Cited by 4,597Qualitative Research Methods and ApplicationsFocus Groups and Qualitative MethodsQualitative Research Methods and Ethics

Code Saturation Versus Meaning Saturation: How Many Interviews Are Enough?

Open access
Hennink, Monique M., Kaiser, Bonnie N., Marconi, Vincent C.·2017·Qualitative Health Research

Abstract

Saturation is a core guiding principle to determine sample sizes in qualitative research, yet little methodological research exists on parameters that influence saturation. Our study compared two approaches to assessing saturation: code saturation and meaning saturation. We examined sample sizes needed to reach saturation in each approach, what saturation meant, and how to assess saturation. Examining 25 in-depth interviews, we found that code saturation was reached at nine interviews, whereby the range of thematic issues was identified. However, 16 to 24 interviews were needed to reach meaning saturation where we developed a richly textured understanding of issues. Thus, code saturation may indicate when researchers have “heard it all,” but meaning saturation is needed to “understand it all.” We used our results to develop parameters that influence saturation, which may be used to estimate sample sizes for qualitative research proposals or to document in publications the grounds on which saturation was achieved.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1049732316665344

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • A master codebook was created until meaning saturation was reached.

    “A master codebook was created until meaning saturation was achieved.24”

    From Mechanisms of mindfulness in patients with migraine: Results of a qualitative study. (2023) · cites this paper as [24]

    The Method sections (pages unavailable in our copy) describe creating a codebook and refining it through all 25 interviews. They assess meaning saturation separately for individual codes, rather than saying the codebook was created until meaning saturation was achieved. The Discussion notes that some code dimensions were still emerging at 25 interviews. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Some authors combine two or more models of saturation, making its conceptualization less distinct.

    “Some authors appear to espouse interpretations of saturation that combine two or more of the models defined above, making its conceptualization less distinct.”

    From Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization (2018) · cites this paper as Hennink et al. (2017)

    The Introduction (‘Challenges in Applying Saturation’; page unavailable) says saturation is used beyond grounded theory and that, without adequate guidance, its meaning becomes unclear. This supports the claim about a less distinct conceptualization, but the paper does not say that authors combine two or more models of saturation. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Saturation is generally reached between 9 and 17 interviews.

    “Based on previous studies, saturation is generally reached between 9 and 17 interviews, with 10–15 in-depth interviews planned for this study.54”

    From Determinants of the choice of delivery mode in pregnant women: a convergent parallel mixed-methods study protocol (2026) · cites this paper as [54]

    The Results (Code Saturation) report code saturation at nine interviews, and the Introduction (Assessing Saturation) describes a prior study that reached overall saturation at 17. But this paper distinguishes code from meaning saturation, reports that meaning saturation required 16–24 interviews, and cautions against treating a particular interview count as a general rule. It therefore does not support the unqualified claim that saturation is generally reached between 9 and 17 interviews. (LLM, conf=0.89)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Twelve to fifteen participants for each qualitative study will be interviewed, which is regarded as adequate to achieve code saturation.

    “As for the qualitative studies, twelve to fifteen participants for each study will be interviewed, which is regarded as adequate to achieve code saturation in the qualitative analysis (Hennink et al., 2017).”

    From A study protocol of a randomized controlled study of internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy for adult attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (2023) · cites this paper as Hennink et al., 2017

    The Results (Code Saturation) report that code saturation was reached after nine interviews in the authors’ data, so 12–15 interviews is consistent with that finding. The Discussion cautions that the sample needed depends on study purpose, population, and the types of codes; it does not establish 12–15 as adequate for each qualitative study. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • A sample of N = 20 was aimed for based on general recommendation and experience in the field, with the potential for further recruitment if deemed necessary.

    “A sample of N = 20 was aimed for based on general recommendation (Francis et al., 2010; Hennink et al., 2017) and experience in the field with the potential for further recruitment if deemed necessary (e.g. because of low saturation).”

    From How to promote usage of telehealth interventions for farmers' mental health? A qualitative study on supporting and hindering aspects for acceptance and satisfaction with a personalized telephone coaching for depression prevention (2023) · cites this paper as Hennink et al., 2017

    The Introduction (‘Challenges in Applying Saturation’; page unavailable) says researchers must estimate sample size in advance and that most recommendations are experiential rules of thumb. The Discussion says the sample needed depends on the study and may expand with iterative sampling. These passages support planning a sample with room to recruit further, but not a general recommendation to aim for N = 20. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hennink, M. M., Kaiser, B. N., & Marconi, V. C.
Affiliations
  • Emory University (US)
  • Duke University (US)
Corresponding author
Hennink, Monique M.
Venue
Qualitative Health Research
Published
2016-09-26
Volume
27
Issue
4
Pages
591-608
ISSN
  • 1049-7323 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-7557
OpenAlex
W2524597629
Cited by
4,597
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 1096 · 2025: 933 · 2024: 700 · 2023: 538 · 2022: 482 · 2021: 379 · 2020: 219 · 2019: 125 · 2018: 92 · 2017: 30 · 2016: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
365.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Qualitative Health Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Emory University
  • Center for AIDS Research, University of Washington
  • National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (P30AI050409)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Focus Groups and Qualitative Methods
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Keywords
saturation, sample size determination, qualitative research, in-depth interviews
MeSH terms
Humans, Interviews as Topic, Research Design, Sample Size, Qualitative Research

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