Cited by 2,597Ethnobotanical and Medicinal Plants StudiesQualitative Research Methods and EthicsSurvey Methodology and Nonresponse

Purposive sampling as a tool for informant selection

Open access
Tongco, Ma. Dolores C.·2007·Ethnobotany Research and Applications

Abstract

Informant selection is highly relevant for ethnobotanical research, as people are constantly looked upon for knowledgeand information. The purposive sampling technique is a type of non-probability sampling that is most effective when one needs to study a certain cultural domain with knowledgeable experts within. Purposive sampling may also be used with both qualitative and quantitative researchtechniques. The inherent bias of the method contributesto its efficiency, and the method stays robust even when tested against random probability sampling. Choosingthe purposive sample is fundamental to the quality of data gathered; thus, reliability and competence of the informantmust be ensured.

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 · 10.17348/era.5.0.147-158

Cites

62 of 62 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?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [74]74. Zent, S. 2001. Acculturation and ethnobotanical knowl- edge loss among the Piaroa of Venezuela: Demonstration of a quantitative method for the empirical study of tradi- tional ecological knowledge change. Pp. 190-211 in On Biocultural Diversity: Linking Language, Knowledge, and the Environment. Edited by L. Maffi. Smithsonian Institu- tion Press, Washington D.C. Zhen, L., M.A. Zoebisch, G. Chen & Z. Feng. 2006. Sus- tainability of farmers' soil fertility management practices: A case study in the North China Plain. Journal of Environ- mental Management 79:409-419.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tongco, M. D. C.
Affiliations
University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa (US)
Corresponding author
Tongco, Ma. Dolores C.
Venue
Ethnobotany Research and Applications
Published
2007-12-31
Volume
5
Pages
147
ISSN
1547-3465 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1820505434
Cited by
2,597
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 169 · 2025: 247 · 2024: 241 · 2023: 260 · 2022: 270 · 2021: 286 · 2020: 220 · 2019: 187 · 2018: 160 · 2017: 119 · 2016: 114 · 2015: 119 · 2014: 100 · 2013: 47 · 2012: 27
FWCI
6.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Ethnobotany Research and Applications (publishedVersion)
  • ScholarSpace (University of Hawaii at Manoa) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Ethnobotanical and Medicinal Plants Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
Keywords
purposive sampling, informant selection, ethnobotany, non-probability sampling, sampling bias, data quality

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