A concise of the journal "snowball sampling using social networks to research non heterosexual women.

1. Vinay Shriyan
NMIMS, Part time MBA
Marketing, First year,
Div. A, Roll No. 61
Snowball Sampling Using Social Networks to Research Non heterosexual Women
Snowball Sampling: Sensitive Research and Interpersonal Networks
Recruiting research participants can be problematic when research focuses upon specific individuals, groups or experiences
which are not validated by society. These individuals and groups are often 'hidden'. The study of sexualities is a sensitive
subject because there may be risks to participants if they are transgressing dominant heterosexual codes. The revelation of a
'deviant' sexual identity can mean participants suffer a loss of employment, harassment and even violence, moreover, sexual
issues are often considered 'private' and outside the 'public' realm of research. Valentine (1993c, p. 114) used lesbian social
networks to recruit participants and outlines her use of the snowball sampling method as 'contacting one participant via the
other'. Snowball sampling thus relies on the behavior or trait under study being social and participants sharing with others
the characteristic under examination.
Although snowball sampling is used extensively, particularly in relation to research on sexualities, there are few reflexive
accounts of how it has been employed. This paper seeks to address this lacuna and uses the research made with 28 non-
heterosexual women to explore snowball sampling. The study considered experiences of heterosexism and genderism in
everyday places and spaces. The broad term 'non-heterosexual' was employed to discuss women's lives outside of
heterosexuality but not necessarily within categories such as 'lesbian'. The research consisted of six focus groups, and three
couple interviews. Moreover, 13 of these women were her friends prior to the study. Consequently, her research involved
pre-existing friends from the outset. The remaining 15 were acquaintances or strangers to her and were asked to participate
by women who were already involved in the study. Feminist researchers have often claimed that relationships between
participants and researchers should be acknowledged and on occasion fostered. This paper will discuss friendships and
social networks through an examination of the inclusions and exclusions of snowball sampling.
Accessing Hidden Populations
Snowball sampling can enable researchers to gain access to individuals who live outside the boundaries of normative
heterosexuality. Initial contact with potential participants can be made in a number of ways such as 'lesbian', gay and
bisexual groups and advertisements in local and national lesbian, gay and bisexual press to begin their snowballs. Studies
such as these create a hidden population. Another way to gain initial contacts is to use personal networks and ask friends
and acquaintances to be involved. This method avoids the problems associated with methods that rely on the categorization
of groups. In addition, using the gay scene does not necessarily mean that women claim the label 'lesbian' or 'gay'.
Employing personal networks meant that women did not have to define as 'lesbian', access gay media or support groups or
regularly socialize on the gay scene in order to take part. Moreover, using these networks gave her access to women who
would not answer advertisements and who, she believed, had to be asked individually. Consequently, she was able to
include non-heterosexual women who were not 'out and proud', whose voices are often left unheard or invalidated. Being
rooted in social networks was significant because participants were able to 'check out' the research and her both as a
researcher and a person. Consequently, her sexuality played a significant role in the recruitment of participants. Participants
may have trusted her because she is a non-heterosexual woman and She did have easier access than perhaps a 'straight' man
would have been granted. Using friendship networks in these instances included word of mouth assurances which are
significant when the research is of a sensitive nature.
Recreating Hidden Populations?
Snowball sampling can be seen as a biased sampling technique because it is not random and it selects individuals on the
basis of social networks. The representativeness should be striven for and define representativeness as 'an instance of a
general phenomena'. However, representative studies of sexualities are problematic because of the issues of sensitivity
which make for difficulties in establishing sampling frames and problems in defining gay or lesbian sexualities. While
issues of representativeness and generalizable are themselves problematic, these discussions are beyond the scope of this
paper. Instead, snowball sampling can exclude particular individuals and groups creating specific and 'non-representational'
samples. With small numbers, it would have been necessary to categorize the population and assume that one or two people
can speak for a sector of the population, such as 'black', 'working class' or 'disabled' groups. This is not to negate the
importance of reflecting on the composition of a sample and acknowledging its specificity. Social settings were important

2. spaces in which to meet friends and acquaintances who became participants in her research. Furthermore, other networks
that were employed, such as sport and work, can also be exclusionary in terms of disability and ethnicity. Consequently,
where snowballs begin can be significant to the formation of the sample creating particular exclusions and boundaries.
However, it is worth noting that non-heterosexual women are not a homogeneous group and we exclude people, including
other non-heterosexual women, from our social networks. For her research women may have been excluded for a
multiplicity of reasons, such as her not knowing a person well enough or because of strained relations between women (for
example, if they had gone through a break up). Moreover, it is difficult to assess who has been excluded when the group
under investigation is 'hidden'. In conjunction with this, there may have been self-screening where women indicated to their
friends or partners that they would prefer not to be involved. Snowball sampling relies on individuals' willingness to be
involved in research and consequently some people will always be excluded. This may in part be due to snowball sampling
that relies on interpersonal relations and often a white, middle class, urban researcher's social networks. Consequently, and
paradoxically, studies that use snowball sampling, whilst accessing hard to reach participants, can create other 'hidden
populations'. Acknowledging the specificities of this sampling technique does not negate it; rather it enables a fuller
understanding of the exclusions of the particular method.
Conclusion
This paper does not seek to offer a final and definitive word on snowball sampling. Instead it seeks to begin a discussion of
this often used but seldom debated research technique. It does not fully address the complexities of employing snowball
sampling as these discussions can impose artificial boundaries and categories. Social networks, as channels for recruitment,
can be an advantage in some respects; For example, including those often ignored in studies that rely on random or
representative sampling yet a disadvantage in others and excluding those not within friendship groups. I wish to suggest that
studies which employ snowball sampling should be aware of the exclusions of the method and the potential of the personal
involvement of the researcher's own social networks. How a sample is made forms research accounts such that the way we
sample partially makes what we find.
The news article I have chosen indicates how snowball sampling was used statistically analyze and identify medical blogs
that violated patient privacy. This was a very successful use of snowball sampling as it would be close to impossible
otherwise. I personally am not vouching towards snowball sampling but after the study of these articles I'm curious to
deploy it.
News Source
Date: July 28, 2008
Title: Gardasil gets booster shot
Website: http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2008/07/28/gardasil_gets_booster_shot/