Saturation controversy in qualitative research: Complexities and underlying assumptions. A literature review

Abstract

Judgement of quality in qualitative has been a contested and controversial issue amongst researchers. Contention has always emanated from the subjective nature of qualitative studies, absence of clear guidelines in sampling as well as the lack of generalisability of findings. Numerous avenues have been suggested to improve qualitative research quality and key amongst the suggestions is the concept of saturation. It is viewed as a contemporary measure to alleviate the subjectivity in qualitative research, a yardstick for estimating sample sizes in qualitative research as well as an assurance for rigour and quality. Despite its recognition as a vital tool, it has its own fair share of controversies and contradictions. This research, through a comprehensive and evaluative literature review sought to unpack the saturation puzzle, controversies in definitions and underlying assumptions. The objective was to make a contribution to the contemporary but growing body of knowledge on the saturation conundrum. The study found out that there are various forms of saturation and with varying underlying propositions, therefore in order to meaningfully apply the concept, researchers have to appreciate the forms of saturation, link the appropriate form to their qualitative research design. It is undoubtedly important for research to define fully the form adopted, explicate the steps followed to achieve it and how it was ultimately achieved. In short, narrow the scope of saturation and contextualise it to your research.