Sampling Richness and Qualitative Integrity: Challenges for Research With Families
Abstract
Sampling is one of the most difficult and contentious aspects of qualitative research design. There are few guidelines for sampling decisions or for understanding saturation in qualitative family research. The authors frame the problematic of data quality in the selection of units of analysis and observation and consider how to enhance sample richness. They outline considerations for data quantity and sample size as well as case‐ and variable‐based approaches. With multiple examples from recent and classic studies to illustrate the consequences of sampling decisions, they explore links between saturation and validity. Finally, they encourage researchers to craft a coherent statement on qualitative integrity to demonstrate how their sampling decisions are rooted in epistemology, theory, and richness and quality of data.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
If data collected from each person are useable and unique, meaningful input is collected from fewer participants, whereas increasing the number of observations of the same group of participants can better engage with the complexities of the data.
“If data collected from each person are useable and unique, meaningful input is collected from fewer participants, whereas they may increase the number of observations of the same group of participants in order to better engage with the complexities of the data (Roy et al., 2015).”
From Quality Criteria: General and Specific Guidelines for Qualitative Approaches in Psychology Research. A Concise Guide for Novice Researchers and Reviewers (2024) · cites this paper as Roy et al., 2015
Cites
The Discovery of Grounded Theory; Strategies for Qualitative Research
Glaser, B. G., Strauss, A. L., & Strutzel, E. (1968) · Nursing Research · doi:10.1097/00006199-196807000-00014 · Cited by 39,449 · see citing works
How Many Interviews Are Enough?: An Experiment with Data Saturation and Variability
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006) · Field Methods · doi:10.1177/1525822x05279903 · Cited by 20,808 · see citing works
Hartley, J. (2004) · Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research · doi:10.4135/9781446280119.n26 · Cited by 15,461 · see citing works
Sample size in qualitative research
Sandelowski, M. (1995) · Research in Nursing & Health · doi:10.1002/nur.4770180211 · Cited by 4,372 · see citing works
The Significance of Saturation
Morse, J. M. (1995) · Qualitative Health Research · doi:10.1177/104973239500500201 · Cited by 2,663 · see citing works
Sampling in qualitative research. Purposeful and theoretical sampling: Merging or clear boundaries?
Coyne, I. T. (1997) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2648.1997.t01-25-00999.x · Cited by 2,402 · see citing works
“To be of use”: enhancing the utility of qualitative research
Sandelowski, M. (1997) · Nursing Outlook · doi:10.1016/s0029-6554(97)90043-9 · Cited by 247 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Varpio, L., Ajjawi, R., Monrouxe, L. V., O'Brien, B. C., & Rees, C. E. (2017) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/medu.13124 · Cited by 1,028 · see citing works
Cena, E., Brooks, J., Day, W., Goodman, S., Rousaki, A., Ruby-Granger, V., & Seymour-Smith, S. (2024) · International Journal of Qualitative Methods · doi:10.1177/16094069241282843 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
“If data collected from each person are useable and unique, meaningful input is collected from fewer participants, whereas they may increase the number of observations of the same group of participants in order to better engage with the complexities of the data (Roy et al., 2015).”
- Authors
- Roy, K., Zvonkovic, A., Goldberg, A., Sharp, E., & LaRossa, R.
- Affiliations
- University of Maryland, College Park (US)
- Virginia Tech (US)
- Clark University (US)
- Texas Tech University (US)
- Georgia State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Roy, Kevin
- Venue
- Journal of Marriage and Family
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2015-01-14
- Volume
- 77
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 243-260
- ISSN
- 0022-2445 (ISSN-L)
- 1741-3737
- OpenAlex
- W2057099256
- Cited by
- 180
- References
- 7
- Citations by year
- 2026: 14 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 9
- FWCI
- 77.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Marriage and the Family (publishedVersion)
- Clark Digital Commons (Clark University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Data Analysis and Archiving
- Keywords
- saturation, data quality, family research, sample size, validity, epistemology, unit of analysis
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
