How Many Interviews Are Enough to Identify Metathemes in Multisited and Cross-cultural Research? Another Perspective on Guest, Bunce, and Johnson’s (2006) Landmark Study

480 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

A simple method to assess and report thematic saturation in qualitative research (2020, background): “A two-tier structure with primary (“parent”) codes and constituent secondary (“child”) codes is a common form, but researchers may also want to identify and look for higher-level, meta-themes (e.g., Hagaman and Wutich [19]).”
Can sample size in qualitative research be determined a priori? (2018, background): “Extending Guest et al’s (2006) work, Hagaman and Wutich (2017) focus on metathemes – which they define as themes that are cross-cultural rather than culture- or sitespecific.”
How Many Focus Groups Are Enough? Building an Evidence Base for Nonprobability Sample Sizes (2017, background): “Research by Hagaman and Wutich (2017) suggests that cross-cultural research contexts may require more interviews to reach saturation than the aforementioned studies.”
‘Define, Explain, Justify, Apply’ (DEJA): An analytic tool for guiding qualitative research sample size (2021, methodology): “Galvin (2015) raised the oft-asked question of how many interviews are enough in qualitative studies (Baker & Edwards, 2012; Guest et al., 2006; Hagaman & Wutich, 2017; Kindsiko & Poltimäe, 2019; Hennink et al., 2016) by analysing 54 articles from six journals to generate formulae and equations…”