Case studies and their rationale

1998

Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics

 When should we use case studies? 267  The case study design process 268  Types of case study design 274  Data collection sources 277  Quality in case studies: validity and reliability 279  Analysing the evidence 282  Composing case study reports 286 Keywords  Case study design  Causal relationships  Multiple data sources  Unit of analysis  Converging evidence  Cross-case comparisons

By now, the case study method has attained routine status as a viable method for doing education research. 1 Other methods include but are not limited to surveys, ethnographies, experiments, quasi-experiments, economic and statistical modeling, histories, research syntheses, and developmental methods. 2 Summary Point No. 1:

In this book, George and Bennett explain how research methods such as process tracing and comparative case studies are designed, carried out, and used as the basis for theory development in social science. They provide an invaluable research guide for any scholar interested in the case study approach. But the book is much more than an account of how to do case study research. The authors also offer a sophisticated discussion of the philosophy of science that will be useful to anyone interested in the place of case-study methods in broader debates about social science methodology, and they give a discerning analysis of policy-relevant theory that is sure to draw the attention of a research community increasingly concerned about the social and political relevance of modern social science. In scope, clarity, and erudition, this book sets a new standard not only in the analysis of case study methods, but also in the study of social science methods more broadly." " This book combines clear and concise instructions on how to do qualitative research with sophisticated but accessible epistemological reasons for that advice. The volume provides step-by-step templates on ways to design research, compare across cases, congruence test and process trace, and use typological theories. This guidance is illustrated with dozens of concrete examples. Almost no other methodology text comes close to matching the authors' top-to-bottom synthesis of philosophy of science and practical advice." " This landmark study offers to scholars of all methodological persuasions a philosophically informed, theoretically nuanced, and methodologically detailed treatment of case study analysis. With this book Alexander George and Andrew Bennett help all of us in improving our research, teaching, and disciplinary debates."

Although case study methods remain a controversial approach to data collection, they are widely recognised in many social science studies especially when in-depth explanations of a social behaviour are sought after. This article, therefore, discusses several aspects of case studies as a research method. These include the design and categories of case studies and how their robustness can be achieved. It also explores on the advantages and disadvantages of case study as a research method.

Annals of Tourism Research, 2020

The case study method is instrumental in researching complex and new phenomena for both building and testing theories; yet, it is often misunderstood, misused, or mislabeled. For example, Vuignier's (2016) literature review of case studies in destination/place branding research revealed that some studies do not comply with expert definitions since they over-rely on certain information sources such as destination authorities or consultant companies due to the lack of scientific rigor or the absence of empirical data. Similarly, Adeyinka-Ojo, Nair, and Khoo-Lattimore's (2014) literature review of case study research in the destination context identified common misconception of this to be a weak method owing to the lack of methodological rigor, reliability, and validity. Realizing the applicability of the case study method for complex phenomena, they recommended some remedies to improve the rigor of the case study method and the reliability and validity of findings. Nonetheless, a review of literature (Table 1 in Appendix) reveals that the misunderstanding and misuse practices continue; some studies are conceptual, use a limited perspective related to the subject, rely on a single data source, or use diverse terminologies such as "a case study," "the case of…," or "the … case." This practice is perpetuated when novice researchers and students follow suit. This research note aims to clarify the case study method, discuss the root causes of misconceptions, summarize the basic rules and advantages of proper case study method, and call for a unified approach in using the case study method by researchers, reviewers, and editors. The root causes of misconceptions Divergent approaches to the case study method and semantic discrepancies may originate from authors who do not fully appreciate the case study method. When the work is incomplete, short of scientific rigor, or includes some qualitative data but does not qualify for any qualitative methods in their entirety, the resort seems to be "a case study," "the case of," or "a case of." Additionally, more frequently than not, the authors are urged by the reviewers or editors to name their studies as such. Eisenhardt and Graebner (2007) caution about the potential misjudgment of reviewers about the case study method:

Qualitative Inquiry, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 219-245, 2006

This article examines five common misunderstandings about case-study research: (a) theoretical knowledge is more valuable than practical knowledge; (b) one cannot generalize from a single case, therefore, the single-case study cannot contribute to scientific development; (c) the case study is most useful for generating hypotheses, whereas other methods are more suitable for hypotheses testing and theory building; (d) the case study contains a bias toward verification; and (e) it is often difficult to summarize specific case studies. This article explains and corrects these misunderstandings one by one and concludes with the Kuhnian insight that a scientific discipline without a large number of thoroughly executed case studies is a discipline without systematic production of exemplars, and a discipline without exemplars is an ineffective one. Social science may be strengthened by the execution of a greater number of good case studies.