‘Unsatisfactory Saturation’: a critical exploration of the notion of saturated sample sizes in qualitative research

Measuring quality in qualitative research is a contentious issue with diverse opinions and various frameworks available within the evidence base. One important and somewhat neglected argument within this field relates to the increasingly ubiquitous discourse of data saturation. While originally developed within grounded theory, theoretical saturation, and later termed data/thematic saturation for other qualitative methods, the meaning has evolved and become transformed. Problematically this temporal drift has been treated as unproblematic and saturation as a marker for sampling adequacy is becoming increasingly accepted and expected. In this article we challenge the unquestioned acceptance of the concept of saturation and consider its plausibility and transferability across all qualitative approaches. By considering issues of transparency and epistemology we argue that adopting saturation as a generic quality marker is inappropriate. The aim of this article is to highlight the pertinent issues and encourage the research community to engage with and contribute to this important area.

[1]  A. Strauss,et al.  The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research aldine de gruyter , 1968 .

[2]  Anton J. Kuzel,et al.  Sampling in qualitative inquiry. , 1992 .

[3]  J. Morse The Significance of Saturation , 1995 .

[4]  M. Marshall Sampling for qualitative research. , 1996, Family practice.

[5]  S. Thorne Data analysis in qualitative research , 2000 .

[6]  G. Gaskell,et al.  Individual and Group Interviewing , 2000 .

[7]  Rosaline S Barbour,et al.  Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog? , 2001, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[8]  J. Morse,et al.  Verification Strategies for Establishing Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research , 2002 .

[9]  L. Davidson,et al.  Understanding and Evaluating Qualitative Research∗ , 2002, The Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry.

[10]  J. Potter Two kinds of natural , 2002 .

[11]  K. Caelli,et al.  ‘Clear as Mud’: Toward Greater Clarity in Generic Qualitative Research , 2003 .

[12]  Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie,et al.  Effect Sizes in Qualitative Research: A Prolegomenon , 2003 .

[13]  A. Tuckett Qualitative research sampling: the very real complexities. , 2004, Nurse researcher.

[14]  Judith Green,et al.  Qualitative methods for health research , 2004 .

[15]  E. Guba,et al.  Paradigmatic Controversies, Contradictions, and Emerging Confluences. , 2005 .

[16]  N. Leech,et al.  Taking the “Q” Out of Research: Teaching Research Methodology Courses Without the Divide Between Quantitative and Qualitative Paradigms , 2005 .

[17]  J. Meyrick What is Good Qualitative Research? , 2006, Journal of health psychology.

[18]  Sue Ziebland,et al.  Making sense of qualitative data analysis: an introduction with illustrations from DIPEx (personal experiences of health and illness) , 2006, Medical education.

[19]  L. Manderson,et al.  “Researcher Saturation”: The Impact of Data Triangulation and Intensive-Research Practices on the Researcher and Qualitative Research Process , 2007, Qualitative health research.

[20]  H. Starks,et al.  Choose Your Method: A Comparison of Phenomenology, Discourse Analysis, and Grounded Theory , 2007, Qualitative health research.

[21]  P. Have Doing conversation analysis , 2007 .

[22]  Glenn A. Bowen Naturalistic inquiry and the saturation concept: a research note , 2008 .

[23]  J. Grimshaw,et al.  What is an adequate sample size? Operationalising data saturation for theory-based interview studies , 2010, Psychology & health.

[24]  M. Mason Sample Size and Saturation in PhD Studies Using Qualitative Interviews , 2010 .

[25]  Sarah J. Tracy Qualitative Quality: Eight “Big-Tent” Criteria for Excellent Qualitative Research , 2010 .

[26]  Francine Toye,et al.  What is quality in qualitative health research? , 2011, Evidence Based Nursing.