Comparison of Convenience Sampling and Purposive Sampling
American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics
Volume 5, Issue 1, January 2016, Pages: 1-4
Received: Nov. 23, 2015; Accepted: Dec. 6, 2015; Published: Dec. 22, 2015
Views 66246      Downloads 4541
Authors
Ilker Etikan, Department of Biostatistics, Near East University, Nicosia-TRNC, Cyprus
Sulaiman Abubakar Musa, Department of Biostatistics, Near East University, Nicosia-TRNC, Cyprus
Rukayya Sunusi Alkassim, Department of Biostatistics, Near East University, Nicosia-TRNC, Cyprus
Article Tools
Follow on us
Abstract
This article studied and compared the two nonprobability sampling techniques namely, Convenience Sampling and Purposive Sampling. Convenience Sampling and Purposive Sampling are Nonprobability Sampling Techniques that a researcher uses to choose a sample of subjects/units from a population. Although, Nonprobability sampling has a lot of limitations due to the subjective nature in choosing the sample and thus it is not good representative of the population, but it is useful especially when randomization is impossible like when the population is very large. It can be useful when the researcher has limited resources, time and workforce. It can also be used when the research does not aim to generate results that will be used to create generalizations pertaining to the entire population. Therefore, there is a need to use nonprobability sampling techniques. The aim of this study is to compare among the two nonrandom sampling techniques in order to know whether one technique is better or useful than the other. Different articles were reviewed to compare between Convenience Sampling and Purposive Sampling and it is concluded that the choice of the techniques (Convenience Sampling and Purposive Sampling) depends on the nature and type of the research.
Keywords
Convenience Sampling, Purposive Sampling, Sampling Techniques
To cite this article
Ilker Etikan, Sulaiman Abubakar Musa, Rukayya Sunusi Alkassim, Comparison of Convenience Sampling and Purposive Sampling, American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics. Vol. 5, No. 1, 2016, pp. 1-4. doi: 10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11
Copyright
Copyright © 2015 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
References
[1]
Battaglia, M. P. (2008). Non Probability Sampling . Encyclopedia of Survey Resesrch Methods. 2008. SAGE Publications, 1-4.
[2]
Bernard, H. R. (2002). Research methods in anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (3rd ed.). Walnut Creek, CA: Alta Mira Press.
[3]
Cresswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and Conducting mixed method research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
[4]
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. New York: Oxford University Press.
[5]
Explorable.com. (2009, Sep 16). Convenience Sampling. Retrieved Nov 13, 2015, from https://explorable.com/convenience-sampling
[6]
Fink, Arlene. How to Sample in Surveys. Vol. 6. London: Sage Publications, 1995.
[7]
Hatch, E. & Lazaraton, A. (1991). The research manual: Design and statistics for applied linguistics. New York: Newbury House Publishers.
[8]
Henry, Gary T. Practical Sampling. Vol. 21. London: Sage Publications, 1990.
[9]
http://dissertation.laerd.com/purposive-sampling.php#types.
[10]
http://www.unesco.org/iiep.
[11]
Lawrence A Palinkas, Carla A Green, Jennifer P Wisdom, & Kimberly Eaton Hoagwood. (2013). Purposeful Sampling for Qualitative Data Collection and Analysis in Mixed Method Implementation Research. Reearch Gate.
[12]
Leiner, D. J. (2014). Convenience Samples and Respondent Pools. 1-36.
[13]
Mackey, A. & Gass, S. (2005). Second language research: Methodology and design. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
[14]
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
[15]
Morse, J. M., & Niehaus, L. (2009). Mixed method design: Principles and procedures. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
[16]
Oppong, S. H. (2013). The problem of sampling in qualitative research. Asian journal of management sciences and education, 1-9.
[17]
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
[18]
S. K., & Given Lisa M. (2008). Convenience Sample. In The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
[19]
Spradley, J. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
[20]
Tailor, G. R. (Ed.). (2005). Integrating quantitative and qualitative methods in research. Maryland: University Press of America Inc.
[21]
Tongco, M. D. (nd). Purposive Sampling as a Tool for Informant Selection. A Journal of Plant, People and Applied Research Ethnobotany Research and Applications, 1-12.
[22]
Walliman, N. (2011). Research methods: The basics. New York: Rout ledge.
[23]
Zhi., H. L. (2014). A comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. PubMed, 105-11.
ADDRESS
Science Publishing Group
1 Rockefeller Plaza,
10th and 11th Floors,
New York, NY 10020
U.S.A.
Tel: (001)347-983-5186