Saturation – a one-size-fits-all fallacy: A critique rooted in phenomenological and qualitative content analysis perspectives

Abstract

This paper challenges the universal application of saturation across qualitative methodologies. Saturation is often used to justify sample sizes and findings in qualitative research, yet its relevance varies across methodological approaches. Despite extensive debate, there remains a lack of clarity regarding the applicability of saturation to specific qualitative approaches, particularly within health sciences where its use is often expected. This paper offers a critical examination of the idea of saturation from the perspectives of phenomenological research and qualitative content analysis. We argue that saturation should not be treated as a universal marker of quality, as its uncritical use across qualitative methodologies risks methodological mismatch and oversimplification. Instead, we argue that researchers justify sampling and analytical strategies according to the epistemological logic of the chosen method. We call on researchers, editors and reviewers to critically reflect on the use of saturation in evaluation criteria and support methodologically grounded approaches assessments of qualitative research quality.