more relaxed and disclose sensitive information. The article highlights a lack of evidence supporting the notion that telephone interviews produce lower quality data and calls for more research comparing different interview modalities to assess their impact on data quality and their suitability for various research topics and populations. It also notes that while there is growing interest in electronic qualitative interviews, telephone interviews are still viewed as less desirable. The article suggests that the bias against telephone interviews may stem from concerns about the loss of nonverbal data and contextual information, but argues that these concerns are not well-supported by evidence. It concludes that telephone interviews can be a valuable data collection method and that more research is needed to determine their effectiveness and to develop guidelines for their use in qualitative research.The article discusses the underrepresentation of telephone interviews in qualitative research and the prevailing bias against them. While telephone interviews are widely used in quantitative research, they are rarely discussed in qualitative contexts. The article argues that telephone interviews are often seen as less effective than face-to-face interviews due to the absence of visual cues, which is believed to hinder rapport, probing, and data interpretation. However, telephone interviews may offer advantages, such as allowing respondents to feel more relaxed and disclose sensitive information. The article highlights a lack of evidence supporting the notion that telephone interviews produce lower quality data and calls for more research comparing different interview modalities to assess their impact on data quality and their suitability for various research topics and populations. It also notes that while there is growing interest in electronic qualitative interviews, telephone interviews are still viewed as less desirable. The article suggests that the bias against telephone interviews may stem from concerns about the loss of nonverbal data and contextual information, but argues that these concerns are not well-supported by evidence. It concludes that telephone interviews can be a valuable data collection method and that more research is needed to determine their effectiveness and to develop guidelines for their use in qualitative research.