This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Peregrine, P. N. Articles by Slupe, A. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Sampling Techniques and Sampling Error in Naturalistic Observation: An Empirical Evaluation With Implications for Cross-Cultural Research

Juniata College

David R. Drews

Juniata College

Melissa North

Juniata College

Amy Slupe

Juniata College

Naturalistic observation plays an important role in cross-cultural research, and in virtually all cases observations are made of popu lation samples, not whole populations. A variety of sampling strat egies have been devised for naturalistic fieldwork, but deviations from actual target populations differ widely depending on the strategy used. This study uses two sets of continuous observations of child touching behavior to empirically evaluate these various sampling strategies. We find that random samples are the only ones that reliably represent the target populations. This finding has a number of implications for cross-cultural research, primarily that (a) data collected using differing sampling techniques are likely to vary in their representativeness, making samples gathered with different techniques difficult to compare; and (b) because the repre sentativeness of any sample is partly a function of the nature of the target population, careful attention should be paid to the definition of target populations.

Cross-Cultural Research, Vol. 27, No. 3-4, 232-246 (1993)
DOI: 10.1177/106939719302700304


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?