Publication Date

1-1-2024

Document Type

Article

Publication Title

International Journal of Qualitative Methods

Volume

23

DOI

10.1177/16094069241296206

Abstract

There has been a recent explosion of articles on minimum sample sizes needed for analyzing qualitative data. The purpose of this integrated review is to examine this literature for 10 types of qualitative data analysis (5 types of saturation and 5 common methods). Building on established reviews and expanding to new methods, our findings extract the following sample size guidelines: theme saturation (9 interviews; 4 focus groups), meaning saturation (24 interviews; 8 focus groups), theoretical saturation (20–30+ interviews), metatheme saturation (20–40 interviews per site), and saturation in salience (10 exhaustive free lists); two methods where power analysis determines sample size: classical content analysis (statistical power analysis) and qualitative content analysis (information power); and three methods with little or no sample size guidance: reflexive thematic analysis, schema analysis, and ethnography (current guidance indicates 50–81 data documents or 20–30 interviews may be adequate). Our review highlights areas in which the extant literature does not provide sufficient sample size guidance—not because it is epistemologically flawed, but because it is not yet comprehensive and nuanced enough. To address this, we conclude by proposing ways researchers can navigate and contribute to the complex literature on sample size estimates.

Funding Number

SBE-2017491

Funding Sponsor

National Science Foundation

Keywords

sample size, sampling, saturation

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 License

Department

Anthropology

Plum Print visual indicator of research metrics
PlumX Metrics
  • Citations
    • Citation Indexes: 11
  • Usage
    • Downloads: 18
    • Abstract Views: 5
  • Captures
    • Readers: 149
see details

Share

COinS