Response to “Calling for a Shared Understanding of Sampling Terminology in Qualitative Research

In their critique of our recent paper on theoretical sampling in the Journal of Advanced Nursing (McCrae & Purssell, 2016), Gentles and Vilches (2017) show the importance of terminological clarity in qualitative research. As keen exponents of grounded theory, Gentles and Vilches display a sophisticated and nuanced understanding of the principles and practice of theoretical sampling. Our paper, however, was written from a different standpoint to theirs. We strive to improve the quality of nursing research, and our scrutiny of grounded theory studies was within a theme that has also included systematic reviewing in nursing journals (McCrae, Blackstock, & Purssell, 2015). The same methodological standards should apply to research by nurses as to any other researchers, but as nursing scholars we are conscious of the particular needs of students and researchers in our discipline. Nursing, indeed, has a strong qualitative tradition. Nurses consider patients holistically, being more orientated to care than cure. While medicine typically measures outcomes, nurses tend to be more concerned with the patient’s experience: How it feels to be the human being receiving treatment in a clinical environment rather than merely assessing symptoms. Interestingly, the original work on grounded theory by Glaser and Strauss (1965) was in palliative care, and Strauss had previously conducted notable research in mental hospitals (Strauss & Shabshin, 1961). Nonetheless, qualitative research by nurses is not always of good quality. Rigor is as important in qualitative studies as in any other form of scientific investigation. As well as lecturers who teach, supervise, and examine academic work by nursing students, we have both had years of experience on research ethics committees, and our shared observation is of the principles and procedures of qualitative research frequently being applied loosely or haphazardly. Often, we have found researchers claiming to use grounded theory when core components of that method are not applied. Undoubtedly, the quality of nursing research has improved, judging by academic journals, but