scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal ArticleDOI

Does sample size matter in qualitative research?: A review of qualitative interviews in IS research

TL;DR: Little or no rigor for justifying sample size was shown for virtually all of the IS studies in this dataset, implying the subjective nature of sample size in qualitative IS studies.
Abstract: This study examines 83 IS qualitative studies in leading IS journals for the following purposes: (a) identifying the extent to which IS qualitative studies employ best practices of justifying sample size; (b) identifying optimal ranges of interviews for various types of qualitative research; and (c) identifying the extent to which cultural factors (such as journal of publication, number of authors, world region) impact sample size of interviews. Little or no rigor for justifying sample size was shown for virtually all of the IS studies in this dataset. Furthermore, the number of interviews conducted for qualitative studies is correlated with cultural factors, implying the subjective nature of sample size in qualitative IS studies. Recommendations are provided for minimally acceptable practices of justifying sample size of interviews in qualitative IS studies.
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Reading a book as this basics of qualitative research grounded theory procedures and techniques and other references can enrich your life quality.

13,415 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is recommended that qualitative health researchers be more transparent about evaluations of their sample size sufficiency, situating these within broader and more encompassing assessments of data adequacy.
Abstract: Choosing a suitable sample size in qualitative research is an area of conceptual debate and practical uncertainty. That sample size principles, guidelines and tools have been developed to enable researchers to set, and justify the acceptability of, their sample size is an indication that the issue constitutes an important marker of the quality of qualitative research. Nevertheless, research shows that sample size sufficiency reporting is often poor, if not absent, across a range of disciplinary fields. A systematic analysis of single-interview-per-participant designs within three health-related journals from the disciplines of psychology, sociology and medicine, over a 15-year period, was conducted to examine whether and how sample sizes were justified and how sample size was characterised and discussed by authors. Data pertinent to sample size were extracted and analysed using qualitative and quantitative analytic techniques. Our findings demonstrate that provision of sample size justifications in qualitative health research is limited; is not contingent on the number of interviews; and relates to the journal of publication. Defence of sample size was most frequently supported across all three journals with reference to the principle of saturation and to pragmatic considerations. Qualitative sample sizes were predominantly – and often without justification – characterised as insufficient (i.e., ‘small’) and discussed in the context of study limitations. Sample size insufficiency was seen to threaten the validity and generalizability of studies’ results, with the latter being frequently conceived in nomothetic terms. We recommend, firstly, that qualitative health researchers be more transparent about evaluations of their sample size sufficiency, situating these within broader and more encompassing assessments of data adequacy. Secondly, we invite researchers critically to consider how saturation parameters found in prior methodological studies and sample size community norms might best inform, and apply to, their own project and encourage that data adequacy is best appraised with reference to features that are intrinsic to the study at hand. Finally, those reviewing papers have a vital role in supporting and encouraging transparent study-specific reporting.

1,052 citations


Cites background or methods or result from "Does sample size matter in qualitat..."

  • ...Nevertheless, claims of saturation were never substantiated in relation to procedures conducted in the study itself, endorsing similar observations in the literature [25, 30, 47]....

    [...]

  • ...Other work has sought to examine practices of sample size reporting and sufficiency assessment across a range of disciplinary fields and research domains, from nutrition [34] and health education [32], to education and the health sciences [22, 27], information systems [30], organisation and workplace studies [33], human computer interaction [21], and accounting studies [24]....

    [...]

  • ...In line with previous studies [22, 30, 33, 34] the findings demonstrate that reporting of sample size sufficiency is limited; just over 50% of articles in the BMJ and BJHP and 82% in the SHI did not provide any sample size justification....

    [...]

  • ...On the basis of the researchers’ previous experience and the literature, [30, 31] we...

    [...]

  • ...Providing a sample size justification was not related to the number of interviews conducted, but it was associated with the journal that the article was published in, indicating the influence of disciplinary or publishing norms, also reported in prior research [30]....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In qualitative research, the determination of sample size is contextual and partially dependent upon the scientific paradigm under which investigation is taking place as discussed by the authors, which will require larger samples than in-depth qualitative research does, so that a representative picture of the whole population under review can be gained.
Abstract: Purpose Qualitative researchers have been criticised for not justifying sample size decisions in their research. This short paper addresses the issue of which sample sizes are appropriate and valid within different approaches to qualitative research. Design/methodology/approach The sparse literature on sample sizes in qualitative research is reviewed and discussed. This examination is informed by the personal experience of the author in terms of assessing, as an editor, reviewer comments as they relate to sample size in qualitative research. Also, the discussion is informed by the author’s own experience of undertaking commercial and academic qualitative research over the last 31 years. Findings In qualitative research, the determination of sample size is contextual and partially dependent upon the scientific paradigm under which investigation is taking place. For example, qualitative research which is oriented towards positivism, will require larger samples than in-depth qualitative research does, so that a representative picture of the whole population under review can be gained. Nonetheless, the paper also concludes that sample sizes involving one single case can be highly informative and meaningful as demonstrated in examples from management and medical research. Unique examples of research using a single sample or case but involving new areas or findings that are potentially highly relevant, can be worthy of publication. Theoretical saturation can also be useful as a guide in designing qualitative research, with practical research illustrating that samples of 12 may be cases where data saturation occurs among a relatively homogeneous population. Practical implications Sample sizes as low as one can be justified. Researchers and reviewers may find the discussion in this paper to be a useful guide to determining and critiquing sample size in qualitative research. Originality/value Sample size in qualitative research is always mentioned by reviewers of qualitative papers but discussion tends to be simplistic and relatively uninformed. The current paper draws attention to how sample sizes, at both ends of the size continuum, can be justified by researchers. This will also aid reviewers in their making of comments about the appropriateness of sample sizes in qualitative research.

687 citations

References
More filters
Book
01 Oct 1984
TL;DR: In this article, buku ini mencakup lebih dari 50 studi kasus, memberikan perhatian untuk analisis kuantitatif, membahas lebah lengkap penggunaan desain metode campuran penelitian, and termasuk wawasan metodologi baru.
Abstract: Buku ini menyediakan sebuah portal lengkap untuk dunia penelitian studi kasus, buku ini menawarkan cakupan yang luas dari desain dan penggunaan metode studi kasus sebagai alat penelitian yang valid. Dalam buku ini mencakup lebih dari 50 studi kasus, memberikan perhatian untuk analisis kuantitatif, membahas lebih lengkap penggunaan desain metode campuran penelitian, dan termasuk wawasan metodologi baru.

78,012 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Feb 2009
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors describe the process of inducting theory using case studies from specifying the research questions to reaching closure, which is a process similar to hypothesis-testing research.
Abstract: Building Theories From Case Study Research - This paper describes the process of inducting theory using case studies from specifying the research questions to reaching closure. Some features of the process, such as problem definition and construct validation, are similar to hypothesis-testing research. Others, such as within-case analysis and replication logic, are unique to the inductive, case-oriented process. Overall, the process described here is highly iterative and tightly linked to data. This research approach is especially appropriate in new topic areas. The resultant theory is often novel, testable, and empirically valid. Finally, framebreaking insights, the tests of good theory (e.g., parsimony, logical coherence), and convincing grounding in the evidence are the key criteria for evaluating this type of research.

40,005 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The discipline and practice of qualitative research have been extensively studied in the literature as discussed by the authors, including the work of Denzin and Denzin, and their history in sociology and anthropology, as well as the role of women in qualitative research.
Abstract: Introduction - Norman K Denzin and Yvonna S Lincoln The Discipline and Practice of Qualitative Research PART ONE: LOCATING THE FIELD Qualitative Methods - Arthur J Vidich and Stanford M Lyman Their History in Sociology and Anthropology Reconstructing the Relationships between Universities and Society through Action Research - Davydd J Greenwood and Morten Levin For Whom? Qualitative Research, Representations and Social Responsibilities - Michelle Fine et al Ethics and Politics in Qualitative Research - Clifford G Christians PART TWO: PARADIGMS AND PERSPECTIVES IN TRANSITION Paradigmatic Controversies, Contradictions and Emerging Confluences - Yvonna S Lincoln and Egon G Guba Three Epistemological Stances for Qualitative Inquiry - Thomas A Schwandt Interpretivism, Hermeneutics and Social Constructionism Feminisms and Qualitative Research at and into the Millennium - Virginia L Olesen Racialized Discourses and Ethnic Epistemologies - Gloria Ladson-Billings Rethinking Critical Theory and Qualitative Research - Joe L Kincheloe and Peter McLaren Cultural Studies - John Frow and Meaghan Morris Sexualities, Queer Theory and Qualitative Research - Joshua Gamson PART THREE: STRATEGIES OF INQUIRY The Choreography of Qualitative Research Design - Valerie J Janesick Minuets, Improvisations and Crystallization An Untold Story? Doing Funded Qualitative Research - Julianne Cheek Performance Ethnography - Michal M McCall A Brief History and Some Advice Case Studies - Robert E Stake Ethnography and Ethnographic Representation - Barbara Tedlock Analyzing Interpretive Practice - Jaber F Gubrium and James A Holstein Grounded Theory - Kathy Charmaz Objectivist and Constructivist Methods Undaunted Courage - William G Tierney Life History and the Postmodern Challenge Testimonio, Subalternity and Narrative Authority - John Beverley Participatory Action Research - Stephen Kemmis and Robin McTaggart Clinical Research - William L Miller and Benjamin F Crabtree PART FOUR: METHODS OF COLLECTING AND ANALYZING EMPIRICAL MATERIALS The Interview - Andrea Fontana and James H Frey From Structured Questions to Negotiated Text Rethinking Observation - Michael V Angrosino and Kimberly A Mays de Perez From Method to Context The Interpretation of Documents and Material Culture - Ian Hodder Re-Imagining Visual Methods - Douglas Harper Galileo to Neuromancer Auto-Ethnography, Personal Narrative, Reflexivity - Carolyn Ellis and Arthur P Bochner Researcher as Subject Data Management and Analysis Methods - Gery W Ryan and H Russell Bernard Software and Qualitative Research - Eben A Weitzman Analyzing Talk and Text - David Silverman Focus Groups in Feminist Research - Esther Madriz Applied Ethnography - Erve Chambers PART FIVE: THE ART AND PRACTICES OF INTERPRETATION, EVALUATION AND REPRESENTATION The Problem of Criteria in the Age of Relativism - John K Smith and Deborah K Deemer The Practices and Politics of Interpretation - Norman K Denzin Writing - Laurel Richardson A Method of Inquiry Anthropological Poetics - Ivan Brady Understanding Social Programs through Evaluation - Jennifer C Greene Influencing the Policy Process with Qualitative Research - Ray C Rist PART SIX: THE FUTURE OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH Qualitative Inquiry - Mary M Gergen and Kenneth J Gergen Tensions and Transformations The Seventh Moment - Yvonna S Lincoln and Norman K Denzin Out of the Past

26,318 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors define a leadership event as a perceived segment of action whose meaning is created by the interactions of actors involved in producing it, and present a set of innovative methods for capturing and analyzing these contextually driven processes.
Abstract: �Traditional, hierarchical views of leadership are less and less useful given the complexities of our modern world. Leadership theory must transition to new perspectives that account for the complex adaptive needs of organizations. In this paper, we propose that leadership (as opposed to leaders) can be seen as a complex dynamic process that emerges in the interactive “spaces between” people and ideas. That is, leadership is a dynamic that transcends the capabilities of individuals alone; it is the product of interaction, tension, and exchange rules governing changes in perceptions and understanding. We label this a dynamic of adaptive leadership, and we show how this dynamic provides important insights about the nature of leadership and its outcomes in organizational fields. We define a leadership event as a perceived segment of action whose meaning is created by the interactions of actors involved in producing it, and we present a set of innovative methods for capturing and analyzing these contextually driven processes. We provide theoretical and practical implications of these ideas for organizational behavior and organization and management theory.

22,673 citations


"Does sample size matter in qualitat..." refers background in this paper

  • ...One multiple-case study cited Eisenhardt [10] in the selection...

    [...]

  • ...One multiple-case study cited Eisenhardt [10] in the selection of ten cases; yet, provided no additional detail about reasons for selecting the number of interviews for each case [3]....

    [...]

Book
01 Jan 1967
TL;DR: In this paper, the discovery of grounded theory is discussed and grounded theory can be found in the form of a grounded theory discovery problem, where the root cause of the problem is identified.
Abstract: The discovery of grounded theory , The discovery of grounded theory , کتابخانه مرکزی دانشگاه علوم پزشکی تهران

22,245 citations


"Does sample size matter in qualitat..." refers background in this paper

  • ...While it is true that many archival documents, observation, and other sources of data are included in qualitative studies, particularly cases, qualitative interviews are the primary data source in the vast majority of IS positivist cases studies, as confirmed by Dubé and Paré [9]....

    [...]