Sample Sizes for 10 Types of Qualitative Data Analysis: An Integrative Review, Empirical Guidance, and Next Steps

Amber Wutich, Melissa Beresford, H. Russell Bernard

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

11 Scopus citations

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalInternational Journal of Qualitative Methods
Volume23
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2024
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • sample size
  • sampling
  • saturation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Education

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Sample Sizes for 10 Types of Qualitative Data Analysis: An Integrative Review, Empirical Guidance, and Next Steps'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this