13 Research methods, statistics, critical review and evidence-based practice13.7 Qualitative research

13.7.2 Qualitative sampling

3 min read1 figure

Written by Resident Doctor Committee · Published

Qualitative sampling

Purposive sampling

  • Purposive sampling selects participants deliberately, by judgement or nomination, because they are information-rich and have characteristics relevant to the research question.

  • It aims for relevant experience and a range of perspectives, not statistical representativeness.

Variant

Basis of selection

Maximum variation

Participants span the widest range of outcomes and circumstances, and themes that hold across them are taken as central

Intensity

A few information-rich informants who have lived the experience in depth but are not deviant cases, also called the key-informant approach

Criterion

A specified experience, such as detention under section 3

Typical case

Cases judged ordinary, chosen to describe usual experience

Theoretical

The emerging analysis decides who is recruited next, to develop categories in grounded theory

Follow the loop to see theoretical sampling: each round of coding and comparison decides who is recruited next, and the dashed exit shows saturation, reached when no new categories emerge. Drawn for the MRCPsychiatrist statistics course

Convenience sampling

  • Convenience (opportunistic) sampling recruits whoever is accessible and willing, first come first served, until a target number is reached, such as clinic attenders.

  • Accessibility then shapes the findings, because the sample misses non-attenders and people who are unavailable in working hours.

Applying basic eligibility criteria to whoever turns up does not make a convenience sample purposive.

Snowball sampling

  • Snowball sampling recruits through nominations and introductions from people already in the study.

  • It suits hidden, stigmatised or hard-to-reach groups for whom there is no sampling frame.

  • It over-represents well-connected people and misses isolated ones, so researchers use several starting points to broaden coverage.

Sample size

  • No universal number exists, and a study that claims saturation must define it and show it.

  • Malterud, Siersma and Guassora's information power framework says a study needs fewer participants when the aim is narrow, the experience fits the question closely, established theory supports it, the dialogue is rich and the analysis is deep rather than comparative.

Reporting the sample

  • Researchers report the recruitment source, the sampling strategy and its rationale, exclusions and refusals, so readers can judge transferability to other settings.

Data saturation

Saturation and sample size

  • Data saturation sets sample size in qualitative research. Researchers analyse data as they collect it and stop recruiting when new data yield no new themes.

  • A power calculation fixes sample size only in quantitative designs.

  • A study that fixed its sample size in advance cannot claim that saturation decided when recruitment stopped.

Three senses of saturation

Sense

What is exhausted

Where it belongs

Code saturation

New relevant codes

Some codebook-based approaches

Meaning saturation

Further depth about the variation and context of issues

Approaches that use the concept explicitly

Theoretical saturation

Further development of categories

Grounded theory with theoretical sampling

  • Theoretical saturation in grounded theory is reached when further data and constant comparison produce no new categories or properties.

  • Theoretical sampling recruits people who can develop categories that are still thin, rather than simply the next available participant.

  • In Hennink, Kaiser and Marconi's 25 interviews, code saturation came at about nine, but meaning saturation needed 16 to 24.

Limits

  • Guest, Bunce and Johnson found saturation within 12 of 60 interviews in one study, but 12 is not a general rule.

  • Apparent saturation may be false when interviews are thin or recruitment is narrow, for example clinic attenders only.

  • Braun and Clarke argue that saturation does not suit reflexive thematic analysis, where researchers generate themes rather than discover them.

  • Information power is an alternative rationale: the more relevant information a sample holds for a specific aim, the fewer participants it needs.