PSY1023 Chap.6 Sampling, Reflexivity and Ethical Communication
Sampling, Reflexivity and Ethical Communication
Week 5 is where the group project stops being a plan on a slide and starts involving real people. Three questions run through the seminar and tutorial. Who should you talk to, and what can their accounts tell you about everyone else? How do your own background and beliefs shape what you hear? And how do you explain the study to participants so that their agreement to take part is genuinely informed?
This chapter treats those questions as one design problem, because a weak answer to any of them undermines the trustworthiness of the report you write later in the semester.
Sampling starts with two terms that students often blur. The population is everyone your conclusions are meant to cover, while the sample is the smaller set of people who actually give you data.
Qualitative studies rarely aim to generalise in a statistical sense, but they still have to show that the people interviewed capture the variety that matters for the research question.
The unit contrasts random, probability-based selection with non-random approaches such as convenience, snowball and volunteer recruitment, and it lists the influences on sample size, from methodology and analysis type to practical constraints and saturation.
Being able to name the approach your group used, and the voices it is likely to miss, is a quick way to strengthen a Method section.
Reflexivity is the second strand. Researchers are not neutral recording devices; their identities, roles and assumptions influence which questions get asked and how answers are interpreted.
The seminar describes tools for managing that influence, including a reflective journal that records reasons as well as reactions, and regular debriefing with peers or supervisors. In AT2 this becomes a 500-word positionality statement, written before the Week 8 interviews, covering your own ontological and epistemological perspective and the dynamics of your group.
Strong statements connect identity to concrete research decisions rather than listing labels.
The final strand is communication with participants. The tutorial frames ethical communication around safety and privacy, openness, respectful language and accessibility, and it introduces the explanatory statement and consent form your group adapts from a sample template.
These documents explain purpose, eligibility, risks, withdrawal rights, confidentiality and data storage, and the consent form later appears as an appendix in the AT3 report. The paid pages work through a figure of sampling families, a repaired positionality paragraph and two applied practice questions.
What this chapter covers
- 01
Population, sample and representativeness
- 02
Probability and non-probability sampling
- 03
Convenience, snowball and volunteer recruitment
- 04
Influences on sample size and saturation
- 05
Researcher reflexivity and the reflective journal
- 06
Writing the AT2 positionality statement
- 07
Explanatory statements, consent and ethical communication
Worked example · free
Describing a recruitment strategy and its limit
- 1Name the first stage accurately: people answering an open post have chosen to take part, so this is volunteer sampling.
- 1Name the second stage: asking interviewees to suggest further carers is snowball or network sampling, where current participants recruit future ones.
- 1Classify both as non-probability methods, because selection is not random and each carer's chance of inclusion is unknown.
- 2State the representativeness risk in concrete terms: the sample may over-represent carers who already use peer support and who know one another, and miss isolated carers.
Key terms
- Population
- The entire group a study wants to draw conclusions about, such as all students in a particular cohort.
- Representativeness
- The degree to which data from a sample accurately reflects the population of interest.
- Snowball Sampling
- A non-probability recruitment method in which existing participants recruit further participants, also called network sampling.
- Saturation
- A point in data collection where new information no longer adds to the categories or patterns already identified.
- Reflexivity
- Ongoing critical scrutiny by researchers of the roles, identities and behaviour they bring to a study and of how these shape its process, participants and outcomes.
- Explanatory Statement
- A participant-facing document setting out a study's purpose, eligibility, procedures, risks, withdrawal rights, privacy and complaint pathways.
Sampling, Reflexivity and Ethical Communication FAQ
Is convenience sampling a weakness I should hide in my report?
No. Most student projects rely on non-probability recruitment, and markers respond better to an honest label plus a specific limitation. Name the technique, explain why it was practical, and state which perspectives the sample may not capture.
What is the difference between representativeness and generalisability?
Representativeness asks whether the people you sampled reflect the variety within the population you defined. Generalisability asks whether results extend beyond the study to other people and settings, which small qualitative projects usually do not claim.
When should the positionality statement be written?
It should be finished before the Week 8 tutorial, because it reflects on who you are as an interviewer and how your group works going into data collection. It has a strict 500-word upper limit inside AT2.
How long is research data kept according to the sample explanatory statement?
The sample states that data will be kept for seven years and then destroyed, with paper files shredded and electronic files deleted. Participants are identified by a number rather than by name on stored files.
Does reflexivity mean removing my bias from the research?
Not in the reflexive approach this unit teaches. The goal is to examine and report how your perspective shaped questions and interpretation, using tools such as a reflective journal and peer debriefing, rather than claiming complete neutrality.
Assessment move
Start by drawing the sampling tree from memory: two families at the top, then the named non-probability techniques underneath, each with a one-line definition in your own words. Test yourself by inventing three short recruitment stories, such as a poster in a gym or a message passed between flatmates, and labelling each technique within ten seconds.
Then rehearse the limitation sentence until it becomes automatic: technique, reason it was practical, and the specific group it may miss. For reflexivity, keep a short journal during the weeks before interviews. After each group meeting, write two sentences on what you assumed and why, because that habit produces concrete material for the positionality statement.
When drafting the statement, check every sentence with one question: does it show how my identity or worldview could affect the questions, the listening or the interpretation? Cut any sentence that only lists a label. Ask a teammate to read the group dynamics section and confirm that it describes your actual role fairly.
For ethical communication, print your group's explanatory statement and read it aloud as if you were a nervous participant. Mark anything that sounds like jargon, any logistic detail that no longer matches your design, and any promise about privacy or storage that your procedure cannot keep. Fix those lines before Week 8, because the same document becomes an appendix in AT3 and markers will compare it with your Method.
Working through Sampling, Reflexivity and Ethical Communication in PSY1023? Sia is AskSia’s AI Psychology tutor — ask any PSY1023 Sampling, Reflexivity and Ethical Communication question and get a clear, step-by-step explanation grounded in how PSY1023 is taught and assessed. Read this chapter free, then take your hardest questions to Sia.
