Sampling methods in psychology refer to strategies used to select a subset of individuals (a sample) from a larger population, to study and draw inferences about the entire population. Common methods include random sampling, stratified sampling, cluster sampling, and convenience sampling. Proper sampling ensures representative, generalizable, and valid research results.
Key Terms
- Sampling: the process of selecting a representative group from the population under study.
- Target population: the total group of individuals from which the sample might be drawn.
- Sample: a subset of individuals selected from a larger population for study or investigation. Those included in the sample are termed “participants.”
- Generalizability: the ability to apply research findings from a sample to the broader target population, contingent on the sample being representative of that population.
- Biased sample: a sample that disproportionately represents certain segments of the population, leading to overrepresentation or underrepresentation of specific groups.
For instance, if the advert for volunteers is published in the New York Times, this limits how much the study’s findings can be generalized to the whole population, because NYT readers may not represent the entire population in certain respects (e.g., politically, socio-economically).
The Purpose of Sampling
We are interested in learning about large groups of people with something in common in psychological research. We call the group interested in studying our “target population.”
In some types of research, the target population might be as broad as all humans. Still, in other types of research, the target population might be a smaller group, such as teenagers, preschool children, or people who misuse drugs.
Studying every person in a target population is more or less impossible. Hence, psychologists select a sample or sub-group of the population that is likely to be representative of the target population we are interested in.
This is important because we want to generalize from the sample to the target population. The more representative the sample, the more confident the researcher can be that the results can be generalized to the target population.
One of the problems that can occur when selecting a sample from a target population is sampling bias. Sampling bias refers to situations where the sample does not reflect the characteristics of the target population.
Many psychology studies have a biased sample because they have used an opportunity sample that comprises university students as their participants (e.g., Asch ).
OK, so you’ve thought up this brilliant psychological study and designed it perfectly. But who will you try it out on, and how will you select your participants?
There are various sampling methods. The one chosen will depend on a number of factors (such as time, money, etc.).
Random Sampling
Random sampling is a type of probability sampling where everyone in the entire target population has an equal chance of being selected.
This is similar to the national lottery. If the “population” is everyone who bought a lottery ticket, then everyone has an equal chance of winning the lottery (assuming they all have one ticket each).
Random samples require a way of naming or numbering the target population and then using some raffle method to choose those to make up the sample. Random samples are the best method of selecting your sample from the population of interest.
- The advantages are that your sample should represent the target population and eliminate sampling bias.
- The disadvantage is that it is very difficult to achieve (i.e., time, effort, and money).
Stratified Sampling
During stratified sampling, the researcher identifies the different types of people that make up the target population and works out the proportions needed for the sample to be representative.
A list is made of each variable (e.g., IQ, gender, etc.) that might have an effect on the research. For example, if we are interested in the money spent on books by undergraduates, then the main subject studied may be an important variable.
For example, students studying English Literature may spend more money on books than engineering students, so if we use a large percentage of English students or engineering students, our results will not be accurate.
We have to determine the relative percentage of each group at a university, e.g., Engineering 10%, Social Sciences 15%, English 20%, Sciences 25%, Languages 10%, Law 5%, and Medicine 15%. The sample must then contain all these groups in the same proportion as in the target population (university students).
- The disadvantage of stratified sampling is that gathering such a sample would be extremely time-consuming and difficult to do. This method is rarely used in Psychology.
- However, the advantage is that the sample should be highly representative of the target population, and therefore we can generalize from the results obtained.
Opportunity Sampling
Opportunity sampling is a method in which participants are chosen based on their ease of availability and proximity to the researcher, rather than using random or systematic criteria. It’s a type of convenience sampling.
An opportunity sample is obtained by asking members of the population of interest if they would participate in your research. An example would be selecting a sample of students from those coming out of the library.
- This is a quick and easy way of choosing participants (advantage)
- It may not provide a representative sample and could be biased (disadvantage).
Systematic Sampling
Systematic sampling is a method where every nth individual is selected from a list or sequence to form a sample, ensuring even and regular intervals between chosen subjects.
Participants are systematically selected (i.e., orderly/logical) from the target population, like every nth participant on a list of names.
To take a systematic sample, you list all the population members and then decide upon a sample you would like. By dividing the number of people in the population by the number of people you want in your sample, you get a number we will call n.
If you take every nth name, you will get a systematic sample of the correct size. If, for example, you wanted to sample 150 children from a school of 1,500, you would take every 10th name.
- The advantage of this method is that it should provide a representative sample.
- The disadvantage is that it is very difficult to achieve (i.e., time, effort, and money).
Sample size
The sample size is a critical factor in determining the reliability and validity of a study’s findings. While increasing the sample size can enhance the generalizability of results, it’s also essential to balance practical considerations, such as resource constraints and diminishing returns from ever-larger samples.
Reliability and Validity
-
Reliability refers to the consistency and reproducibility of research findings across different occasions, researchers, or instruments. A small sample size may lead to inconsistent results due to increased susceptibility to random error or the influence of outliers. In contrast, a larger sample minimizes these errors, promoting more reliable results.
-
Validity pertains to the accuracy and truthfulness of research findings. For a study to be valid, it should accurately measure what it intends to do. A small, unrepresentative sample can compromise external validity, meaning the results don’t generalize well to the larger population. A larger sample captures more variability, ensuring that specific subgroups or anomalies don’t overly influence results.
Practical Considerations
-
Resource Constraints: Larger samples demand more time, money, and resources. Data collection becomes more extensive, data analysis more complex, and logistics more challenging.
-
Diminishing Returns: While increasing the sample size generally leads to improved accuracy and precision, there’s a point where adding more participants yields only marginal benefits. For instance, going from 50 to 500 participants might significantly boost a study’s robustness, but jumping from 10,000 to 10,500 might not offer a comparable advantage, especially considering the added costs.
