Background Purposive sampling has a long developmental history and there are as many views that it is simple and straightforward as there are about its complexity. The reason for purposive sampling is the better matching of the sample to the aims and objectives of the research, thus improving the rigour of the study and trustworthiness of the data and results. Four aspects to this concept have previously been described: credibility, transferability, dependability and confirmability. Aims The aim of this paper is to outline the nature and intent of purposive sampling, presenting three different case studies as examples of its application in different contexts. Results Presenting individual case studies has highlighted how purposive sampling can be integrated into varying contexts dependent on study design. The sampling strategies clearly situate each study in terms of trustworthiness for data collection and analysis. The selected approach to purposive sampling used in each case aligns to the research methodology, aims and objectives, thus addressing each of the aspects of rigour. Conclusions Making explicit the approach used for participant sampling provides improved methodological rigour as judged by the four aspects of trustworthiness. The cases presented provide a guide for novice researchers of how rigour may be addressed in qualitative research.

Preventing plagiarism is an ongoing issue for higher education institutions. Although plagiarism has been traditionally seen as cheating, it is increasingly thought to be the result of poor referencing, with students reporting difficulties citing and referencing bibliographic sources. This study examined the academic knowledge, attitude, skills, and confidence of students in a school of nursing to understand poor referencing. A cross-sectional quantitative and qualitative survey was distributed to postgraduate (N = 1,000) certificate, diploma, and master's students. Quantitative data gathered demographics, cultural and linguistic background, and use of technology. Thematic analysis discovered patterns and themes. Results showed participants understood requirements for referencing; half indicated poor referencing was due to difficulty referencing Internet sources or losing track of sources, and many lacked confidence in key referencing tasks. Despite this, 50% did not make use of referencing resources. Overall, these data suggest incorrect referencing is rarely intentional and predominantly caused by skills deficit.

No abstract