Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization.
Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s11135-017-0574-8
复制
发表时间：
2018
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Jinks C
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Saunders B;Sim J;Kingstone T;Baker S;Waterfield J;Bartlam B;Burroughs H;Jinks C
在定性研究中，饱和作为一种方法论原则已被广泛接受。通常认为，根据迄今已收集或分析的数据，无需进一步收集和/或分析数据。然而，饱和度如何概念化似乎存在不确定性，其使用也不一致。在本文中，我们希望澄清饱和度的性质、目的和用途，并在这样做时增加了饱和度在不同方法中的作用的理论辩论。我们确定了四种不同的饱和方法，它们在采用归纳或演绎逻辑的程度上有所不同，并且相对强调数据收集，数据分析和理论化。我们将探讨与这些不同方法相关的饱和可能服务的目的，以及如何以及何时寻求饱和的含义。在研究这些问题时，我们强调了饱和背后的不确定逻辑——本质上是基于观察到的对未观察到的事物的预测性陈述，我们认为，这种判断会导致模棱两可，并可能部分解释围绕其使用的混乱。我们的结论是，饱和应该以一种与研究问题、所采用的理论立场和分析框架一致的方式进行操作，但也应该对其范围进行一些限制，以免在其概念化和用途过于广泛的情况下冒失去其连贯性和效力的风险。
Saturation has attained widespread acceptance as a methodological principle in qualitative research. It is commonly taken to indicate that, on the basis of the data that have been collected or analysed hitherto, further data collection and/or analysis are unnecessary. However, there appears to be uncertainty as to how saturation should be conceptualized, and inconsistencies in its use. In this paper, we look to clarify the nature, purposes and uses of saturation, and in doing so add to theoretical debate on the role of saturation across different methodologies. We identify four distinct approaches to saturation, which differ in terms of the extent to which an inductive or a deductive logic is adopted, and the relative emphasis on data collection, data analysis, and theorizing. We explore the purposes saturation might serve in relation to these different approaches, and the implications for how and when saturation will be sought. In examining these issues, we highlight the uncertain logic underlying saturation—as essentially a predictive statement about the unobserved based on the observed, a judgement that, we argue, results in equivocation, and may in part explain the confusion surrounding its use. We conclude that saturation should be operationalized in a way that is consistent with the research question(s), and the theoretical position and analytic framework adopted, but also that there should be some limit to its scope, so as not to risk saturation losing its coherence and potency if its conceptualization and uses are stretched too widely.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
3.2
作者：
Dube, Eve;Vivion, Maryline;Guay, Maryse
通讯作者：
Guay, Maryse
影响因子：
5.4
作者：
Aiken, Abigail R. A.;Dillaway, Chloe;Mevs-Korff, Natasha
通讯作者：
Mevs-Korff, Natasha
影响因子：
1.7
作者：
Boddy, Clive Roland
通讯作者：
Boddy, Clive Roland
影响因子：
3.3
作者：
Francis, Jill J.;Johnston, Marie;Grimshaw, Jeremy M.
通讯作者：
Grimshaw, Jeremy M.
影响因子：
1.3
作者：
Drisko, JW
通讯作者：
Drisko, JW