Purposeful Sampling for Qualitative Data Collection and Analysis in Mixed Method Implementation Research

  • Lawrence A. PalinkasEmail author
  • Sarah M. Horwitz
  • Carla A. Green
  • Jennifer P. Wisdom
  • Naihua Duan
  • Kimberly Hoagwood
Original Article


Purposeful sampling is widely used in qualitative research for the identification and selection of information-rich cases related to the phenomenon of interest. Although there are several different purposeful sampling strategies, criterion sampling appears to be used most commonly in implementation research. However, combining sampling strategies may be more appropriate to the aims of implementation research and more consistent with recent developments in quantitative methods. This paper reviews the principles and practice of purposeful sampling in implementation research, summarizes types and categories of purposeful sampling strategies and provides a set of recommendations for use of single strategy or multistage strategy designs, particularly for state implementation research.


Mental health services Children and adolescents Mixed methods Qualitative methods implementation State systems 



This study was funded through a Grant from the National Institute of Mental Health (P30-MH090322: K. Hoagwood, PI).


  1. Aarons, G. A., Green, A. E., Palinkas, L. A., Self-Brown, S., Whitaker, D. J., Lutzker, J. R., et al.  (2012). Dynamic adaptation process to implement an evidence-based maltreatment intervention. Implementation Science, 7, 32.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Aarons, G. A., Hurlburt, M., & Horwitz, S. M. (2011). Advancing a conceptual model of evidence-based practice implementation in child welfare. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 38, 4–23.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Aarons, G. A., & Palinkas, L. A. (2007). Implementation of evidence-based practice in child welfare: Service provider perspectives. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 34, 411–419.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Aarons, G. A., Wells, R., Zagursky, K., Fettes, D. L., & Palinkas, L. A. (2009). Implementing evidence-based practice in community mental health agencies: Multiple stakeholder perspectives. American Journal of Public Health, 99(11), 2087–2095.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bachman, M. O., O’Brien, M., Husbands, C., Shreeve, A., Jones, N., Watson, J., et al. (2009). Integrating children’s services in England: National evaluation of children’s trusts. Child: Care, Health and Development, 35, 257–265.Google Scholar
  6. Bernard, H. R. (2002). Research methods in anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (3rd ed.). Walnut Creek, CA: Alta Mira Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bloom, H. S., & Michalopoulos, C. (2013). When is the story in the subgroups? Strategies for interpreting and reporting intervention effects for subgroups. Prevention Science, 14, 179–188.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown, C., Ten Have, T., Jo, B., Dagne, G., Wyman, P., Muthén, B., et al. (2009). Adaptive designs for randomized trials in public health. Annual Review of Public Health, 30, 1–25.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Brown, C. H., Wang, W., Kellam, S. G., Muthén, B. O., & Prevention Science and Methodology Group. (2008). Methods for testing theory and evaluating impact in randomized field trials: Intent-to-treat analyses for integrating the perspectives of person, place, and time. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, S95, S74–S104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brown, C. H., Wyman, P. A., Guo, J., & Peña, J. (2006). Dynamic wait-listed designs for randomized trials: New designs for prevention of youth suicide. Clinical Trials, 3, 259–271.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Brunette, M. F., Asher, D., Whitley, R., Lutz, W. J., Weider, B. L., Jones, A. M., et al. (2008). Implementation of integrated dual disorders treatment: A qualitative analysis of facilitators and barriers. Psychiatric Services, 59, 989–995.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Cresswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed method research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  13. Curran, G. M., Bauer, M., Mittman, B., Pyne, J. M., & Stetler, C. (2012). Effectiveness-implementation hybrid designs: Combining elements of clinical effectiveness and implementation research to enhance public health impact. Medical Care, 50, 217–226.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Denzen, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  15. Duan, N., Bhaumik, D. K., Palinkas, L. A., & Hoagwood, K. (this issue). Purposeful sampling and optimal design. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research.Google Scholar
  16. Gioia, D., & Dziadosz, G. (2008).  Adoption of evidence-based practices in community mental health: A mixed method study of practitioner experience. Community Mental Health Journal, 44, 347–357.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.Google Scholar
  18. Glaser, B. G., & Straus, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  19. Glasgow, R., Magid, D., Beck, A., Ritzwoller, D., & Estabrooks, P. (2005). Practical clinical trials for translating research to practice: Design and measurement recommendations. Medical Care, 43(6), 551.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Green, A. E., & Aarons, G. A. (2011). A comparison of policy and direct practice stakeholder perceptions of factors affecting evidence-based practice implementation using concept mapping. Implementation Science, 6, 104.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Henke, R. M., Chou, A. F., Chanin, J. C., Zides, A. B., & Scholle, S. H. (2008). Physician attitude toward depression care interventions: Implications for implementation of quality improvement initiatives. Implementation Science, 3, 40.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Hoagwood, K. E., Vogel, J. M., Levitt, J. M., D’Amico, P. J., Paisner, W. I., & Kaplan, S. J. (2007). Implementing an evidence-based trauma treatment in a state system after September 11: The CATS Project. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 46(6), 773–779.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Kemper, E. A., Stringfield, S., & Teddlie, C. (2003). Mixed methods sampling strategies in social science research. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in the social and behavioral sciences (pp. 273–296). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  25. Kramer, T. F., & Burns, B. J. (2008). Implementing cognitive behavioral therapy in the real world: A case study of two mental health centers. Implementation Science, 3, 14.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Landsverk, J., Brown, H., Chamberlain, P., Palinkas, L. A., & Horwitz, S. M. (2012). Design and analysis in dissemination and implementation research. In R. C. Brownson, G. A. Colditz, & E. K. Proctor (Eds.), Translating science to practice (pp. 225–260). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Marshall, T., Rapp, C. A., Becker, D. R., & Bond, G. R. (2008). Key factors for implementing supported employment. Psychiatric Services, 59, 886–892.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Marty, D., Rapp, C., McHugo, G., & Whitley, R. (2008). Factors influencing consumer outcome monitoring in implementation of evidence-based practices: Results from the National EBP Implementation Project. Administration and Policy In Mental Health, 35, 204–211.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  30. Minkler, M., & Wallerstein, N. (Eds.). (2003). Community-based participatory research for health. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  31. Morgan, D. L. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  32. Morse, J. M., & Niehaus, L. (2009). Mixed method design: Principles and procedures. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.Google Scholar
  33. Padgett, D. K. (2008). Qualitative methods in social work research (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
  34. Palinkas, L. A., Aarons, G. A., Horwitz, S. M., Chamberlain, P., Hurlburt, M., & Landsverk, J. (2011a). Mixed method designs in implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 38, 44–53.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Palinkas, L. A., Ell, K., Hansen, M., Cabassa, L. J., & Wells, A. A. (2011b). Sustainability of collaborative care interventions in primary care settings. Journal of Social Work, 11, 99–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Palinkas, L. A., Holloway, I. W., Rice, E., Fuentes, D., Wu, Q., & Chamberlain, P. (2011c). Social networks and implementation of evidence-based practices in public youth-serving systems: A mixed methods study. Implementation Science, 6, 113.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Palinkas, L. A., Fuentes, D., Garcia, A. R., Finno, M., Holloway, I. W., & Chamberlain, P. (2012). Inter-organizational collaboration in the implementation of evidence-based practices among agencies serving abused and neglected youth. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research. doi: 10.1007/s10488-012-0437-5.
  38. Palinkas, L. A., & Soydan, H. (2012). Translation and implementation of evidence-based practice. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  40. Proctor, E. K., Knudsen, K. J., Fedoracivius, N., Hovmand, P., Rosen, A., & Perron, B. (2007). Implementation of evidence-based practice in community behavioral health: Agency director perspectives. Administration and Policy in Mental Health, 34, 479–488.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Proctor, E. K., Landsverk, J., Aarons, G., Chambers, D., Glisson, C., & Mittman, C. (2009). Implementation research in mental health services: An emerging science with conceptual, methodological, and training challenges. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 36, 24–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Rapp, C. A., Etzel-Wise, D., Marty, D., Coffman, M., Carlson, L., Asher, D., et al. (2010). Barriers to evidence-based practice implementation: Results of a qualitative study. Community Mental Health Journal, 46, 112–118.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Raudenbush, S., & Liu, X. (2000). Statistical power and optimal design for multisite randomized trials. Psychological Methods, 5, 199–213.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Slade, M., Gask, L., Leese, M., McCrone, P., Montana, C., Powell, R., et al. (2008). Failure to improve appropriateness of referrals to adult community mental health services—Lessons from a multi-site cluster randomized controlled trial. Family Practice, 25, 181–190.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Spradley, J. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
  46. Swain, K., Whitley, R., McHugo, G. J., & Drake, R. E. (2010). The sustainability of evidence-based practices in routine mental health agencies. Community Mental Health Journal, 46, 119–129.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2003). Major issues and controversies in the use of mixed methods in the social and behavioral sciences. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in the social and behavioral sciences (pp. 3–50). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  48. Tunis, S. R., Stryer, D. B., & Clancey, C. M. (2003). Increasing the value of clinical research for decision making in clinical and health policy. Journal of the American Medical Association, 290(1624–1632), 2003.Google Scholar
  49. Wisdom, J. P., Cavaleri, M. C., Onwuegbuzie, A. T., & Green, C. A. (2011). Methodological reporting in qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods health services research articles. Health Services Research, 47, 721–745.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Woltmann, E. M., Whitley, R., McHugo, G. J., et al. (2008). The role of staff turnover in the implementation of evidence-based practices in health care. Psychiatric Services, 59, 732–737.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Zazzali, J. L., Sherbourne, C., Hoagwood, K. E., Greene, D., Bigley, M. F., & Sexton, T. L. (2008). The adoption and implementation of an evidence based practice in child and family mental health services organizations: A pilot study of functional family therapy in New York State. Administration and Policy in Mental Health, 35, 38–49.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lawrence A. Palinkas
    • 1
    Email author
  • Sarah M. Horwitz
    • 2
  • Carla A. Green
    • 3
  • Jennifer P. Wisdom
    • 4
  • Naihua Duan
    • 5
  • Kimberly Hoagwood
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Social WorkUniversity of Southern CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA
  2. 2.Department of Child and Adolescent PsychiatryNew York UniversityNew YorkUSA
  3. 3.Center for Health ResearchKaiser Permanente NorthwestPortlandUSA
  4. 4.George Washington UniversityWashingtonUSA
  5. 5.Department of Psychiatry and New York State Neuropsychiatric InstituteColumbia UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations