Open-ended interview questions and saturation

Susan C. Weller, Ben Vickers, Harvey Bernard, Alyssa M. Blackburn, Stephen Borgatti, Clarence C. Gravlee, Jeffrey C. Johnson

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    2 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Sample size determination for open-ended questions or qualitative interviews relies primarily on custom and finding the point where little new information is obtained (thematic saturation). Here, we propose and test a refined definition of saturation as obtaining the most salient items in a set of qualitative interviews (where items can be material things or concepts, depending on the topic of study) rather than attempting to obtain all the items. Salient items have higher prevalence and are more culturally important. To do this, we explore saturation, salience, sample size, and domain size in 28 sets of interviews in which respondents were asked to list all the things they could think of in one of 18 topical domains. The domains —like kinds of fruits (highly bounded) and things that mothers do (unbounded)—varied greatly in size. The datasets comprise 20–99 interviews each (1,147 total interviews). When saturation was defined as the point where less than one new item per person would be expected, the median sample size for reaching saturation was 75 (range = 15–194). Thematic saturation was, as expected, related to domain size. It was also related to the amount of information contributed by each respondent but, unexpectedly, was reached more quickly when respondents contributed less information. In contrast, a greater amount of information per person increased the retrieval of salient items. Even small samples (n = 10) produced 95% of the most salient ideas with exhaustive listing, but only 53% of those items were captured with limited responses per person (three). For most domains, item salience appeared to be a more useful concept for thinking about sample size adequacy than finding the point of thematic saturation. Thus, we advance the concept of saturation in salience and emphasize probing to increase the amount of information collected per respondent to increase sample efficiency.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Article numbere0198606
    JournalPLoS One
    Volume13
    Issue number6
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Jun 1 2018

    Fingerprint

    Size determination
    Fruits
    interviews
    Sample Size
    Interviews
    sampling
    Fruit
    Surveys and Questionnaires
    fruits

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
    • Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)

    Cite this

    Weller, S. C., Vickers, B., Bernard, H., Blackburn, A. M., Borgatti, S., Gravlee, C. C., & Johnson, J. C. (2018). Open-ended interview questions and saturation. PLoS One, 13(6), [e0198606]. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0198606

    Open-ended interview questions and saturation. / Weller, Susan C.; Vickers, Ben; Bernard, Harvey; Blackburn, Alyssa M.; Borgatti, Stephen; Gravlee, Clarence C.; Johnson, Jeffrey C.

    In: PLoS One, Vol. 13, No. 6, e0198606, 01.06.2018.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Weller, SC, Vickers, B, Bernard, H, Blackburn, AM, Borgatti, S, Gravlee, CC & Johnson, JC 2018, 'Open-ended interview questions and saturation' PLoS One, vol. 13, no. 6, e0198606. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0198606
    Weller SC, Vickers B, Bernard H, Blackburn AM, Borgatti S, Gravlee CC et al. Open-ended interview questions and saturation. PLoS One. 2018 Jun 1;13(6). e0198606. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0198606
    Weller, Susan C. ; Vickers, Ben ; Bernard, Harvey ; Blackburn, Alyssa M. ; Borgatti, Stephen ; Gravlee, Clarence C. ; Johnson, Jeffrey C. / Open-ended interview questions and saturation. In: PLoS One. 2018 ; Vol. 13, No. 6.
    @article{cd1a721fb79e4a40b24bfa104aea5a97,
    title = "Open-ended interview questions and saturation",
    abstract = "Sample size determination for open-ended questions or qualitative interviews relies primarily on custom and finding the point where little new information is obtained (thematic saturation). Here, we propose and test a refined definition of saturation as obtaining the most salient items in a set of qualitative interviews (where items can be material things or concepts, depending on the topic of study) rather than attempting to obtain all the items. Salient items have higher prevalence and are more culturally important. To do this, we explore saturation, salience, sample size, and domain size in 28 sets of interviews in which respondents were asked to list all the things they could think of in one of 18 topical domains. The domains —like kinds of fruits (highly bounded) and things that mothers do (unbounded)—varied greatly in size. The datasets comprise 20–99 interviews each (1,147 total interviews). When saturation was defined as the point where less than one new item per person would be expected, the median sample size for reaching saturation was 75 (range = 15–194). Thematic saturation was, as expected, related to domain size. It was also related to the amount of information contributed by each respondent but, unexpectedly, was reached more quickly when respondents contributed less information. In contrast, a greater amount of information per person increased the retrieval of salient items. Even small samples (n = 10) produced 95{\%} of the most salient ideas with exhaustive listing, but only 53{\%} of those items were captured with limited responses per person (three). For most domains, item salience appeared to be a more useful concept for thinking about sample size adequacy than finding the point of thematic saturation. Thus, we advance the concept of saturation in salience and emphasize probing to increase the amount of information collected per respondent to increase sample efficiency.",
    author = "Weller, {Susan C.} and Ben Vickers and Harvey Bernard and Blackburn, {Alyssa M.} and Stephen Borgatti and Gravlee, {Clarence C.} and Johnson, {Jeffrey C.}",
    year = "2018",
    month = "6",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.1371/journal.pone.0198606",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "13",
    journal = "PLoS One",
    issn = "1932-6203",
    publisher = "Public Library of Science",
    number = "6",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Open-ended interview questions and saturation

    AU - Weller, Susan C.

    AU - Vickers, Ben

    AU - Bernard, Harvey

    AU - Blackburn, Alyssa M.

    AU - Borgatti, Stephen

    AU - Gravlee, Clarence C.

    AU - Johnson, Jeffrey C.

    PY - 2018/6/1

    Y1 - 2018/6/1

    N2 - Sample size determination for open-ended questions or qualitative interviews relies primarily on custom and finding the point where little new information is obtained (thematic saturation). Here, we propose and test a refined definition of saturation as obtaining the most salient items in a set of qualitative interviews (where items can be material things or concepts, depending on the topic of study) rather than attempting to obtain all the items. Salient items have higher prevalence and are more culturally important. To do this, we explore saturation, salience, sample size, and domain size in 28 sets of interviews in which respondents were asked to list all the things they could think of in one of 18 topical domains. The domains —like kinds of fruits (highly bounded) and things that mothers do (unbounded)—varied greatly in size. The datasets comprise 20–99 interviews each (1,147 total interviews). When saturation was defined as the point where less than one new item per person would be expected, the median sample size for reaching saturation was 75 (range = 15–194). Thematic saturation was, as expected, related to domain size. It was also related to the amount of information contributed by each respondent but, unexpectedly, was reached more quickly when respondents contributed less information. In contrast, a greater amount of information per person increased the retrieval of salient items. Even small samples (n = 10) produced 95% of the most salient ideas with exhaustive listing, but only 53% of those items were captured with limited responses per person (three). For most domains, item salience appeared to be a more useful concept for thinking about sample size adequacy than finding the point of thematic saturation. Thus, we advance the concept of saturation in salience and emphasize probing to increase the amount of information collected per respondent to increase sample efficiency.

    AB - Sample size determination for open-ended questions or qualitative interviews relies primarily on custom and finding the point where little new information is obtained (thematic saturation). Here, we propose and test a refined definition of saturation as obtaining the most salient items in a set of qualitative interviews (where items can be material things or concepts, depending on the topic of study) rather than attempting to obtain all the items. Salient items have higher prevalence and are more culturally important. To do this, we explore saturation, salience, sample size, and domain size in 28 sets of interviews in which respondents were asked to list all the things they could think of in one of 18 topical domains. The domains —like kinds of fruits (highly bounded) and things that mothers do (unbounded)—varied greatly in size. The datasets comprise 20–99 interviews each (1,147 total interviews). When saturation was defined as the point where less than one new item per person would be expected, the median sample size for reaching saturation was 75 (range = 15–194). Thematic saturation was, as expected, related to domain size. It was also related to the amount of information contributed by each respondent but, unexpectedly, was reached more quickly when respondents contributed less information. In contrast, a greater amount of information per person increased the retrieval of salient items. Even small samples (n = 10) produced 95% of the most salient ideas with exhaustive listing, but only 53% of those items were captured with limited responses per person (three). For most domains, item salience appeared to be a more useful concept for thinking about sample size adequacy than finding the point of thematic saturation. Thus, we advance the concept of saturation in salience and emphasize probing to increase the amount of information collected per respondent to increase sample efficiency.

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85048816823&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85048816823&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0198606

    DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0198606

    M3 - Article

    VL - 13

    JO - PLoS One

    JF - PLoS One

    SN - 1932-6203

    IS - 6

    M1 - e0198606

    ER -