SAMPLING IN

ANTITATIVE RESEARC H
QU
198
188 Time and cost 198
Introduction Non-response
ative sample 189 199
The importance of a represent Heterogeneity of the popula
tion
191 g
199
plin
Sampling error Types of non -probability sam 200
193 Convenien ce sam plin g
Types of probability sample 201
193 Quota sam pling
Simple random sample 203
.193
Systematic sample limits to gen eralization
194 20 4
Stratified random sampling fHor in survey research
194
Multi-stage cluster sampling ;eys 204
195 Sampling issues for onli11a iur
sample
The qualities of a probability 20 7
1< • ,r •t:ir.i;r-
197
Sample size 207
size 197 C.uesti ons fer re•;iew
Absolute and relative sample

CHAPTER OUTLI NE ciples and practices associ

ated
e tha t foll ow it are ver y much con cerned with prin
This chapter and the thre earch ; for
ly a concern for survey res
ch. Sa mp ling principles are not exclusive ver,
with social sur vey res ear s (see Chapter ). Howe
13
t to the sel ection of doc uments for content analysi be
example, they are relevan people who wo uld
on sam pling in con nec tion with the selection of
sis wil l be
in this chapter the empha pter explores:
que stions by inte rvie w or questionnaire . The cha
ask ed entative sample (the
(als o kno wn as extern al validity) and of a repres
eralization
• the related ideas of gen a sample to a population );
ear che r to generalize findings from
latter allows the res s has been employed;
-th at is, one in wh ich a random selection proces
sample
• the idea of a probability
; the systematic sample ; the
of pro bab ility sam ple : the simple random sample
• the main types r sample ;
and the multi-stage cluste
stratified random sample ;
;
in deciding on sample size
• the main issues involved which is widely used .in market
non -pr oba bility sam ple , including quota sampling,
• different types of
research and opinion polls;
r in survey research;
• potential sources of erro
online surveys .
• some sampling issues in
188 9 Sampling in quantitative research

Introduction i~i-Kl1@1®¥1Mi@i1 ihii 1

This chapter is concerned with some important aspects Decide on topic/area to be researched
of conducting a survey, but it presents only a partial pic-
ture, because there are many other steps. In this chapter Review literature/theories relating to to
+
we are concerned with the issues involved in selecting
respondents for survey research, although the principles
Formulate res+rch question ~
+
involved apply equally to other approaches to
quantitative research, such as content analysis. Chapters 9,
10, and 11 deal with the data collection aspects of con- Consider whether a social survey is appropr t
ducting a survey, while Chapters 15 and 16 deal with the (if not, cons,'der an a Iternat ·rve research design) ra e
analysis of data.
Figure 9 .1 is intended to outline the main steps involved
+
Consider what kind of population will be appropriate
in planning and conducting survey research. The plan-
ning will begin with an examination of general research +
Consider what kind of sample design will be employed
issues that are to be investigated. These are gradually nar-
rowed down so that they become research questions,
which may take the form of hypotheses, though this is not
+
Explore whether there is a sampling fra me that can be
necessarily the case. The movement from research issues employed
to research questions is likely to be the result of reading
the literature relating to the issues. Decide on mode of adm inistration
+
Once the research questions have been formulated, (face-to-face, telephone, postal, email, online)
the planning of the fieldwork can begin. In practice,
decisions relating to sampling and to the research instru-
Develop questions (and devise answer
+
ment will overlap, but they are presented in Figure 9 .1 as alternatives fo r closed questions)
'--- - - -- -
part of a sequence. The survey researcher needs to
decide what kind of population is suited to the investiga- +
Review question::; and assess face validity
tion of the topic and also needs to formulate a research ' - - - - --
instrument and decide how it should be administered.
The 'research instrument' may be a structured Pilot questions
+
interview schedule (discussed in Chapter 10) or a
+
self-completion questionnaire (Chapter 11). There are
several different ways of administering such instru-
Revise questions J
ments. Figure 9.2 outlines the main types that are likely
Finalize quest ion naire/schedule
+ J
to be encountered.
Quantitative research almost invariably involves sam-
pling. In this chapter, we will be mostly concerned with L___ s_a_m.. .'p.__l.e_
____
+
.::.. fr_o:__m___::__ _J
po.. .'p.__u_la_t_io_n_ _ _ _
sampling for social survey research involving data col-
lection by structured interview or questionnaire. In
Administer quest ionnaire/schedule to sample
social survey research, sampling constitutes a key step in
the research process, a s illustrated in Figure 9.1. How-
ever, other methods of quantitative research also involve Transform completed questionnaires/schedules
sampling considerations, as will be seen in Chapter 13, into computer-readable data (coding)
where we will examine structured observation and con-
tent analysis. The principles of sampling involved are
r-----___:_
♦--~ Analyse data ~
more or less identical in connection w ith these other
methods, though frequently oth er considerations come r
r -_ __ ♦
...:..___-~
L Interpret fi ndings ______-,
to the fore as well.

Cons ider implications of findi ngs for resea

 The importance of a representative samp
le 189

Survey

Structured Self-completion
interview questionnaire

t t i ♦
Face-to-face Telephone
Supervised
5
I Po~tal I / internet I
I
t t
Paper + pencil
1
I C~PI I Paper ; pencil
B I
+I
Embedded
7
I
Atta~hed

The importa nce of a ~·::·!pr.esent ative sample

by inter view is
c1niv usit y or them , since conducting surv ey rese arch
Many of the read ers of this book w ill br. sum ing, all
at university considerably more expensive and time -con
college students. At som e poin t in your stay Chap ter 10).
de colle ges) things being equal, than by questionnaire (see
(we will use this term from now on to inclu le stud ents
of your fel- It is almo st certa in that you will need to samp
you may have won dere d abou t the attit udes your univ er-
t thei r behav- from the total popu latio n of stud ents in
low students to vario us matt ers, or abou num ber of
abou t thei r sity to colle ct data from a man agea ble
iour in certa in cont exts , or som ethi ng
ine any or all resp onde nts.
backgrounds. If you were to deci de to exam sufficient to
cond uctin g Bu twil l any old sample suffice? Would it be
of these three area s, you mig ht cons ider cam pus (if
tion nair es in loca te yourself in a cent ral posi tion on your
structured interviews or send ing out ques the stud ents
udes , and your university has one) and then inter view
order to find out abou t thei r beha viou r, attit in a posi tion to
to cons ider who com e past you and who m you are
backgrounds. You wou ld, of cour se, have icien t to go
tion nair es, inter view ? Alte rnati vely, wou ld it be suff
how best to design your inter view s or ques le to be inter -
sion s that arou nd your stud ent unio n aski ng peop
and the issues that are invo lved in the deci yone on your
arch instr u- viewed? Or to send ques tionn aires to ever
need to be made abou t desi gnin g thes e rese
the focu s of course?
ments and adm inist ering them will be wan t to be
that poin t, The answ er depe nds on whe ther or not you
Chapters 9-11. However, befo re gett ing to enti re stud ent
lem. Let us able to generalize your find ings to the
you are likely to be conf ront ed with a prob as disc usse d in
stud ents . It body in your univ ersit y. If you do- and
~ay that your university has arou nd 10,000 of quan titat ive
15
extremely unlikely that you will have the
time and Cha pter 8, one of the preo ccup atio ns
that any of the
resources to collect data from all thes e stud
ents . It is resea rche rs is gene raliz atio n-it is unlik ely
. . prev ious para -
lllllikely that you wou ld be able to send quest10nna1res three samp ling str~tegies prop osed in the
to all 10 000 and then proc ess the resu lts, and even grap h would_ proVIde you with a representa
tive sample of
'
ro gene raliz e
more Unlik ely that you wou ld be able to inter view all
of all stud ents m your univ ersit y. To be able
190 9 Sampling in quantitative research

your findings from your sample to the population from sample? There are various reasons, ofwhich t
which it was selected, the sample must be representative. stand out: he fo)]O\v.
lllg
This is a fundamentally important point, because the aim
of analysing data from a sample is to make inferences • The first two approaches depend heaVi
availability of students during the ti ly Upon th
about the larger population from which the sample was me or ti e
drawn, without having to try to collect data from the
you search them out. Not all students mes that
are lik 1
equally available at that time so the e Yto be
whole population. See Key concept 9 .1 for an explanation ' sample .
of terms concerning sampling. reflect those students who are not available. Will llot
Why might the strategies for sampling students previ- • The first two approaches also depend O h
n t e stud
ously outlined be unlikely to produce a representative going to the locations. Not all students Will ents
necessaruy

KEY CONCEPT 9.1

Basic terms and concepts in sampling
• Population: basically, the universe of units from which the sample is to be selected. The term 'units' is employed
because it is not necessarily people who are being sampled-the researcher may wa nt to sample from a
universe of nations, cities, regions, fi rms, etc. Thus, 'population' has a much broader meaning in sampling than
it does in the everyday use of the term (meaning the total number of people in a geographical area).
• Sample: the segment of the population that is selected for investigation . It is a subset of the population. The
method of selection may be based on a probability or a non-probability approach (see later).
• Sampling frame : the listing of all units in the population from which the sample will be selected.
• Representative sample: a sample that reflects the population accurately so •!·,c1t ,tis a mic rocosm of the
population.
• Sampling bias: a distortion in the representativeness of the sample that ari-;es when mem bers of the
population (or more precisely the sampling frame) vary in terms of how likely they are to be included in the
sample, suc h that some groups are over-represented, and others under-represe nted by comparison with their
proportions in the population.
• Probability sample: a sample that has been selected using random selection so that each unit in the
population has a known c hance of being selected. It is generally assumed that a representative sample is
m ore likely to be the outcome when this method of selection from the population is employed. The aim of
probability sam pling is to keep sampling error (see later) to a minim um.
• Non-probability sample: a sample that has not been selected using a random selection method. Essentially,
this implies that some units in the population are more likely to be selected than others.
• Sampline error: the difference between a sample and the population from wh ich it is selected, even though a
probability sample has been selected.
• Non-sampling error: differences between the population and the sam ple that arise either from deficiencies in
the sampling approach, such as an inadequate sampling frame or non-response (see later), or from such
problem s as poor q uestion wording, poor interviewing, or flawed processing of data.
• Non-response: a source of non-sampling error that is particularly likely to happen when individuals are being rne
d orfor so
sampled . It occurs w henever some members of the sample refuse to cooperate cannot be contacte • .
. ' izat1on}.
reason ca nnot supply the required data (for example, because they are no longer working in the organ .
. . . . II units in a
• Census: the collection of data from an entire population . Thus, if data are collected in relation to a data.
pop ulation, rather than in relation to a sample of units of that population the data are treated as census n
The phrase ' the census' typica lly refers to collection of data from all me~bers of t he population of a natios a
·s, a na1·1onaI census. Many countries· around the world undertake a census every few years ·n aa
state--that 1 1
way of genera ting a snapshot of a range of social and econom ic features of their populations. However,
statistica l context, like the term population, the idea of a census has a broader meaning than this.

locate yourself or go to
the
ass the point where you
. tl
. , or th ey may vary s1gru can yi n the -
'fj fre
p dent union
stu
movements are
th which the. y do so. Their .
quency
wi
resi-
s as where their halls of
Jikely to reflect such thing ir
are situated, or where the
dence or accommodation ain ,
or their social habits. Ag
de aranents are located, · g ou t on
I . uld me an rru·ssm
to prely on these ocaaons wo
ent them.
students who do no t frequ
ely, tha t your decisions ab
out
, It is possible, not to say lik
ll be influenced by your
which people to approach wi
endly or cooperative the
peo-
judgements about how fri le
be or by how comfortab
le concerned are likely to
students of the same (or
;ou feel about interviewing
elf, as well as by many oth
er
different) gender to yours
factors.
rd strategy is that students
on
, The problem with the thi
e the same subject as ch
ea
your course by definition tak
t be representative of all
other and therefore will no
students in the university.
pling
case of all thr ee sam
In other words, in the are
s about whom to sample
approaches, your decision c-
nal judgements, by prospe
influenced too much by perso ia
, or by your implicit criter
tive respondents' availability age
ns mean that, in the langu
for inclusion. Such limitatio A bia sed
ple will be biased.
of survey sampling, your sam m the case of something lik
resent the population fro
sample is one that does not rep , bia s
ed. As far as possible
which the sample was select . In
selection of your sample
should be removed from the d However, after non-respon
to remove bias altogeth er
an
fact, it is incredibly difficult
to be
to derive a truly representat
ive sample . What needs
an
are taken to keep bias to
done is to ensure that steps
absolute minimum.
Sampling error 191
Key
can be identified (see
Three sources of bias
nation of terms):
concept 9· 1 for an expla
is
andom sampling method
• Ifa non-probability or non-r l
used. If the meth 0 d used to se ect the sample is
not ran -
that human judgement wi
ll
dom, there is a possibility
s, making some members
of
affect the selection proces
.
th ep 1 · to be selected than others
. opu anon more likely the use
eliminated through
This source of bias can be . ure for
of probability or ran dom sampling, the proced
in this chapter.
which is described later
dequate. If the sampling
• If th e ~ampling frame is ina inaccurate, or suffers
frame is not comprehensiv
e or is
ple
similar deficiency, the sam
from some other kind of en if
resent the population, ev
tha t is derived cannot rep
pling method is employed.
a random or probability sam
to participate or cannot be
• Ifsome sample members refuse e
, if there is non-response. Th
contacted-in other words to
se is that those who agree
problem with non-respon who
various ways from those
participate may differ in es ma y
Some of the differenc
do not agree to participate.
ch question or questions.
If
be significant to the resear
may be possible to check
ho w
the data are available, it
onse, the resulting sample
far, when there is non-resp
. It is often possible to do thi
s
differs from the population
s such as gender or age, or,
in
in terms of characteristic stu-
e a sample of university
's characteristics reflect the
dents, whether the sample dy.
of the students' areas ofstu
entire population in terms -
se it is usually extremely dif
er differences exist between
ficult to determine wheth -
ple in terms of 'deeper' fac
the population and the sam
tterns of behaviour.
tors, such as attitudes or pa

Sampling error
be equally split in
• . . . sam pli ng we wo uld ex pect ou r sample of 50 to
In order to appreciate the s1gmf1cance of there is a
r ter ms of thi s va ria ble, as in Figure 9.4. If
error for ach.ieving. conside tha t we ha ve one
F' a representative sample ' am ou nt of sampling err or, so
. ion of sm all
agme we have a po pu lat
7
igures 9 3-9
2oo plo·yee · · Im no t ap praised and one too
d Im ag ine em ployee too many who is
em we want a sample of 50 . . In Figure 9.6
as Well h s, an th . us is few wh o is, it will look like Figure 9.5
t at one of iables of concern to us de gr ee of ov er-
wheth rnotem I e var . rm an ce we se e a ra th er mo re se rio
ero p oyees receive regula r pe rfo no t receive
appraisal fr 0 the i · • d th at rep res en tat ion of employees who do
s m. r 1mmed1ate supervisor, an ee too many who are
the popuJa . 15
do and th tlon equally
h ose wh o do
div ide
.
d betw een
not. This split is repres
tho
en
se
ted
wh o appraisals. This time there are thr
by no t ap pra ise d an d three too few who are
. In Figure 9. 7
entation of employ-
I
t e vertical li
tha t div id h ion int o tw o we ha ve a ve ry ser ious over-rep res
haJVes (see p· ne es t e po . pu lat ce appraisals,
igure 9.3) · If the sample 1s resen tat ive , ee s wh o do no t receive pe rfo rman
rep
19 2 9 Sampling in quantitative research

P,ilj' , H r u Y :Si,!,■ -·
;±1 "dfM dU15W'ISll:Nt111Pi&'l'bf'Ulk jiH!i,N. 1,,11;;.114;,ji
··---·-- ,..,__,.,.__, ,_
Have performance Do not have
Do not have performance
Have performance appraisal Perform
appraisal appraisal a~Ce
appraisal O O O O O O O O O O
O o O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 O0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Oo oo o o
0 O O O O O O O O 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 Oo
O o O o O O O O O 0 Ooo o o o
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 00000 0
o o o O O O O O O 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o o O o O O O O O 0 0 0 00000000 o o o - 00
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 000 0000 0 000 ° 00
o o O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O
o o O O O O O O O 0 o o o o o o ._
o _ o_ o_ o-+_o__:o:.....::o:._:::
o_'-o O o
0 O O O O O O O O 0 O0
00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0-0 0 0 00
O O O O O O O O O 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ° 0
O O O O O O O O O 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 00000000 0 00 00 0 00 00
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

I
f.ijHffii1A.,w,,;1;;;;.;1 1¥!liiiMLifi,iiiiiiMI
Do not have performance Have performance Do not have performance
Have performance
appraisal appraisal appraisal
appraisal
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 00 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n n 0 0 0 000000000 0
0 0 0 0 IJ ,.. 0fo O 0 000000000 0
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 •0 0 0 0 0 0000000 0
J
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .:, ,. ' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O OO

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 , 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 --
1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 00 0 0000000 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0000 000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 ~
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 000 000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000

because there are 35 employees in the sample who are

rijMffiW111uiiiiii,,iiiiiMI not appraised, which is much larger than the 2S who
should be in the sample.
Have performance Do not have performance
red earlier,
It is important to appreciate that, as sugges
appraisal appraisal funinatesaJll·
probability sampling does not and cannot e
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ill saJllP1e,a
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0
piing error. Even with a well-crafted probab · ryHowe,......,,
0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O
r:::-:--:--:--+----
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
degree of sampling error is likely to creep IJl. n·
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. . h ce than no
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
probability sampling stands a better c an . ched
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
probability sampling of keeping sampling error ill e~a-
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . . lik the outcolll
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O
so t hat 1t does not end up looking e pliJ18
l t'f salll
tured in Figure 9.7. Moreover, probabt 1 . giJtal
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0
o o o o o "ol o o o o . e teslln
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
allows the researcher to employ significanc . 0 rroai
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . . h pulan° .
perffi!ts mferences to be made about t e po J,..,s¢lil1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . ill~~wv
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0
which the sample was selected. These w
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Chapter 16.
 Types of probability samp le 193

fypes of probability sample

e are inte reste d in levels of train ing' skill 4
· LiSr all the employees in the popu
lation and assign
jnethat W that our case,
rrnag t and lear ning amo ng emp loye es, and them consecutive numbers from I to N. In
Joprnen, n
deve xarnine the vari able s that rela te to vari atio this will be 1 to 9,00 0.
ant toe mig ht
weW f train ing they have und erta ken. We S. Using a table of rand om numbers,
or (more likely) a
. Jevels o nduc t our rese arch m . . 1 nea rby com -
e om num-
in a smg com pute r prog ram that can gene rate rand
'de to co be emp loy- that lie
deci . ans that our pop ulat ion will all bers, select n (450) different random numbers
Th1s rne n that we will employees
panY•rhatcornpany, whic h in turn will mea betw een 1 and N (9,0 00). Select the 450
• es of rand om
ees in neralize our findings only to emp loye who se num ber corresponds to each of the
ble toge
be 8 We simp ly cann ot assu me that leve ls of num bers .
hat company. r
t . d their corr elate s will be the sam e in othe 6 . The employees to which then (450)
rand om numbers
in.mg an wan t our rese arch
era . We migh t deci de that we refe r cons titut e the sample.
companies. on full- time emp loye es, so that
d cted only . ess. First, ther e is
to be con u
d subcontracted wor kers are omi tted . Ima
g- Two poin ts are strik ing abou t this proc
. manifest itself.
part-ome an
here are 9 000 full- time emp loye es in the almo st no oppo rtun ity for hum an bias to
ective crite-
ine coothat t ' Employees would not be selected on such subj
appr oach able .
company. ria as whe ther they look ed friendly and
ely mec hani -
The sele ction of who m to inter view is entir
t on the employ-
cal. Secondly, the process is not depe nden
Simple random sample ees' avai labil ity. They do not have to be
work ing in the
c form of inter view er's proximity to be included in the sample. The
The simple random sam ple is the mos t basi
unit of proc ess of selection is done with out their knowledge. It is
robability sample. With rand om sam plin g, each er that they
;he population has an equa l prob abil ity of
incl usio n in not unti l they are cont acte d by an inter view
the sample. Imag ine that we deci de that
we hav e know that they are part of a social survey.
use a table of
enough money to inter view 450 emp loye es
at the com - It used to be com mon for rese arch ers to
som e textbooks
pany. This means that the prob abil ity of incl
usio n in the rand om num bers to sele ct a sample, and
easi est way to
still incl ude such tables as an appendix. The
sample is the man y ran-
gene rate a table , how ever, is to use one of
d online. Alter-
- 450
. 1 ID
- Le.
· 20 dom num ber gene rato rs whic h can be foun
9,000 om num bers
natively, it is possible to gene rate a list of rand
esse d 2s stical packages.
This is known as the samplingfraction and is expr usin g Mic roso ft Excel, SPS S, or othe r stati
n
N
Systematic sample
n size.
where n is the sample size and N is the popu latio is the syst ema tic
rand om sam ple A vari atio n on the simp le rand om sam ple
The key steps in devising our simp le ct unit s dire ctly
can be represented as follows: sam ple. With this kind of sam ple, you sele
out reso rting to
from the sam plin g fram e-th at is, with
1. Define the population. We have deci ded
that this will
rand om num bers .
be all full ti This is our e in 20. Wit h a
N . · _me employees at the company. We kno w that we are to sele ct I emp loye
and m this case is 9,000. a rand om star t
syst ema tic sam ple, we wou ld mak e
2. Select or de . usin g a tabl e of
It is lik Vise a comprehensive sam plin g fram e. betw een I and 20 inclu sive, poss ibly by
star t with the
depa .-.
ely that th
e company's hum an reso urce (HR ) rand om num bers . Let's assu me that we
•uuent 'II ever y twen tieth
Will enabJ WI keep records of all emp
loye es. This num ber 16. The reaf ter, we wou ld take
th h go:
e us to exclud e ose w o do not mee t our
criteria f, . emp loye e on the list. So the sequ ence will
or Inclusion · part -time emp loye es and
thosewh - 1.e.
oworkon th . 16, 36, 56, 76, 96, 116, etc.
ees of the e preffilses but are not emp loy-
company. gn num bers to
3
· De ·cte Yours This app~oac h obv iate s the need to assi
CI up na mes of the
this •u be 450. ample size (n) · u, h
vve ave deci ded that emp loye es' nam es and then to look
Wi draw n by the
emp loye es who se num bers have been
194 9 Sampling in quantitative research

random selection process. It is importan t to ensure, how- and by whether or not employees are b
certain salary level or occupati onal a ove or
ever, that there is no inherent ordering of the sampling
frame, since this may bias the resulting sample. If there is to identify employe es in terms of th&racte. 1rit is ~I~~
. . . "bl ese s.... e~-tluJt
na, 1t 1s poss1 e to use pairs of cr·t . "atjh.•
some ordering to the list, the best solution is to rearrang e it. 1 ena O •nng .
(such as departm ental member shi r several C?iCrit,e_
occupati onal grade). p Plus &end . ~
. er 1>l11.
Stratified random sampling S tra tifie d sampIing 1s really feasible ...
• • • Only Wh
evant m1orma tton 1s avatlable . In other Word en the tel
• C

In our imagina ry study of company employe es, one of the

are available that allow the ready id . . s, Whend<lta·
features that we might want our sample to exhibit is a pro- entificati0
portiona l represen tation of the different departm ents in bers of the populati on in terms of the str . . n of Ille
. . sens1"ble to employ th· atifyjn&Ctiter·ll\.
. .a) , 1t1s
which employe es work. It might be that the kind of (orcnten
. . . 1s sarn Ii 100
But 1t ts unlikely to be practical or eco . P ngrneth,,,.
departm ent an employe e works in is viewed as relevant to .. . . nom1ca1 I"f ""·
a wide range of attitudin al features that are in turn rele- t1ficat1on of populati on member s tor s tratifi tbeiden • ·
poses entails a great deal of work becau cation Pur.
vant to the study of skill developm ent and training. Gen- se th ere is no
available listing in terms of strata.
erating a simple random sample or a systemat ic sample
might yield such a represen tation, so that the proporti on
of employe es from the sales and marketin g departm ent in Multi-stage cluster sampling
the sample would be the same as that in the employe e
populati on and so on. Thus, if there are 1,800 employees In the example we have been dealing with, employee
st0
in the sales and marketin g departm ent, using our sam- be interview ed are located in a single company. 1ntel'V_iew
.
pling fraction of 1 in 20, we would expect to have 90 ers Will have to arrange their interview s with the sampled·
employe es in our sample from this departm ent of the employees, but, because they are all working on the
premises (for the purpose s of this hypothetical example same
compan y. Howeve r, because of samplin g error, it is .
we are assumm g that the company has only one locanon) .
unlikely that this will occur and more likely that there will
be a differenc e, so that there may be, say, 85 or 93 from they will not be involved in a lot of travel. However ,unag-'
·

this departm ent. ine that we wanted a national sample of employees. It is

Because it is very likely that the company will include in
its records the departm ent in which employees are based,
or indeed may have separate lists of employees for each
departm ent, it will be possible to ensure that employees are
accurate ly represen ted in terms of their departm ental
member ship. In the language ofsampling, this means strat-
ifying the populati on by a criterion (in this case, depart-
mental member ship) and selecting either a simple random
sample or a systemat ic sample from each of the resulting
strata. In the present example , if there are five departm ents
we would have five strata, with the numbers in each stra-
tum being one-twe ntieth of the total for each departm ent.
The advanta ge of stratified samplin g in a case like this
is clear: it ensures that the resulting sample will be dis-
tributed in the same way as the populati on in terms of
the stratifyi ng criterion . If you use a simple random or
systema tic samplin g approac h, you may end up with a
distribu tion like that of the stratified sample, but it is
unlikely . Two points are relevant here. First, you can
conduct stratified samplin g sensibly only when it is rela-
tively easy to identify and allocate units to strata. If it is
not possible or it would be very difficult to do so, strati-
fied samplin g will not be feasible. Secondly , you can use
more than one stratifyi ng criterion . Thus, it may be that
you would want to stratify by departm ent, by gender,
likely that intervie wers would have to travel the length
and breadth of the country to interview the sampled indi-
viduals. This would add a great deal to the time and cost
of doing the research . Th is kind of problem occurs when-
ever the aim is to inte(vie w a sample that is to be drawn
from a widely dispersed populati on, such as a national
populati on, or a large region, or even a large city.
One way in which it is possible to deal with this poten-
tial problem is to employ cluster sampling. With cluster
samplin g, the primary samplin g unit (the first stage of
the samplin g procedu re) is not the units of the popula·
tion to be sampled but groupin gs of those units. It is tbe
th
latter groupin gs or aggrega tions of populatio n units at
are known as clusters. Imagine that we want a nationally
s who are.
represen tative sample of 5,000 emp loyee
· · the UK (th15h
working for the 100 largest compames m
informa tion is publicly availabl e and generate d t~odug .
h e-1n ex,
the FTSE-F inancia l Times Stock Exe ang . al.iZa·
compan y size is measure d in terms of market capJC lin&
tematic saJJlP uld
. ) . U smg
t10n . .
simple ran d om or sys
l hich wo
would yield a widely disperse d samp e, w 1u·
. wers one 50
result in a great deal of travel for intervte · 10yee5
. . h b .es and then emP
t10n m1g t e to sample compam jlirysaJII·
from each of the sampled compan ies. A probab h 5r:age.
pling method would need to be employe d at eac
 The qualities of a probability sample
195

RESEARCH IN FOCUS 9.2

A survey of Australian workplaces and employees utilizing
stratified random sampling and cluster sampling
The 2015 Study of Australian Leadership (SAL) (see Research in focus 3.13) utilized a cluster-sampling approach
and stratified random sampling. The aim of the study was to collect data from workplaces and their employees.
Sampling took place in three stages. First, the researchers generated a representative sample of Australian
workplaces. Because no population frame of Australian workplaces exists, a sample of organizations was drawn
that
from a commercial list of businesses. The sample of organizations was stratified by industry and size to ensure
the resulting sample was representative of Australian organizations on these two dimensions. Secondly, workplaces
and
were selected from within organizations, except in the case of single-site organizations, where the organization
the workplace were one and the same. In multi-site organizations, different numbers of workplaces were selected,
depending on the total number of sites: one workplace was selected if the organization had five or fewer workplaces;

•
21 or
two were selected if the organization had six to 20 workplaces; and three were selected if the organization had
more workplaces. In the third stage, employees were sampled from within the sample of workplaces. In workplaces
with fewer than 200 employees, all employees were surveyed. In larger workplaces a random sample of employees
them,
was surveyed. This design produced a representative sample of Australian workplaces and employees within
which allowed workplace and employee data to be linked for the purposes of analysis.

Thus, we might randomly sample 10 companies from the
entire population of the 100 largest companies in the
UK, thus yielding ten clusters, and we would then inter-
view 500 randomly selected employee, at er1ch of the 10
companies. Research in focus 9.2 give:; an e.xample of a
study that used cluster sampling.
Apotential problem, however, is rhar £;-ierc is no guar-
antee that these 10 companies reflect the diverse range of
industrial activities that are engaged in by the population
as a whole. One solution to this problem would be to
group the 100 largest UK companies by industry. This
could be done using the codes from the Standard Indus-
trial Classification system or SIC, which is used widely to
classify companies for the purposes of collecting data.
The next step would be to randomly sample companies
from each of the major groups. One company might then
be sampled from each of the industries, and then approx-
imately 400 employees from each of the companies would
be interviewed. Thus, there are three separate stages:
• group 100 largest UK companie s by market
capitalization;
• sample one company from each of the major
industries;
• sample 400 employees from each of the companies .
In a sense, cluster sampling is always a multi-stag e
approach, because clusters are always sampled first and
then something else-eithe r further clusters or popula-
tion units-is sampled.
Many examples of multi-stage cluster sampling entail
stratification. We might, for example, want further to
stratify the companies according to whether their head-
quarters are located in the UK or abroad. To do this we
would group companies according to whether their head-
quarters were based in the UK or elsewhere and then
select one or two companies per industry from each of the
two strata (see Research in Focus 9.2 for an example of
this kind of approach) .

The qualities of a p~obability sample

The reason why probability sampling is such an important selected (see Chapter 16 for detailed discussion of meth-
. 1survey research 1s
procedurem· socia ·-•
. that, based on 1rnor- ods for making such inferences). In other words, we can
m · generalize findings derived from a sample to the popula-
i ation about a random sample, it is possible to make
nferences about the entire population from which it was tion. This is not to say that we treat the populatio n data
 196 9 Sampling in quantitative research

era li .
sam e. Let us say we wis h
to is the sim ple ave rag e.. Thi s gen zat ion from th
and t~e sam ple dat a as the me an to the pop u1at1. on me
an Will h
dev elo pm ent in our sam ple
of ave kn 0 ,,_ esa
exa m.m e the lev el of ski ll d ll on this see T· wn "1p1.
at ski ll dev elo pm ent as the
erro r. For mo re eta ' 1ps and 5 . ·••argj ,
4SO em plo yee s. We wil l tre 12
.
izm g fro m a ran dom sam ple
to the lti1Js •c; l'l.!or
com ple ted in the pre vio us enera1 Population•
num ber of tra inin g day s
day s
. .. . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .
me an num ber of tra inin g Access the onl ine resourc~~
·;~· ·•... .. ... ... ..'...
mo nth s. We can use the Watch a ·• ...
und ena ken by the sam ple
me an Cm). The me an, ormo
(X) to est ima te the pop ula
tion

re pro per lyth e arit hm etic mea

n, 0 clip abo ut the qua litie s of pro
... . .. ..•. •.•. .... .• .. ... . . .
bab . .
1 sa
Short via ··• ..
eo ',ty
. .. .. .. . . .. •. . .. •.. . · · · · ·· tnp/
e.
....
....

I TI PS AN D SKILLS
Generaliz in g from a random sa m pl e to th e population
rb~ ~ompany, let us say that the
ry stud y of trai ning and ski/I development in a single nea .
Usi ng our ima gina
am oun t of training received in the pre v,ou s 12
day s of trai ning per emp loye e (the average . . . .
sam ple mean is 6 ·7 .
n it we used pro bab ility sampling, how confide
cial consideration here Is: eve
mo nth s in the sample) . A cru the population? If we take an
in fin~: can
num ber of 6. 7 train ing days is likely to be found in
we be tha t the mea n
estimates of the mean of the
variable under consideration Will
a pop ulat ion, the sam ple
num ber of samples from d curve known as a
ion mea n. This vari ation will take the form of a bell-shape
vary in relation to the populat lies tha t there is a clustering
of sample
ribu tion (see Figu re 9.8 ). The shape of the distribution imp ion mean; the
nor ma l dist or below the populat
the pop ulat ion mea n. Hal f the sample means will be at
means at or around population mean) or
the pop ulat ion mea n. As we move to the left (at or below the
oth er halt will be at or above that there would be fewer and
fewer
ve the pop ulat ion mea n), the curve tails off, implying ns
the righ t (at or abo n. The variation of sam mea ple
mea ns tha t dep art con side rably from the population mea
sam ples generating sured using a statistic known
as the
is the sam plin g erro r and is mea
aro und the population mean t a sample mea n is like ly to differ from the
erro r of the mea n. This is an estimate of the amount tha
sta nda rd
population mean.

•,?h~m4 C·iiii,,i·iii,,i¥i,t. -
en I
GI
Q. i
E

-~
0

.8E
::::s
z
-1.9 6 Population +1. 96
SE mean SE
Value of the mean
Note: 95 per cent of sample
means will lie within the sha ded
mean.
area. SE = standard error of the

means will lie

tha t 68 per cen t of all sam ple
is imp orta nt, bec ause sampling theory tells us
This con side rati on per cen t of all sample mean~
0 stan dar d erro r from the population mean and tha t 95
b~~ een plu s or minus 1.0 tion that ,s
mean. It is this sec ond calcula
p~u_ s or min us 1.9 6 stan dar d errors from the population . t t·st,·cal findings.
will ''.e between
aus e 1t 1s at /east imp licit ly employed by survey research ers when the y rep ort the irs a 1
crucial , bec r findings.
. con fide nt the y can be in thei
ploy 1.9 6 stan dar d erro rs as the crucial criterion in how
They typically em
 Sample size 197
Essentially, the criterion implies that you can be 95 per cent certain that the population mean lies within plus or
.
minus 1•96 sampling errors from the sample mean.
If a sample has been s~lected acco_rdl_ng to probability sampling principles, we know that we can be 95 per cent
ertain that the population mean will lie between the sample mean plus or minus 1.96 multiplied by the standard
~rror of the mean. This Is known as the confidence interval. If the mean number of training days in the previous
12 months in our sample of 450 employees is 6.7 and the standard error of the mean is 1.3, we can be 95 per
cent certain that the population mean will lie between

6} + (1,96 X l.3)

and
6.7 - (1.96 X 1.3)

i.e. between 9.248 and 4.152.

If the standard error were smaller, the range of possible values of the population mean would be narrower; if the
standard error were larger, the range of possible values of the population mean would be wider.

If a stratified sample is selected, the standard error of the mean will be smaller; this is because the variation
between strata is essentially eliminated, because the population will be accurately represented in the sample in
terms of the stratification criterion or criteria employed . This consideration demonstrates the way in which
stratification injects an extra increment of precision into the probability sampling process, since a possible source
of sampling error is eliminated.

By contrast, a cluster sample without stratification exhibits a larger standard error of the mean than a comparable
simple random sample. This occurs because a possible source of variability between employees (that is,
membership of one department rather than another, which may affect levels of training undertaken) is
disregarded. If, for example, some departments have a culture of learning in which a large number of employees
were involved, and if these departments were not selected because of the procedure for selecting clusters, an
important source of variability would hzve been omitted. It also implies that the sample mean would be on the low
side, but that is another matter.

Sample size
One question about research methods that we are asked Absolute and relative sample size
by students almost more than any other relates to the
One of the most basic considerations, and one that is pos-
size of the sample: 'How large should my sample be?' or
sibly the most surprising, is that, contrary to what you
'Is my sample large enough?' The decision about sample
might have expected, it is the absolute size of a sample
size is not a straightforward one: it depends on a number
that is important, not its relative size. This means that a
of considerations and there is no one definitive answer.
' national probability sample of 1,000 individuals in the UK
This is frequently a source of great disappointment to
is as likely to be as representative as a national probability
those who pose such questions. Moreover, most of the
sample of 1,000 individuals in the USA, even though the
time decisions about sample size are affected by consid-
latter has a much larger population. It also means that
erations of time and cost (see Tips and skills 'Sample size
increasing the size of a sample increases the precision of a
and probability sampling'). Therefore, invariably deci-
sample. This means that the 95 per cent confidence inter-
. about sample size represent a comprotn1se
sions · be tween
val referred to in Tips and skills 'Generalizing from a ran-
the constraints of time and cost, the need for precision,
dom sample to the population' narrows. However, a large
and a variety of further considerations that will now be sample cannot guarantee precision, so that it is probably
addressed.
 198 9 Sampling in quantitative research

TIPS AND SKILLS

Sample size and probability sampling
As we have said, the issue of sample size is the matter that most often concerns students
and researchers
conduct surveys. Basically, the bigger the sample, the more representative it is likely to
be (provided the saWhenthe-y
. h ·t . d
randomly selected) , regardless of the size of the population from wh1c
. 1 1s rawn. However, when doing lllple IS
. . .
proJects, students typically need to do their research with very limited resources . You should research
try to find out frorn
department or school if there are any guidelines about whether or not samples of a minimum
size are expecte Your
. .
there are no such guidelines, you will need to conduct your mini-surv . h t d. If
ey in sue a way as o maximize the nurnbe
i~terviews you can manage or the number of questionnaires you can send out and process,
given the amount of r Of
time and resources available to you. Also, in many if not most cases, ~ tr~ly random approach
to sample selection
may not be open to you. The crucial point is to be clear about and to Justify what you have
done, as well as to
demonstrate the limitations of your sample. Explain the difficulties that you would have
encountered in generating a
random sample. Explain why you could not include any more in your sample of responde

•
nts. But, above all, do no
make claims about your sample that are not sustainable. Do not claim that it is represent
ative or that you have a t
random sample when it is clearly not the case that either of these is true. In other words,
be frank about what you
have done. People will be much more inclined to accept an awareness of the limits of your
sample design than
claims about a sample that are patently false. Also, it may be that there are lots of good
features about your sample-
the range of people included, the good response rate, the high level of cooperation you
received from the firm. Make
sure you play up these positive features at the same time as being honest about your sample's
limitations.

better to say that increasin g the size of a sample increases
the likely precisio n of a sample. This means that as sample
size increase s, samplin g error decrease s. Therefor e, an
importa nt compon ent of any decision about sample size
could be how much samplin g error one is prepared to tol-
erate. The less samplin g error one is prepared to tolerate,
the larger a sample will need to be. Fowler (1993) how-
ever warns against a simple acceptan ce of this criterion .
He argues that in practice researche rs do not base their
decision s about sample size on a single estimate of a vari-
able. Most survey research is intended to generate a host
of estimat es-that is, of the variable s that make up the
researc h instrum ent that is adminis tered. He also
observe s that it is not normal for survey research ers to be
in a position to specify in advance 'a desired level of preci-
sion' (1993: 34). Moreover, since sampling error will be
only one compon ent of any error entailed in an estimate,
the notion of using a desired level of precision as a factor
in a decision about sample size is not realistic. Instead, to
the extent that this notion does enter into decision s about
sample size, it often does so in a general rather than a cal-
cula ted way.
Time and cost
Time and cost consider ations become very relevant in this
context. In the previous paragrap h it is clearly being sug-
gest ed that the larger the sample size, the greater the pre-
cision (because the amount of sampling error will be
less). By and large, up to a sample size of around 1,000,
the gains in precision are noticeab le as the sample size
climbs from low fi gure:- of SO, 100, 150, and so on
upwards . After a certair> point, however , often in the
region of 1,000, the sh arp in creases in precision become
less pronoun ced, and, although it does not plateau, there
is a slow-dow n in the extent to which precision increases
(and hence the extent to w hich the sample error of the
mean declines) . Consider ations of sampling size are likely
to be profound ly affected by matters of time and cost at
such a juncture , since striving for smaller and smaller
increme nts of precision becomes an increasingly uneco-
nomic proposit ion.
Non-response
Conside rations about samplin g error do not eild her~-
The problem of non-resp onse should also be borne •~
. arnounto
mind. Most sample surveys include a certain of our
non-resp onse. Thus, it is likely that only some If it is
sample will agree to pa rticipate in the research. are
our aim to ensure as far as possible that 4 So ernployeesceJlC
interview ed and ifwe think that there may be a zorers40--
rate of non-resp onse, it may be advisable to saJllP will
90
SOindividu als, on the grounds that approxunatelY y queS·
be non-resp ondents. For example , of the 143 s~ e( 995)
.
nonna1r.
es sent to compani.es m . T c powell 1
• ·
 Types of non-probability sampling 199

KEY CONCEPT 9.3

What is a response rate?
When a social survey is conducted, whether by structured inte rview or by self-completion questionnaire, it is
the
invariably the case that some people who are in the sample do not participate. The response rate is, therefore,
percentage of a sample that does, in fact, agree to participate. However, the calculation of a response rate is a
little more complicated than this. First, not everyone who replies will be included: if a large number of questions
are not answered by a respondent, or if there are clear indications that they have not taken the interview or
questionnaire seriously, it is better to employ only the number of usable interviews or questionnaires as the
numerator. Similarly, it also tends to occur that not everyone in a sample turns out to be a suitable or appropriate
respondent or can be contacted. Thus the response rate is calculated as follows:

number of usable questionnaires

. xlOO
total sample - unsuitable or uncontactable members of the sample

study of total quality managem ent, only 40 were
returned and of these only 36 were usable, making a
response rate of 25 per cent. This raises the question of
whether or not this sample is big enough to represent
companies in the geographi cal area of the n orth -eastern
USA that the study claims to represent (see Chapter 11
for a further discussion of acceptabl e respome rates) .
The issue of non-respo nse, and in particular of ,efusal to
participate, is of particular significan ce, because it has
been suggested by some researche rs that respon se rates
(see Key concept 9.3) to surveys are declin ing in many
countries. This implies that there is a growing tendency
towards people refusing to participa te in survey
research. As long ago as 1973, an article in the American
magazine Business Week carried an article ominousl y
entitled 'The Public Clams up on Survey Takers'. The
magazine asked survey companie s about their experi-
ences and found considera ble concern about declining
response rates (Business Week 1973). Similarly, in Brit-
ain, a report from a working party on the Market
Research Society's Research and Developm ent Commit-
· 1975 pointed to concerns among market research
tee In
companie s. Fulton (2018) claims that this poses a par-
ticular threat to studies of organizati ons, where response
rates tend to be lower than in other fields of research.
However, analyses of this issue by Baruch and Holtom
(2008) and Anseel et al. (2010) suggested that there is
little evidence of a generalize d decline in response rates
in surveys in organizati onal research. Strategies that can
improve responses to survey instrumen ts such as struc-
tured interviews and questionn aires will be examined in
Chapters 10 and 11.
Heterogeneity of the population
Yet another considerat ion is the homogene ity and hetero-
geneity of the population from which the sample is to be
taken. When a sample is very heterogen eous, such as a
sample of a whole country or city, the populatio n which it
represents is likely to be highly varied. When it is rela-
tively homogene ous, such as members of a company or of
an occupatio n, the amount of variation is less. The impli-
cation of this is that, the greater the heterogen eity of a
populatio n, the larger a sample will need to be.

Types of non-probability sampling

The term non-proba bility sampling is essentiall y an
Utnbrella tenn to capture all forms of sampling. that are
notcondu d . ..
lin cte according to the norms of probab1ht y sam-
~ g outlined above. It is not surprising , therefore, that
e term covers a wide range of types of sampling strategy,
at least one of which-th e quota sample-is claimed by
some practition ers to be almost as good as a probabilit y
sample. In this section we will cover two main types of
non-proba bility sample: the convenien ce sample and the
quota sample.
200 9 Sampling in quantitative research

least fairly acceptable to use a convenie

Convenience sampling
A convenience sample is one that is simply available to the
researcher by virtue of its accessibility. Imagine that a
researcher who teaches at a university business school is
interested in the way that managers deal with ethical
issues when making business decisions. The researcher
might administer a questionnaire to several classes of stu-
dents, all of whom are managers taking a part-time MBA
degree. The chances are that the researcher will receive
all or almost all the questionnaires back, so that there will management, convenience samples are us1n
be a good response rate. The findings may prove quite
interesting, but the problem with such a sampling strat-
egy is that it is impossible to generalize the findings,
because we do not know of what population this sample is
representative. They are simply a group of managers who
are available to the researcher. They are almost certainly
not representative of managers as a whole-the very fact
they are taking this degree programme marks them out as
different from managers in general.
This is not to suggest that convenience samples should
never be used. Let us say that our lecturer/researcher is
developing a battery of questions that are designed to
measure the ethical decision-making processes used by
managers. It is highly desirable to pilot such a research
instrument before using it in an investigation, and admin-
istering it to a group who are not a part of the main study dents are likely to have more socio-economic resources
may be a legitimate way of carrying out some preliminary
analysis ofsuch issues as whether or not respondents tend
to answer a particular question in identical ways, or
whether or not one question is often omitted when man-
agers respond to it. In other words, for this kind of pur-
pose, a convenience sample may be acceptable, though
not ideal. A second kind of context in which it may be at
. ncesarn
the chance presents itself to gather data fror/leis"'hen
ence sample and it represents too good a conv
. an op · eru.
miss. The data will not allow definitive fi di Pollttnih.
n n~t ~~
erated, because of the problem of genera}j . 0 be &e
. . zation 1,._ n.
could proV1de a spnngboard for further r • uutth""
esearch .,
links to be forged with existing findings in °r allo,,y
It also perhaps ought to be recognized h · an area
. t at C
ence sampling probably plays a more prom· 0 nveni.
than is sometimes supposed. In the field 0 fb •~ent role
. essand
. ~n~~
common, and m some areas, such as con YVery
sumerb h
iour research, they have become the norm N e a\'.
. onethel
there is evidence that we should be cautiou . ess,
sin &en
izing from convenience samples, particularly h erai.
w
are samples of undergraduate students (Pet enthey
Merunka 2014). erson and
It is common in some kinds of business resear h
C tOIJSe
university undergraduate students as a convenien
cesam.
pie, particularly in experimental research. This has bee
criticized by Hooghe et al. (2010), who argue that it ca:
endanger the valid ity and generalizability of findings
because undergraduate students are likely to think and
act differently from the general population. For instance
people from lower socio-economic groups are under'.
represented in undergraduate student populations; stu-
than is typical of the gPneral population; and students
may be inclined to exert more-than-typical cognitive
effort in order to give th e 'right' answer. Moreover, it is
highly problematic to make claims about managerial or
workplace phenomena based on such samples, as many
undergraduates have little or no full-time workplace or
managerial experience. This has led some management

STUDENT EXPERIENCE
Using convenience sampling in a dissertation
Jordan conducted research on self-expression in the workplace. Her approach required a fairly large sample 01
employees. The one-year duration of her honours programme, and the need to fit her research around a
. . . h
demanding coursework load, meant that she had to find an efficient way to generate a sample wh1c would alloW
her to conduct her analysis. She chose to survey graduate employees in a private-sector organization, who were
·
undergoing a tra,rnng
· ·
programme run bya non-governmental organization (NGO) she had prev1ou · sly worked tor.
All 515 graduate employees who underwent the training programme were given a paper survey to comp_lete nd
10
during their training programme. She explained: '[the NGO] provides training to this particular organization:
all of the graduate employees ... 515 of them. They . .. provide this training in two places in Melbourne an, use
Sydney .. . the reason why I got 515 surveys was because time was set aside during the workshop. , Jordan sher
of convenience sampling provided her with an effective means to collect data which allowed her to conciuclloyees-
analysis in a situation In which she did not have the time or resources to generate a random sample of emP
 Types of non-probability sampling 201
refuse to Publish papers based on student sam- have been decided upon, it is then the job of interview-
. rnaist0 pie is merely a convenient way to sam- ers to select people who fit these categories. The quotas
JO0 sthesam
ies, unJes ·n the case of part-time MBAs discussed will typically be interrelated. In a manner similar to
P gers, as 1 . . .
pie mana . The study described m Research m focus stratified sampling, the population may be divided into
~• earher. •ence sample taken from the ' rea l worId'
8 (icue strata in terms of, for example, gender, social class, age,
edaconveru
9.4 us from among students. and ethnicity. Census data might be used to identify the
ratberthan number of people who should be in each subgroup. The
numbers to be interviewed in each subgroup will reflect
Quota sampling the population. Each interviewer will probably seek out
m iing is used intensively in commercial individuals who fit several subgroup quotas. Accord-
Quota sa pch as market researc h and po1·1t1ca
. l op1mon
. .
ingly, an interviewer may know that among the various
search, su
re Uin&· The aim of quota sampling is to produ~e a sample subgroups of people, they must find and interview five
Po fl ctS a population in terms of the relative propor- Asian, 25-to-34-year-old, lower-middle-class females in
tbat re e .
. f eople in different categories, such as gender, the area in which the interviewer has been asked to
oons o P . . .
. •cy age groups, socio-economic groups, and region work. The interviewer usually asks people who are
etbntCI , . . .
'dence, and in combmanons of these categories. available to them about their characteristics in order to
0f rest
However, unlike a stratified sample, the sampling of indi- determine their suitability for a particular subgroup.
viduals is not carried out randomly, since the final selec- Once a subgroup quota (or a combination of subgroup
tion of people is left up to the interviewer. quotas) has been achieved, the interviewer will
Once the categories and the number of people to be no longer be concerned to locate individuals for that
interviewed within each category (known as quotas) subgroup.

RESEARCH IN FOCUS 9 .4
Convenience sampling in a study of
discrimination in hiring
Derous et al. (2017) conducted a !>i. 1.1,jy ;.;s a ;-neans of studying how ethnic cues influenced the outcomes of
curriculum vitae (CV) screening during rec;uitment processes. Most studies of CV screening have used samples
of university students (Derous et a!. 2017: 862), but this study utilized a sample of HR professionals as a means
to increase the likelihood that the conclusions drawn were representative of processes and outcomes involving
respondents who undertake recruitment in their daily working lives.

The study was conducted in Belgium. The authors needed a large sample for their study, but there was no
sampling frame available from which to draw a random sample of respondents, so the sample was drawn from
membership lists of HR professional associations, business publications, and the researchers' own networks.
This generated a sample of 1,463 respondents, of whom 424 agreed to participate. Participants were all
Caucasian. Clearly this strategy did not generate a random sample and the sample cannot be regarded as
representative in a statistical sense. Nonetheless, the sampling strategy represented a viable way to draw a large
sample of actual HR professionals which could not otherwise have been generated.

The researchers provided each respondent with job advertisements for two different jobs in two different kinds of
business. They were each also provided with four fictional CVs, each including a photo of a fictional applicant.
The CVs showed a variety of combinations of skin tone (light versus dark) and name (Flemish versus Arab/
Maghreb). Respondents were asked to rate each applicant using a three-item measure with Likert scale
responses. For example, 'Given all the information you read about this applicant, how likely is it that you would
invite this applicant for a job interview?' (1 = not likely at all; 7 =very likely). The findings showed the equally
qualified candidates with a dark skin tone were systematically rated less suitable for jobs than those with light skin
tone, with the effect varying depending on the nature of the job. Name did not appear to matter. The findings
suggested that there was systematic ethnically based discrimination in CV screening and that there were subtle
effects Which arose from the kinds of jobs involved.
202 9 Sampling in quantitative research

The choice of respondents is left to the interviewer, sub- • It is not permissible to calculate a st
andard
ject to the requirement of all quotas being filled, usually mean from a quo_ta sample, because the error 0rth
within a certain time period. Those of you who have ever method of selectton makes it impo 'b non.rand e
ss1 let o111
been approached on the street by a person toting a clip- the range of possible values of a pop 1 . 0 caiC\JI
u ation. <tte
board and interview schedule and have been asked about
All of this makes the quota sample look
your age, occupation, and so on, before being asked a · not favoured
· is
· no d oub t t h at 1t
there is b bet, and
a Poor
series of questions about a product or whatever, have . Y acade i
researchers. It does have some argume
almost certainly encountered an interviewer with a quota nts 10 its 111 c
however: favour,
sample to fill. Sometimes, they will decide not to inter-
view you because you do not meet the criteria required to • It is undoubtedly cheaper and quicker than .
fill a quota. This may be due to a quota already having view survey on a comparable probability sarnan lllter.
been filled or to the criteria for exclusion meaning that a example, interviewers do not have to s Pie. For
nd
person with a certain characteristic that you possess is not time travelling between interviews. pe a lot of
required. • Interviewers do not have to keep calling b k
A number of criticisms are frequently levelled at quota ac on
pie who were not available at the time they I>eo.
samples: Were fir
approached. st

• Because the choice of respondent is left to the inter- • Because calling back is not required, a quota sam .
. I . ple15
viewer, the proponents of probability sampling argue easier to manage. tis not necessary to keep track of
that a quota sample cannot be representative. It may people who need to be recontacted or to keep track of
accurately reflect the population in terms ofsuperficial refusals. Refusals occur, of course, but it is not neces.
characteristics, as defined by the quotas. However, in sary (and indeed it is not possible) to keep a recordof
their choice of people to approach, interviewers may which respondents declined to participate.
be unduly influenced by their perceptions of how • When speed is of the essence, a quota sample is invalu-
friendly people are or by whether the people make eye able when compared to the more cumbersome proba-
contact with the interviewer (unlike most of us, who bility sample. Newspapers frequently need to know,
look at the ground and shuffle past as quickly as pos- quickly, how a national sample of voters feel about a
sible because we do not want to be bothered in our certain topic or how they intend to vote at that time.
leisure time). Similarly, if there is a sudden major news event, such
• People who are in an interviewer's vicinity at the times as a major terrorist attack or a natural disaster, the
they conduct interviews, and are therefore available to news media may seek a more or less instant picture of
be approached, may not be typical; in that case, those the nation's views or responses. Again, a quota sample
who are included in the sample will not be typical. will be much faster.
There is a risk, for example, that people in full-time • As with convenience sampling, quota sampling is use·
paid work may be under-represented. ful for conducting development work on new meas·
• The interviewer is likely to make judgements about ures or on research instruments. It can also be usefully
hich
certain characteristics in deciding whether or not to employed in relation to exploratory work from w
approach a person: in particular, judgements about new theoretical ideas might be generated.
age. Those judgements will sometimes be incorrect- hould not
• Although the standard error of the mean 5 .15 AS
for example, when someone who is eligible to be inter- · frequentlYwriters
·
be computed for a quota sample, it
viewed, because a quota that they fit is unfilled, is not Moser and Kalton (1971) observe, somde . quota
approached because the interviewer makes an incor- etho in
argue that the use of a non-random m oJJIPu·
rect judgement (perhaps that the person is older than . tosuch ac
sampling should not act as a barrier f error is
they look). In such a case, a possible element of bias is . b . . "fi
tatlon ecause its sigm cance as a source o aY artse
.
being introduced. that rn
small when compared to other errors go on to
• It has also been argued that the widespread use of . . H ever theY pe
m surveys (see Figure 9 .9). ow ' plillS 1
social class as a quota control can introduce difficul- argue that at least with ran
dom sam
f saJ11P 1
rnS
mount O t j1S
ties, because of the problem of ensuring that inter- researcher can calculate t h e a d aboll
viewees are properly assigned to class groupings error and does not have to be concerne
(Moser and Kalton 1971) . potential impact.

fjijfP-il·ill:iH@h'lddMIGM
Error
'. , .
Sampling Sampling-related
error error
There is some evidence to suggest that, when compared
to random samples, quota samples often result in biases
(Yang and Banamah 2014). They under-represen t peo-
ple in lower social strata, people who work in the pri-
vate sector and manufacturing , and people at the
extremes of income, and they over-represent women in
L1m1•ts to genera11
I /
•z,rnvn S
One point that is often not fully appreciated is that even
when a sample has been selected using probability sam-
pling, any findings can be generalized only to the popu-
lation from which that sample was taken. This is an
obvious point, but it is easy to think that findings from
a study have some kind of broader applicability. If we
take our imaginary study of training and skill develop-
ment among employees of a company, any findings
could be generalized only to that company. In other
Words, you should be very cautious about generalizing
to employees at other companies. There are many fac-
tors that may imply that the level of training and skill
development is higher (or lower) in that company than
a~ong company employees as a whole. There may be a
higher (or lower) level of skill required in order to do
th
e jobs that the company requires its employees to do;
there maY be more (or less) money m . the company' s
training budget; there may be more (or Jess) of a cu J-
. at this company· or the company may
ture of Jearning
recruit h" '
a igher (or lower) proportion of employees
h
w oar I
t e a ready skilled. There may be many other fac-
ors too.
Limits to generalization 203
1. , .
Data collection Data processing
error error
households with children and people from larger
households (Marsh and Scarbrough 1990; Butcher
1994).
•
{"~ Access the online resources to watch a short video
'-9 clip where Jordan Brown reflects on this theme.
Similarly, we should be cautious of overgeneralizing in
terms oflocality. A frequent criticism made of research on
employee motivation relates to the limited extent to
which it can be assumed to be generalizable beyond the
confines of the national or regional culture on which
the study is based. For example, in their famous study
of motivation Herzberg et al. (1959) conducted
semi-structured interviews with 203 accountants and engi-
neers in the Pittsburgh area in the USA. Most of the com-
panies that constituted sites for the study were involved in
heavy industry, such as steelmaking or shipbuilding. The
population from which the sample was selected consisted
of all accountants and engineers who worked for these
companies. Respondents were chosen randomly accord-
ing to certain criteria for stratification, including age, job
title, level in the company, and length of service. It is inter-
esting that there is no mention of gender in the study,
although we can fairly safely assume that, given that this
was a study of accountants and engineers in the late
1950s, there is likely to be a male bias to the study. The
maximum number of individuals selected for interview in
each company was approximately SO. As the authors
204 9 Sampling In quantitative research

acknowledge, 'the fact that this work was done within a area, is there a point at which we have
thirty-mile radius around Pittsburgh will inevitably raise findings applied to the Pittsburgh to say, 'We11
area the , th~
questions about the degree to which the findings are have changed, and we can no long n, but t~,"'St
er assllrn "lltt
applicable in other areas of the country' (1959: 31). The apply to that or any other locality'? ,.. e that &i
vve are aft th
findings may also reflect the values of high individualism, to assuming that changed circumst ' er all ey
ances . , llsed
self-interest, and high masculinity that have been identi- changed behaviour and attitudes. To ta.k WtU Pro
ea sirn lllpt
fied as characteristic of American culture (Hofstede pie: no one would be prepared to assum h Pie ex:.....
. . et atth ...,1.
1984). This is pan of the reason that there have been so of a study m 1980 of UK uruversity Stud e fincli11
ents' b &s
many attempts to replicate the study on other occupa- and personal finance habits would apply to Stud lldgeting
tional groups and in other localities, including different early twenty-first century. Quite aside fr ents in th
om.ch e
cultures and nationalities. might have occurred naturally, the erosi·o anges that
. nand Vi
However, there could even be a further limit to gener- mantlmg of the student grant system in the Ttl!a] dis.
alization that is implied by the Herzberg et al. sample. The introduction of tuition fees have changed thlJI< and the
main study was conducted in the late 1950s. One issue dents finance their education, including pe h e Ways stu.
r apsa
that is rarely discussed in this context, and that is almost reliance on part-time work (Lucas 1997) greater
, a greate
impossible to assess, is whether or not there is a time limit ance on parents, and use of loans. But even h r reli-
, w en the .
on the findings that are generated. Quite aside from the no definable or recognizable source of releva h re 1s
ntc an
fact that we need to appreciate that the findings cannot (or this kind, there is nonetheless the possibility ( ge of
. . . oreven Uk
at least should not) be generalized beyond the Pittsburgh lihood) that findmgs are temporally specific. e-

Error in survey research

We can think of 'error', a term that has been employed on
a number of occasions, as being made up of four main fac-
tors (see Figure 9.9):
• Sampling error: see Key concept 9.1 for a definition.
This kind of error arises because it is extremely
unlikely that one will end up with a perfectly repre-
sentative sample, even when probability sampling is
employed.
• We can distinguish what might be thought of as
sampling-related error. This is error that is subsumed
under the category non-sampling error (see Key
concept 9 .1) but that arises from activities or events
that are related to the sampling process and are con-
nected with the issue of generalizability or external
validity of findings . Examples are an inaccurate sam-
pling frame and non-response.
• There is also error that is connected with the implemen-
tation of the research p rocess . We might call this data col-
lection error. This source of error includes such factors as
poor question wording ir. :c? J_f-completion questionnaires
or structured intervie,.,,~, poor interviewing techniques,
and flaws in the administration of research instruments.
• Finally, there is data processing error. This arises from t
faulty management of data , in particular errors in the
coding of answers.
The third and fourth sources of error relate to factors that ~
are not associated with sampling and instead relate much
more closely to concerns about the validity of meaSure-
ment, which was addressed in Chapter 8 . The kinds of
steps that need to be taken to keep t h ese sources of error
will
to a minimum in the context of social survey research
be addressed in the next three chapters.

Sampling issues for online surveys

l.i08
Online surveys have become increasingly popular in . ·a1 on saJJIP
mcreasing popula rity is how the maten rnPling
' inlYsa
recent decades (Chapter 11 discusses them further) an d presented above migh t apply to them. Certa ' we aeal
there are now numerous companies which produce online · nline surveys poses some specific challenges.
mo . arnP11°
-g
survey software. An obvious question to ask, given this f 0 nhne s
here fairly briefly with the challenges O
 Sampling issues for online surveys 205
tions due to space constraints. For from a directory of providers, which acted as her sam-
ential so1u ' .
and pot . ed discussion, see Fncke~ (2?~ 7). . pling frame. Another increasingly common approach to
more detail_ from populations of individuals, a maJor sampling is to use online tools to recruit paid participants
•.npbng . . .
Jn s...p • • ·s that not everyone m any nation is or volunteers, as discussed in Thinking Deeply 9.4.
d linlltanon 1
issue an f those who are, some may not have the tech- As Couper (2000) notes of surveys of populations using
~Hne and 0 • • C .
01iw• ' . . to handle online quesnonn aires. ertam probability sampling procedures:
·
01ca 1 abihtY · · k
f online commumcanons ma e e issueth .
other features o.
Intra-orgartizational surveys and those directed at users
more problemauc:
of the Internet were among the first to adopt this new
le have more than one email address.
Manypeop survey technology. These restricted populations typi-
• ail addresses tend to be much more fleeting than cally have no coverage problems ... or very high rates
• EJ1l
pascal addresses. . of coverage. Student surveys are a particular example of
.
le use more than one mternet service pro- this approach that are growing in popularity.
• ManypeoP
vider (ISP). (2000: 485)

• Ahousehold may have one computer but several users. Hewson and Laurent (2008) suggest that when there is no
, Internet Users are a biased sample of the population,
in that they tend to be better educated, wealthier,
younger, and more often male than female (Blasius and
Brandt 2010) •
, Few sampling frames exist of the general online popu-
sampling frame, which is normally the case with samples
to be drawn from the general population, the main
approach taken to generating an appropriate sample is to
post an invitation to answer a questionnaire on relevant
newsgroup message boards, to suitable mailing lists, or
•
lation, and most of these are likely to be expensive to on web pages and social media. The result will be a sam-
acquire, since they are controlled by ISPs or may be ple of entirely unknown representativeness, and it is
impossible to know what the response rate to the ques-
confidential.
tionnaire is, since the size of the population is also
Such issues make the conduct of online surveys using
unknown. On the other hand, given that we have so little
probability sampling principles challenging.
knowledge and understanding of online behaviour and
This is not to say that online surveys should nut be con-
attitudes relating to online issues, it could reasonably be
sidered. Indeed, for researchers in the field of bu~1ness,
argued that some information about these areas is a lot
where respondents are often contacted via the ,_iip n.iza.-
better than none at all, provided that the limitations of the
tions they work in, there may be more opport1Jr.iues than
findings in terms of their generalizability are appreciated.
for researchers in other areas. For example, in many
A further issue in relation to online sampling and sam-
organizations, most if not all non-manual workers are
pling-related error is the matter of non-response (see Key
likely to be online and familiar with the details of using concept 9.3). There is growing evidence that online sur-
email and the internet. It is relatively easy to obtain a list veys typically generate lower response rates than postal
of potential respondents from an organization and to dis-
questionnaire surveys (Tse 1998; Sheehan 2001;
tribute questionnaires to them (Saunders et al. 2017). In Pedersen and Nielsen 2016) . A meta-analysis that com-
such circumstances, surveys can be conducted using
pared web surveys with other modes of survey adminis-
essentially the same probability sampling procedures as
tration found that, on average, web surveys produce a
those outlined earlier in the chapter and email-based sur-
response rate that is 11 per cent lower (Lozar Manfreda
veys may present sampling problems that differ little
et al. 2008). However, response rates can be boosted by
from offiine modes of administration (Fricker 2017).
Suni)'
• following three simple strategies:
arly, surveys of members of commercially relevant
0
~ine groups can be conducted using probability sam- 1. Contact prospective respondents before send-
Phng Principles. If we are interested in collecting data ing them a questionnaire. This is regarded as basic
from members of on1·
me commum.nes . for example t h
ose 'netiquette'. Bosnjak et al. (2008) found that response
Using so . l
cia networking technology' for business pur- rates to a web-based panel survey could be enhanced
poses the .
' n vutually by definition they would need to be by pre-notifying prospective participants. They found
contacted l' .
(199 on tne to generate a sample. C. B. Smith that pre-notifications sent by text (SMS) message
(p
7) cond d
ucte a survey of web presence providers· were more effective than when sent by email but that
eople or org . . . .
and . an1zanons that are involved m creatmg a combination of both was more effective than text
illatntaj ·
rung web content). She acquired her sample messages alone.
206 9 Sampling in quantitative research

THINKING DEEPLY 9.4

Sampling using Amazon MTurk
In recent years there has been increasing interest in the use of online mechanisms for recruiting Part· .
' ICIPants
These include systems for recruiting paid participants, for exampIe Amazon Mec hanical Tu rk (MTurk) ·
. . rt and G
AdWords, as well as for seeking volunteers, for example on Face b00k · It is impo ant to note that such OOg1e
mechanisms generate convenience samples, rather than random samples. All hough such met hods of .
t . I 'th . Part1ciPa
recruitment appear to be becoming more popular they are also con rovers1a 'w1 many having cone nt
' erns abo
the quality of data which they produce (Walter et al. 2019). lit

Aguinis et al. (2020) conducted a review of the use of MTurk in management research and report that ·t .
• • I is now
the most common online method for participant recruitment and that .,ts use mcreased over 2,000 per cent
between 2012 and 2019. Based on their review, they identify four maJor benefits of using MTurk:

• access to a large and diverse pool of potential participants;

• ease and speed of accessing participants;
• relatively low cost;
• suitability for a number of different research designs (Aguinis et al. 2020: 851-2).

They note, however that there are a number of important challenges inherent in using MTurk, which can under .
' mine
the validity of results. Among these are self-selection bias, high attrition rates, vulnerability to malicious software
intended to fraudulently collect payment for participation, and social desirability bias (Aguinis et al. 2020: 826-l).
The authors suggest that the challenges need to be weighed up against the potential advantages and that care needs
to be taken in planning and implementing studies, as well as reporting results, as a means to mitigate their effects.

While concerns about data quality are of course extremely important, there are also potential ethical
considerations in using online recruitment methods such as MTurk. Pittman and Sheehan (2016) argue that
MTurk study participants are usually paid quite small amounts for their participation and thus can potentially
considered to be analogous to 'sweatshop' workers in manufacturing. Gleibs (2017) argues that there has been
relatively little attention paid to the ethical challenges of MTurk and other on!in2 ;:;!:1tforms and that scholars
should be more attuned to these issues. She focuses on the fact that t here is 2 ;J')Wer imbalance between
researchers and participants. This means that underpayment is likely, but a!so ,;-,ises issues around whether
participants are able to withdraw from a study without risking being denied work in fut ure and that they have little
or no recourse if they feel that they have been underpaid or unfairly excl uded from studies by researchers.

2. As with postal questionnaire surveys, follow up non- Students in the sample were initially sent an email invit·
respondents at least once. ing them to visit the website, which allowed access, via a
3 . There is evidence that incentives can increase response password, to the questionnaire. Some of those emailed
rates in online surveys (Pedersen and Nielsen 2016) . were led to expect that the questionnaire would cake ~ght
to 10 minutes to complete (in fact, it would take consider·
The case for the first of these two strategies in boosting ably longer); others were led to expect that 1t · would. cake.
response rates is not entirely clear (Sheehan 2001) but d beJieve1t
20 minutes. As might be expected, those le to . .
seems to be generally advisable. However, as previously h inVJtanon.
would take longer were less likely to accept t e ver
. Howe •
noted, with many online surveys it is impossible to calcu- resulting in a lower response rate for this group. wbO
late a response rate, since, when participants are recruited ndents
Crawford et al. also found that those respo -" onlY
through invitations and postings on discussion boards, · uld tll"-e
were led to believe that the questionnaire wo n [be
etc., the size of the population of which they are a sample . h
e1g t to 10 minutes were more e lik ly to give up o
- unus·
is almost impossible to determine. . . h resulting I0
quesnonnaire part of the way throug , t cases-
. in cnos
Crawford et al. (2001) report the results of a survey of able partially completed questionnaires ere 111os1
students at the University of Michigan that experimented dents W
Interestingly, they also found that respon f the waY
with a number of possible influences on the response rate. . . . part o
likely to abandon their questionnaires
 Questions for review 207
·n the middle of completing a series of on a screen together than when they appeared singly.
h when l . .
chroug . The implications of this findmg reflect the Respondents also seemed less inclined to omit related
uest1ons. . .
open q will encounter in Chapter 11: that 1t 1s proba- questions when they appeared together on a screen rather
advice you k as few open questions in self-complet ion than singly.
blY best to as .
. nnaires as possible. However, it is important not be too sanguine about
quesoo vidence suggests that having a progress some of these findings. One difficulty with them is that
Further e
• an online survey can reduce the number of the samples derive from populations whose members are
•ndicator in
1 . .
h abandon the questJ.onnaire part of the way not as different from one another as would almost cer-
eople w o
p h mpletion (Couper et al. 2001) . A progress indi- tainly be found in samples deriving from general popula-
throug co
. sually a diagrammatic representatio n of how far tions. Another is that it must not be forgotten that, as
catons u
dent has progressed through the questionnair e previously noted, access to the internet is still not univer-
cherespOn
ticular point. Couper et al. also found that it sal, and there is evidence that those with internet access
at any Par
took less time for respondents to complete related items differ from those without, both in terms of personal char-
(for example, a series ofLikert items) when they appeared acteristics and attitudinally.

(i)
■
KEY POINTS

• Probability sampling is a mechanism for reducing bias in the selection of samples.

•
• Ensure you become familiar with key technical terms in the literature on sampling, including
representative sample, random sample, non-response, population , sampling error, etc.
• Randomly selected samples are important because they permit generalizations to the population and
because they have certain known qualities.
• Sampling error decreases~~ sc1mple size increases.
• Quota samples can provide re.iso,~able alternatives to random samples, but they suffer from some
deficiencies.
• Convenience samples may provide interesting data, but it is crucial to be aware of their limitations in
terms of generalizabili ty.
• Sampling and sampling-related error are just two sources of error in social survey research .
• Online surveys pose specific challenges in terms of sampling.

G)I
QUESTIONS FOR REVIEW
········· ·······•·············· ··· ······················ ······················ ·················································· ···································•·········•

• What does each of the following terms mean: population, probability sampling, non-probability
sampling, sampling frame, representative sample, and sampling and non-sampling error?

• What are the goals of sampling?

• What are the main areas of potential bias in sampling?

Sampling error
• What is the significance of sampling error for achieving a representative sample?

Types of probability sample

• What is probability sampling and why is it important?
• What are the main types of probabil ity sample?
208 9 Sampling in quantitative research

• How far does a stratified random sample offer greater precision th an a simple random
or 5Yste
sample? l'llatic
• If you were conducting an interview survey of around 5 oo people in a large city, What ty
? ~~
probability sample would you choose and why.
• A researcher positions herself on a street corner and asks one person in f ive who walks b
· until·
interviewed: she continues doing this she has a samp Ie Of 2 50 • How 1·I kely ·1s she toyach·
to be
representative sample? ieve
a

The qualities of a probability sample

• A researcher is interested in levels of job satisfaction among manual workers i n a firm that is
undergoing change. The firm has 1,200 manual workers. The researcher selects a simpler
. b t· f t· .
sample of 10 per cent of the population . He measures JO sa 1s ac ion on a L1kert scale co andorn
..
.
items. A high level of satisfaction is scored 5 and a low leve I 1s score d 1 T rnpns1ng 10
• he mean job satisf .
. . action
score is 34.3. The standard error of the mean 1s 8.57. What 1s the 95 per cent confidence interv ,
a1.
Sample size

• What factors would you consider in deciding how large your sample should be when devising a
probability sample?
• What is non-response and why is it important to the question of whether or not you will end up with a
representative sample?

Types of non-probability sampling

• Are non-probability samples useless?

• 'Quota samples are not true random samples, but in terms of generating 3 representative sample there
is little difference between them, and this accounts for their widesprecid use in market research and
opinion polling.' Discuss.

Limits to generalization

• 'The problem of generalization to a population is not just to do with t he matter of getting a

representative sample.' Discuss.

Error in survey research

• 'Non-sampling error, as its name implies, is concerned with sources of error that are not part of the
sampling process.' Discuss.

Sampling issues for online surveys

• What are the main challenges in selecting a sample for an on line survey?

··· ············· ···· ··· ····· ······· ····· ······ ··· ·· ···· ······· ·· ·· ····· ······ ····· ······ ······· ·· ····· ············· ······
ONLINE RESOURCES
0 www.oup.com/he/brm6e/
In addition to the video interviews already highlighted, the book's online resources include th e following
features for this chapter specifically:

• Links to additional resources to take your learning further;

• Self-test multiple-choice questions to test your understanding of the material covered ; aoci

• A flashcard glossary to help you recall key terms. - us

.
. gvan0
. .
More generally, the onlrne resources also rnclude a research project guide, video tutona Is on us1n
data software packages, and more. .... ·
....
······ ··· ····· ···· ·· ···· ············ ······ ··· ····· ···· ········ ·· ·· ··· ··········· ······· ······· ···· ····· ·········