Which approach intentionally fills quotas to ensure representation of subgroups but does not use random selection?

• A. Purposive sampling
• B. Quota sampling
• C. Convenience sampling
• D. Snowball sampling

Answer: (B)

The main idea here is how some sampling methods guarantee representation of subgroups without relying on randomness. Quota sampling sets specific subgroups and desired numbers (quotas) to include from each one, then fills those quotas using nonrandom selection—often convenience or the researcher’s judgment—until the targets are met. Because the final picks within each quota aren’t random, this method ensures representation on paper but can introduce bias and limit how well the results generalize to the broader population.

If you compare it to other approaches, purposive sampling also uses nonrandom selection to target particular types of participants, but it doesn’t typically operate with fixed quotas to reflect subgroups. Convenience sampling chooses participants based on ease of access, with no quota structure. Snowball sampling relies on participants to recruit others, again without predefined quotas.