UNIT IV

Sampling
Sampling is a particular technique using which the researcher select the research sample from
the targeted population. Sampling techniques are used in order to draw a representative
sample from the larger population. Sampling techniques ensures that the selected sample
represent all the qualities of the larger population.

Definitions of Sampling

Jopnes (1955) and Salant & Dillman (1994) “sampling is the act, process, or technique of
selecting a suitable sample, or a representative part of a population for the purpose of
determining parameters or characteristics of the whole population”.

Glicken (2003) sampling is “the process of selecting a smaller group of participants to tell us
essentially what a larger population might tell us if we asked every member of the larger
population the same questions”.

So, on the basis of the given definitions we can say that the sample is a smaller part of the
larger population in which the researcher is interested to conduct the research.

Methods of Sampling

In the area of social sciences, research samples are drawn from the targeted population using
two methods: Probability and Non-Probability sampling techniques.

1. Probability sampling techniques:

Probability sampling techniques are a set of methods used in statistics and research to select a
sample from a larger population in a way that every element in the population has a known,
non-zero probability of being included in the sample. Probability sampling methods ensure
that the sample is representative of the population and allow for statistical inferences to be
made with a high degree of accuracy. Here are some common probability sampling
techniques:

A. Simple Random Sampling: In simple random sampling, each element in the

population has an equal chance of being selected. This can be achieved through
methods like drawing lots, using random number generators, or using a random
table.
 B. Stratified Sampling: Stratified sampling divides the population into subgroups or
strata based on a specific characteristic (e.g., age, gender, income). A random
sample is then taken from each stratum, ensuring that each subgroup is
represented in the final sample.
C. Systematic Sampling: In systematic sampling, researchers select every nth
element from a list or population. The starting point is chosen randomly. For
instance, if every 5th person from a voter registration list is selected, it's a
systematic sample.
D. Cluster Sampling: Cluster sampling involves dividing the population into
clusters, such as geographic regions or groups, and then randomly selecting entire
clusters. This method is useful when it is difficult to create a complete list of all
elements in the population.

Probability sampling techniques are highly regarded in research because they minimize bias
and allow researchers to make valid statistical inferences about a population based on the
characteristics of the sample. This is crucial in scientific and social research when the goal is
to generalize findings from a sample to a larger population.

2. Non-probability sampling
Non-probability sampling techniques are methods of selecting a sample from a population
where not every element has a known, non-zero probability of being included in the sample.
These methods are commonly used in situations where probability sampling is impractical,
too costly, or not feasible. However, they come with limitations and are generally considered
less representative and less reliable for making statistical inferences compared to
probability sampling techniques. Here are some common non-probability sampling
techniques:

A. Convenience or Availability Sampling: Convenience or availability sampling

involves selecting individuals who are easiest to access or the researchers participants
are selected based on their availability during a specified time period. For example,
surveying all students who attend a class on a specific day.
B. Judgmental or Purposive Sampling: In judgmental or purposive sampling,
researchers select specific individuals or elements from the population based on their
knowledge, judgment, or specific criteria. This method is often used when researchers
seek particular expertise or characteristics, but it is prone to researcher bias.
C. Snowball Sampling: Snowball sampling is used when the population is difficult to
access, particularly in studies of hidden or hard-to-reach populations. Researchers
begin with a few initial participants, and those participants help in identifying and
recruiting additional participants. This method is often used in studies of social
networks or marginalized groups.
 D. Quota Sampling: Quota sampling is a method where researchers divide the
population into subgroups and then select individuals from each subgroup until they
reach a predetermined quota. While it allows for some control over the sample
composition, it is not random and can introduce bias.
E. Volunteer Sampling: Volunteer sampling involves individuals self-selecting into the
sample. People who are interested or motivated to participate in a study are more
likely to be included, leading to self-selection bias.

Non-probability sampling techniques are often used in exploratory research or when strict
random sampling is not feasible. Researchers should be aware of the limitations and potential
bias associated with these methods and use them judiciously. In cases where generalizability
is a priority, probability sampling techniques are generally preferred.
Methods and Tools of Data Collection
Observation
Observation is the basic method of obtaining information about social phenomena under investigation.
All of us are constantly engaged in observation. However, all such observations are not scientific
observations. Observations become a method of data collection when it is planned in accordance with
the purpose of research and recorded systematically keeping in mind the validity and reliability of
observed data. There are numerous situations where this method of observation is considered as most
appropriate. Say for example, a researcher who is interested in understanding the behaviour of
children who cannot speak, necessarily, has to depend on this method of observation. Many aspects of
our behaviour are so much a part of life that it becomes difficult to translate it into words. Many a
time, a researcher faces resistance from respondents being studied. Sometimes, people do not
cooperate with the researcher and show their unwillingness to respond to the questions of the
researcher. Although observations cannot always overcome such resistance, it is relatively the most
appropriate method of data collection in such situations. The method of observations serves variety of
research objectives. Exploratory objectives are worth mentioning here. A researcher can explore some
aspects of his main research question or can gain insight into the research problem and develop the
basis for his hypothesis. It may also be used to collect supplementary information that would help
interpret findings obtained by other methods.

Type of Observations

Participant Observations

Participant observation involves sharing the life of the group under study by the researcher. In other
words, participant observation is an attempt to put both the observer and the observed on the same
side by making the observer a member of the group so that he can experience what they experience
and work within their frame of reference. In particular, the researcher becomes a member of the
community being observed by him.

Non-participant Observations

On the contrary, non-participant observation is characterised by a lack of participation by the observer

in the life of the group that a researcher is observing. In other words, in non-participant observations
the observer has detached role and records without any attempt on his part to participate in the
interaction process with the group being observed.

Case Study Method

The case study method in social investigation is an in-depth and contextually rich approach
used to study specific individuals, groups, organizations, or communities within their natural
settings. Researchers typically employ a combination of data collection techniques such as
interviews, observations, and document analysis to gain an exhaustive understanding of the
case under scrutiny. It is particularly beneficial for exploring complex, unique, or context-
specific phenomena. Case studies are often applied when researchers aim to answer "how"
and "why" questions or when they want to delve deeply into a subject. This method provides
rich, detailed insights, facilitating the exploration of intricate social dynamics and offering a
unique perspective on the chosen case. While case studies offer numerous advantages,
including hypothesis generation and the potential to contribute to theory-building, they also
present challenges such as difficulties in generalizing findings beyond the specific case,
potential researcher bias, and resource-intensiveness due to the extensive data collection and
analysis required. Nonetheless, case studies remain a valuable tool in social investigation,
especially when exploring intricate or atypical cases.

Advantages of case studies

Case studies provide researchers with several unique advantages, including:

 They allow researchers to observe and record information about rare, impractical, or
unethical conditions and behaviours.
 They provide researchers with new evidence to support psychological theories.
 They help researchers develop hypotheses that others can study or add to in the future.
 They offer researchers additional insights into the phenomenon to gain a better
understanding of the behaviour or event.
 They allow researchers to evaluate conditions or behaviours in a real-world setting
that may be difficult to replicate in a laboratory environment.

Disadvantages of case studies

Along with many advantages of using case studies, there are several disadvantages to
consider, including:

 Case study results can be difficult to replicate.

 Case studies can be expensive and time-consuming.
 Researchers can allow their own feelings to influence the case study, known as
researcher bias.
 Case studies can lack scientific methods and rigour to protect the accuracy of data
collected.
 Researchers can find the volume of data difficult to analyze and apply to a larger
population.

Interview
The interview is a verbal interaction between the researcher and the respondents. This method has
been a widely used method of data collection. This method involves presentation of verbal questions
orally and collecting oral verbal responses. Many feel that the best way to find out why people behave
as they do is to question them about their behaviour directly by interviewing them. In this method, the
interviewer asks questions in a face-to-face contact (generally) to the interviewee, the person who is
being interviewed who gives answers (mostly) to these questions. Interview has been a widely used
method of data collection so far as, information about the social background, opinion, attitudes,
changes in relations are concerned.

Types of Interview:

The Structured Interviews

As the name suggests, structured interviews maintain some control over the respondents.
Nevertheless, considerable flexibility is permitted in deciding the extent to which interviews should
be structured. First and foremost area, through which an interview is structured, is the questions and
its responses. The questions in an interview are regulated to get appropriate responses. In so far as
responses are concerned they are regulated and controlled by giving multiple choices to the
interviewee. To achieve this, first the questions have to be in order and focussed to get reliable and
appropriate responses; it is beneficial to ask questions in same order from one interview to another
interview.

The Unstructured Interviews

In unstructured interviews questions are not ordered in a particular way. The order of questions is not
fixed. In other words the order of questions followed in one interview may not be followed in the next
interview. Even the questions asked are not worded in the same way. In sum, the interview is free of
regulation and control.

Questionnaire
A questionnaire is a research instrument consisting of a series of questions or prompts to gather
information from individuals. It's a method of data collection commonly used in survey research,
market research, social sciences, and various other fields. Questionnaires can be administered in
various formats, including paper-and-pencil, online surveys, face-to-face interviews, and telephone
interviews.

The primary purpose of a questionnaire is to collect structured data from respondents to gain insights,
opinions, attitudes, or factual information on a specific topic. The questions in a questionnaire can be
closed-ended (providing predefined response options) or open-ended (allowing respondents to provide
their own answers). The design of a questionnaire depends on the research objectives and the type of
information you want to gather.

Formats of Questions: The format of the question and the response categories accompanying the
questions are other aspects, which need attention of the researchers. Three types of question formats
are discussed in the following sections: (1) open-ended questions, (2) closed-ended questions and (3)
contingency questions.

Open-Ended and Closed-Ended Questions: Questions in a questionnaire can be either open ended
or closed-ended. In a closed-ended question, respondents are offered a set of answers from which they
are asked to choose the one that most closely represents their views. For example, to measure sex
discrimination against women in the unorganised sector the author used, among other questions, the
following closed-ended question:

Open-ended questions are not followed by any kind of specified responses, and the respondents’
responses are recorded in full. For instance, the question “What do you personally feel are the most
important issues related to child labour which the government should try to take care of?” is an open-
ended question used frequently in questionnaires designed to study public opinion. The advantage of
the open-ended question is that it does not force the respondent to adapt to predetermined responses.

Contingency Questions Frequently questions that are relevant to some respondents may be irrelevant
to others. For example, the question “Check the most important reasons why you are not going to
college” obviously applies only to those intermediate students who are not planning to go to college at
all. It is often necessary to include questions that might apply only to some respondents and not to
others. Some questions may be relevant only to females and not to males: others will only apply to
respondents who are self-employed, and so on.

When a question is applicable to only a sub-group of the sample it is known as contingency question.
A contingency question is a special case of a closed ended question and it is one that applies only to a
subgroup of respondents. The relevance of the question to this subgroup is determined by the answer
of respondents to a preceding question. For example, in a research study the preceding question was,
“Are you aware of the Act?” The contingency question could be, “If yes, what do you know about it?”
The relevance of the second question to the respondent is contingent upon his or her response to the
preceding question. Only respondents who responded “Yes” to the preceding question will find the
contingency question relevant. Therefore, the response categories of the preceding questions will be 1.
Yes (answer the following question); 2. No (skip to question 3).

Focus Group Discussion

A Focus Group Discussion (FGD) is a qualitative research method and data collection technique in
which a selected group of people discusses a given topic or issue in-depth, facilitated by a
professional, external moderator. This method serves to solicit participants’ attitudes and perceptions,
knowledge and experiences, and practices, shared in the course of interaction with different people
(see Table 1). The technique is based upon the assumption that the group processes activated during
an FGD help to identify and clarify shared knowledge among groups and communities, which would
otherwise be difficult to obtain with a series of individual interviews. Yet, this method does not
presume that A) all the knowledge is shared equally among a studied group, or that B) in each
community there is a common, underlying, homogeneous knowledge. Rather, an FDG allows the
investigator to solicit both the participants’ shared narrative as well as their differences in terms of
experiences, opinions and worldviews during such ‘open’ discussion rounds.

Specific types of FGD groups:

‘Natural groups’: consist of multiple participants who belong to a pre-existing informal or formal
group (e.g. family or kin, co-workers, elderly group, women’s self-help group, neighbourhood club,
teachers’ credit association) prior to the study. Conducting a focus group discussion with a natural
group may reveal discrepancies and similarities between what people say and how they act, and how
other participants react and comment in response. However, the researcher must be aware that power
relations inherent to the group’s social dynamics (e.g. doctor vs. nurse, parents vs. children, younger
vs. older persons, men vs. women, better off vs. less well off), might influence participants’ ‘public’
statements. Data analysis must account for this potential bias.

‘Expert groups’: consist of several people who have particularly good and broad expert knowledge
and experience of the research topic(s). Such groups (e.g. nurses from health district centre,
ambulance drivers, or drugstore vendors) tend to be smaller than typical FGDs and are used to solicit
large amounts of highly specific information, although participant statements may vary.
 Advantages of FGDs

 Discussions that are open and free generate fresh ideas that may be quite helpful in making
decisions.
 Focus groups are dynamic. The moderator may adjust the group conversation to make it
easier for everyone to participate. With this dynamic, a focus group’s findings are more
accurate.
 Gestures and energising activities may help researchers get new insights into their subjects.

Disadvantages of Focus Group Discussions

 They are more expensive because the organiser has to compensate the participants.
 Participants feel like they are under supervision, so they do not put their honest opinion in
front.
 The moderator may be disappointed because the results may be biassed.

What are the Skills Required to Conduct FGDs?

Like any research/study methodologies, focus group discussions need significant abilities,
competencies, and knowledge. The researcher must be flexible and devoid of bias and
preconceptions.

A thorough comprehension of the subject, issue, or topic to be studied requires both

theoretical knowledge and actual practice.

Proficiency in the language in which conversations will take place: focus group discussions
cannot be conducted with the help of an interpreter or a third person, regardless of their
abilities.

Facilitating and conducting a focus group interview requires extensive group process
expertise. It is critical to understand how to handle the interview so that one or two persons
do not dominate it. The moderator must ensure an environment where those who are not very
communicative can also express their opinions.

The interviewer must have training or experience in leading group discussions. This skill is
critical because an inexperienced moderator might unintentionally stifle the free flow of
conversation and draw unreasonable conclusions and results.