Calling for a Shared Understanding of Sampling Terminology in Qualitative Research

Abstract

In this article we present the critical analysis of a recent methods overview, authored by McCrae and Purssell, as a means to highlight and address several important ambiguities and misunderstandings associated with terminology commonly used to describe sampling in qualitative research. We share several definitive understandings of sampling-related issues, which have been informed by a rigorous analysis of the methods literature from another earlier methods overview focused more broadly on sampling in qualitative research. Specifically, we address ambiguities and inconsistencies related to what can be sampled in qualitative research (the sampling unit), the concept of theoretical sampling, the term purposeful sampling, the appropriateness of initial sampling in grounded theory, and the need to distinguish between the functions of reporting one's sampling methods and describing the final participant sample. Finally, we argue that a continued lack of clarity in the language we use to describe what we do erodes the real and perceived quality of qualitative research. We point to the important role of methods overviews both for focusing attention on underdeveloped research methods topics and as a source of solutions to methodological problems.

Blending the Principles of Participatory Action Research Approach and Elements of Grounded Theory in a Disaster Risk Reduction Education Case Study

“…(Cooney, 2011;Davoudi et al, 2016;Tie et al, 2019) There is a challenge in establishing rigor-the balance between empirical closure and analytical distance although there are suggestions to increase rigor. (Glaser & Strauss, 1967;Chiovitti & Piran, 2003;Gentles & Vilches, 2017) from students, school principals, and DRR coordinator were useful inputs that provided insights for science teachers and researchers in exploring the teaching of DRR as a whole.…”

Continuing competency in ethical decision making: An interpretive description of occupational therapists’ perspectives

“…Initially, recruitment of key informants involved nomination of practicing occupational therapists that were professional associates known to the principal investigator and co-investigators and who were perceived to (a) have advanced clinical reasoning skills, (b) be able to reflect on and explain their reasoning, and (c) be comfortable answering potentially sensitive questions about decision making. Data gathered during this initial phase informed the subsequent phase of theoretical sampling (Gentles & Vilches, 2017). Theoretical sampling facilitated the inclusion of perspectives considered to be important to informing the analysis, including variations in gender, geographical location, practice area, and practice context (Thorne, 2016).…”

Perceptions of electronic cigarettes among ethno-culturally diverse Latino adults in four US urban centers

“…Focus group data were collected in 2014 as part of a National Institutes of Health (NIH) and FDA U50 grant to the Tobacco Regulatory and Addiction Center (A-TRAC) of the American Heart Association. A purposive sampling technique (Gentles et al 2015) was used to recruit study participants based on the following inclusion criteria: (1) self-identified Latino men and women; (2) ages 18-64 years; (3) residing in areas with a high concentration of Latinos in four US urban centers. A brief screening questionnaire was used to assess the eligibility of interested individuals.…”