American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics

| Peer-Reviewed |

Comparison of Convenience Sampling and Purposive Sampling

Received: 23 November 2015    Accepted: 06 December 2015    Published: 22 December 2015
Views:       Downloads:

Share This Article

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.

DOI 10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11
Published in American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics (Volume 5, Issue 1, January 2016)
Page(s) 1-4
Creative Commons

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.

Copyright

Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Convenience Sampling, Purposive Sampling, Sampling Techniques

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.
Author Information
  • Department of Biostatistics, Near East University, Nicosia-TRNC, Cyprus

  • Department of Biostatistics, Near East University, Nicosia-TRNC, Cyprus

  • Department of Biostatistics, Near East University, Nicosia-TRNC, Cyprus

Cite This Article
  • APA Style

    Ilker Etikan, Sulaiman Abubakar Musa, Rukayya Sunusi Alkassim. (2015). Comparison of Convenience Sampling and Purposive Sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11

    Copy | Download

    ACS Style

    Ilker Etikan; Sulaiman Abubakar Musa; Rukayya Sunusi Alkassim. Comparison of Convenience Sampling and Purposive Sampling. Am. J. Theor. Appl. Stat. 2015, 5(1), 1-4. doi: 10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11

    Copy | Download

    AMA Style

    Ilker Etikan, Sulaiman Abubakar Musa, Rukayya Sunusi Alkassim. Comparison of Convenience Sampling and Purposive Sampling. Am J Theor Appl Stat. 2015;5(1):1-4. doi: 10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11

    Copy | Download

  • @article{10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11,
      author = {Ilker Etikan and Sulaiman Abubakar Musa and Rukayya Sunusi Alkassim},
      title = {Comparison of Convenience Sampling and Purposive Sampling},
      journal = {American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics},
      volume = {5},
      number = {1},
      pages = {1-4},
      doi = {10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11},
      url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11},
      eprint = {https://download.sciencepg.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajtas.20160501.11},
      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.},
     year = {2015}
    }
    

    Copy | Download

  • TY  - JOUR
    T1  - Comparison of Convenience Sampling and Purposive Sampling
    AU  - Ilker Etikan
    AU  - Sulaiman Abubakar Musa
    AU  - Rukayya Sunusi Alkassim
    Y1  - 2015/12/22
    PY  - 2015
    N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11
    DO  - 10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11
    T2  - American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics
    JF  - American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics
    JO  - American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics
    SP  - 1
    EP  - 4
    PB  - Science Publishing Group
    SN  - 2326-9006
    UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11
    AB  - 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.
    VL  - 5
    IS  - 1
    ER  - 

    Copy | Download

  • Sections