SAMPLE SIZE AND SAMPLING ISSUES IN QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

Main Article Content

Jamnean Joungtrakul

Abstract

Determining the sample size and the sampling method in qualitative research is one of the most challenging and confusing issues for novice researchers and those who are newly begin conducting qualitative research, especially in Thailand. The two most problematic questions are: (1) How is an acceptable sample size determined in qualitative research? and (2) What are appropriate sampling methods to be chosen for each qualitative research project applying different qualitative research strategies? These problems are due to the fact that there are several different approaches or strategies available to qualitative researchers and such different strategies require different sample sizes and sampling techniques. In some cases, a specific sampling technique is used for a specific qualitative research strategy. For example, theoretical sampling is specifically used for Grounded Theory. Currently, qualitative researchers in Thailand normally specify a fixed sample size and do not provide a justification or rationale in applying the sample size and sampling procedures. At the same time, the research literature related to how to determine sample size and sampling procedures in Thailand is very limited and is generally insufficient to give a better understanding about these issues. This paper aims to answer the two major questions posed above and is divided into four parts: (1) Introduction to and significance of the problem, as well as an outline of the content of the paper; (2) The concept of sample size in qualitative research; (3) The concept of sampling techniques in qualitative research; (4) Conclusion, discussion of the findings from the study; and recommendations.

Article Details

Section
Review Article

References

จำเนียร จวงตระกูล. (2550ก). การวิจัยเชิงคุณภาพ: เขียนข้อเสนอโครงการวิจัยหรือวิทยานิพนธ์ปริญญาเอกอย่างไรให้ได้รับอนุมัติ. กรุงเทพมหานคร: บริษัท ศูนย์กฎหมายธุรกิจอินเตอร์เนชั่นแนล จำกัด.

จำเนียร จวงตระกูล. (2550ข). การเรียนการสอนการวิจัยในหลักสูตรปริญญาเอกในมหาวิทยาลัยไทย. กรุงเทพมหานคร: บริษัท ศูนย์กฎหมายธุรกิจอินเตอร์เนชั่นแนล จำกัด.

จำเนียร จวงตระกูล. (2555). เรียนปริญญาเอกอย่างไรให้สำเร็จตามเป้าหมาย. กรุงเทพมหานคร: สำนักพิมพ์แห่งจุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย.

จำเนียร จวงตระกูล. (2553). การวิจัยเชิงคุณภาพ: เครื่องมือสร้างองค์ความรู้เพื่อการพัฒนาประเทศ. กรุงเทพมหานคร: บริษัทศูนย์กฎหมายธุรกิจอินเตอร์เนชั่นแนล จำกัด.

จำเนียร จวงตระกูล. (2560). การออกแบบการวิจัยภาคปฏิบัติ: การศึกษาจากบทความวิจัยในวารสารวิชาการ ในประเทศไทย. วารสารวิชาการแพรวากาฬสินธุ์, 4(2), 172-206.

จำเนียร จวงตระกูล. (2561). ระเบียบวิธีการวิจัย เชิงคุณภาพ ปริมาณ แบบผสม: บทกลอนสอนวิจัย. กรุงเทพมหานคร: บริษัท ศูนย์กฎหมายธุรกิจอินเตอร์เนชั่นแนล จำกัด.

สำนักงานราชบัณฑิตยสภา. (2554). ตัวอย่าง. พจนานุกรมฉบับราชบัณฑิตยสถาน พ.ศ. 2554. สืบค้นเมื่อ 26 พฤษภาคม 2561, จาก http://www.royin.go.th/dictionary/

Asiamah, N., Mensah, H. K., & Oteng-Abayie, E. F. (2017). General, target, accessible population: Demystifying the concepts for effective sampling. The Qualitative Report, 22(6), 1607-1622. Retrieved from http://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol22/iss6/9

Babbie, E. (2008). The Basics of Social Research (4 ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.

Biernacki, P., & Waldorf, D. (1981). Snowball Sampling: Problems and Techniques of Chain Referral Sampling. Sociological Methods & Research, 10(2), 141-163.

Burmeister, E. & Aitken, L. M. (2012). Sample size: How many is enough? Australian Critical Care, 25(4), 271-274. doi: 10.1016/j.aucc.2012.07.002

Charmaz, K. (2000). Constructivist and objectivist grounded theory. In N. K. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 509–535). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Traditions. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches (2nd

ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (3rd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Preface. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 199-208). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 1-32). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Draucker, C. B., Martsolf, D. S., Ross, R., & Rusk, T. B. (2007). Theoretical Sampling and Category Development in Grounded Theory. Qualitative Health Research, 17(8), 1137-1148.

Dusek, G. A., Yurova, Y. V., & Ruppel, C. P. (2015). Using social media and targeted snowball sampling to survey a hard-to-reach population: A case study. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 10, 279-299. Retrieved from http://ijds.org/Volume10/IJDSv10p279-299Dusek0717.pdf

Dworkin, S. L. (2012). Sample size policy for qualitative studies using in-depth interviews. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41(6), 1319-1320. doi:10.1007/s10508- 012-0016-6

Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of Convenience Sampling and Purposive Sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1-4. doi: 10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11

Fusch, P. I., & Ness, L. R. (2015). Are We There Yet? Data Saturation in Qualitative Research. The Qualitative Report, 20(9), 1408-1416. Retrieved from https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol20/iss9/3/

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.

Glaser, B. G. (1998). Doing grounded theory: Issues and discussions. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

Green, J., & Thorogood, N. (2004). Qualitative Research for Health Research. London: Sage Publications.

Guba, E. G. (1990). The Alternative Paradigm Dialog. In E. G. Guba (Ed.), The Paradigm Dialog (pp.17-27). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth Generation Evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with Data Saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59-82.

Higginbottom, G. M. A. (2004). Sampling issues in qualitative research. Nurse researcher, 12(1) 7-19. doiI: 10.7748/nr2004.7707.7712.7741.7747.c5927.

Iacobucci, D. (2010). Structural equations modeling: Fit Indices, sample size, and advanced topics. Journal of Cosumer Psychology, 20(1), 90-98.

Joungtrakul, J. (2016). Improving the Response Rate of Questionnaires in Conducting Quantitative Research. AFBE Journal, 9(2), 53-64.

Joungtrakul, J., Sheehan, B., & Aticomsuwan, A. (2013). Qualitative Data Collection Tool: A New Approach to Developing an Interview Guide. AFBE Journal, 6(2), 140-154.

Kock, N., & Hadaya, P. (2018). Minimum sample size estimation in PLS-SEM: The inverse square root and gamma-exponential methods. Information Systems Journal, 28(1), 227-261.

Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research Methodology-Methods and Techniques. (2nd ed.). New Age International Publishers, New Delhi.

Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining Sample Size for Research Activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607-610.

Kun, K. E., Kassim, A., Howze, E., & MacDonald, G. (2013). Interviewing Key Informants: Strategic Planning for a Global Public Health Management Program. The Qualitative Report,18(9), 1-17. Retrieved from https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol18/iss9/2

Kuzel, A. J. (1999). Sampling in qualitative inquiry. In B. F. Crabtree & M. B. Miles (Eds.), Doing qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 33–45). Thousan Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Marshall, B., Cardon, P., Poddar, A., & Fontenot, R. (2013). Does sample size matter in qualitative research?: A review of qualitative interviews in IS research. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 54(1), 11- 22. doi:10.1080/08874417.2013.11645667

Marshall, M. N. (1996). The Key Informant Technique. Family Practice, 13(1), 92-97. doi: 10.1093/fampra/13.1.92

McKenna, S. A., & Main, S. D. (2013). The role and influence of key informants in community-engaged research: A critical perspective. Action Research, 11(2), 113-124. doi: 10.1177/1476750312473342.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Morse, J. (1994). Designing funded qualitative research. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 220–235). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Morse, J. M. (2000). Determining sample size. Qualitative Health Research, 10(1), 3–5. doi: 10.1177/104973200129118183

Moser, A., & Korstjens, I. (2018). Practical guidance to qualitative research: Sampling, data collection and analysis. European Journal of General Practice, 24(1), 9-18. doi:10.1080/13814788.2017.1375091

Noordzij, M., Tripepi, G., Dekker, F. W., Zoccali, C., Tanck, M. W., & Jager, K. J. (2010). Sample size calculations: Basic principles and common pitfalls. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, 25(5), 1388–1393. doi:10.1093/ndt/gfp732

O’Reilly, M., & Parker, N. (2013). Unsatisfactory Saturation: A critical exploration of the notion of saturated sample sizes in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 13(2), 190–197. doi:10.1177/1468794112446106

Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2007). A Call for Qualitative Power Analyses. Quality and Quantity, 41(1), 105-121. doi:10.1007/s11135-005-1098-1

Palinkas, L., Horwitz, S., Green, C., Wisdom, J., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful Sampling for Qualitative Data Collection and Analysis in Mixed Method Implementation Research. Administration & Policy In Mental Health & Mental Health Services Research, 42(5), 533-544. doi:10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y

Rahi, S. (2017). Research Design and Methods: A Systematic Review of Research Paradigms, Sampling Issues and Instruments Development. International Journal of Economics & Management Sciences, 6(2), 403. doi:10.4172/2162-6359.1000403

Royal Society of Thailand. (2011). Sample. Royal Institute Dictionary (2011 ed.). Retrieved 26 May 2561. Retrieved from http://www.royin.go.th/dictionary

Saunders, B., Sim, J., Kingstone, T., Baker, S., Waterfield, J., Bartlam, B., & Jinks, C. (2018). Saturation in qualitative research: Exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Quality and Quantity, 52(9), 1893–1907. doi:10.1007/s11135-017-0574-8

Sim, J., Saunders, B., Waterfield, J., & Kingstone, T. (2018). Can sample size in qualitative research be determined in a priori? International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 21(5), 619-634. doi: 10.1080/13645579.2018.1454643

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basic of qualitative researrch: Techiques and procedures fro developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). CA: Sage Publications.

Strauss, A. L. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Suri, H. (2011). Purposeful sampling in qualitative research synthesis, Qualitative research journal, 11(2), 63-75. doi:10.3316/QRJ1102063

Tran, V. T., Porcher, R., Tran, V. C., & Ravaud, P. (2017). Predicting data saturation in qualitative surveys with mathematical models from ecological research. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 82(2), 71–78. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.10.001

Van Rijnsoever, F. (2015). (I can’t get no) saturation: A simulation and guidelines for minimum sample sizes in qualitative research. Research Innovation Studies Utrecht Working Paper Series 15.05. Utrecht: University of Utrecht.

Yamane, T. (1973). Statistics an Introductory Analysis (3 ed.). New York: Harper & Row Publishers.