Using conceptual depth criteria: addressing the challenge of reaching saturation in qualitative research
By J. Nelson. 2017
560 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Saturation remains a problematic concept within the field of qualitative research, particularly with regard to issues of definition and process. This article sets out some of the common problems with saturation and, with reference to one research study, assesses the value of adopting a range of ‘conceptual depth criteria’ to address problems of definition and process when seeking to establish saturation within a grounded theory approach. It is suggested that the criteria can act as a test to measure the progress of the theoretical sampling and thus ascertain the readiness of the research for the final analytical stages and theory building. Moreover, the application of ‘conceptual depth criteria’ provides the researcher with an evaluative framework and a tool for producing a structured evidence base to substantiate choices made during the theoretical sampling process.
Subfields: Education, Management Science and Operations Research, Sociology and Political Science
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/feab9e710bd9178342a700bc22e08095aa622293
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Education
In Sociology and Political Science
Citations in the corpus
- Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization (2017, background): “The view of saturation as an event has been problematized by others (Strauss and Corbin 1998; Dey 1999; Nelson 2016), and we have explored the implications of conceptualizing saturation in this way, arguing that it appears to give rise to a degree of uncertainty and equivocation, in part driven by…”
- What Influences Saturation? Estimating Sample Sizes in Focus Group Research (2019, unknown): “It goes beyond identifying the presence of issues and moves toward gaining “conceptual depth” to capture the range, complexity, subtlety, resonance, and thereby the validity of issues in data (Nelson, 2017).”