SSOAR Logo
    • Deutsch
    • English
  • English 
    • Deutsch
    • English
  • Login
SSOAR ▼
  • Home
  • About SSOAR
  • Guidelines
  • Publishing in SSOAR
  • Cooperating with SSOAR
    • Cooperation models
    • Delivery routes and formats
    • Projects
  • Cooperation partners
    • Information about cooperation partners
  • Information
    • Possibilities of taking the Green Road
    • Grant of Licences
    • Download additional information
  • Operational concept
Browse and search Add new document OAI-PMH interface
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Download PDF
Download full text

(402.7Kb)

Citation Suggestion

Please use the following Persistent Identifier (PID) to cite this document:
https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-65470-2

Exports for your reference manager

Bibtex export
Endnote export

Display Statistics
Share
  • Share via E-Mail E-Mail
  • Share via Facebook Facebook
  • Share via Bluesky Bluesky
  • Share via Reddit reddit
  • Share via Linkedin LinkedIn
  • Share via XING XING

The Poor and Embarrassing Cousin to the Gentrified Quantitative Academics: What Determines the Sample Size in Qualitative Interview-Based Organization Studies?

Der arme und beschämende Cousin gentrifizierter quantitativer Ansätze: Was bestimmt die Stichprobengröße in qualitativen Interview-basierten Organisationsstudien?
[journal article]

Kindsiko, Eneli
Poltimäe, Helen

Abstract

It is essential for scholars to reflect on their research practices and critically assess scientific rigor. In the current article, we aim to critically review the state of qualitative research in organization studies by focusing on trends in sample sizes. Organizational scholars presenting qualitat... view more

It is essential for scholars to reflect on their research practices and critically assess scientific rigor. In the current article, we aim to critically review the state of qualitative research in organization studies by focusing on trends in sample sizes. Organizational scholars presenting qualitative, interview-based manuscripts tend to face the ongoing challenge of how many interviews are enough. The research reported in this article, covering 11 years and investigating 855 interview-based studies, provides empirical evidence that, across the years, the number of interviews seems to be rather high. The total sample included studies with more than 100 interviews (8% of the sample), more than 50 interviews (34%) and studies with more than 30 interviews (62%). Furthermore, when studies start to increase in sample size, they often do so at the expense of homogeneity across respondents. We conclude by giving some possible explanations for why we are facing such a situation today.... view less


Für Forschende ist es essenziell wichtig, die eigenen Praktiken zu reflektieren und das Einhalten wissenschaftlicher Standards kritisch zu beurteilen. In diesem Beitrag unterziehen wir den Status qualitativer Forschung und genauer Trends mit Blick auf Stichprobengrößen in der Organisationswissenscha... view more

Für Forschende ist es essenziell wichtig, die eigenen Praktiken zu reflektieren und das Einhalten wissenschaftlicher Standards kritisch zu beurteilen. In diesem Beitrag unterziehen wir den Status qualitativer Forschung und genauer Trends mit Blick auf Stichprobengrößen in der Organisationswissenschaft einer kritischen Prüfung. Organisationsforscher/innen, die zu Studien veröffentlichen, in denen qualitative Interviews zum Einsatz kamen, sind kontinuierlich mit der Frage konfrontiert, welche Zahl an Interviews ausreichend ist. Um Trends hierzu einschätzen zu können, haben wir Veröffentlichungen zu 855 Interview-basierten Studien über elf Jahre gesichtet. Dabei wurde deutlich, dass die Zahl der geführten Interviews über die Jahre relativ hoch zu sein scheint: Insgesamt wurden in 8% unseres Samples über 100 Interviews, in 34% über 50 Interviews und in 62% über 30 Interviews geführt. Zugleich geht die Erhöhung der Zahl an Interviews mit einem Rückgang homogener Stichproben einher. In unserem Beitrag diskutieren wir mögliche Gründe für diese aktuelle Problemlage.... view less

Keywords
organization research; qualitative method; interview; sample

Classification
Research Design
Methods and Techniques of Data Collection and Data Analysis, Statistical Methods, Computer Methods

Free Keywords
Saturation; sample size; saturation point

Document language
English

Publication Year
2019

Page/Pages
24 p.

Journal
Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 20 (2019) 3

DOI
https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-20.3.3200

ISSN
1438-5627

Status
Published Version; peer reviewed

Licence
Creative Commons - Attribution 4.0


GESIS LogoDFG LogoOpen Access Logo
Home  |  Legal notices  |  Operational concept  |  Privacy policy
© 2007 - 2025 Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR).
Based on DSpace, Copyright (c) 2002-2022, DuraSpace. All rights reserved.
 

 


GESIS LogoDFG LogoOpen Access Logo
Home  |  Legal notices  |  Operational concept  |  Privacy policy
© 2007 - 2025 Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR).
Based on DSpace, Copyright (c) 2002-2022, DuraSpace. All rights reserved.