Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research
AbstractThis article examines five common misunderstandings about case-study research: (1) Theoretical knowledge is more valuable than practical knowledge; (2) One cannot generalize from a single case, therefore the single case study cannot contribute to scientific development; (3) The case study is most useful for generating hypotheses, while other methods are more suitable for hypotheses testing and theory building; (4) The case study contains a bias toward verification; and (5) It is often difficult to summarize specific case studies. The 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 that a discipline without exemplars is an ineffective one. Social science may be strengthened by the execution of more good case studies.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by arXiv.org in its series Papers with number 1304.1186.
Date of creation: Apr 2013
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published in Qualitative Inquiry, vol. 12, no. 2, April 2006, 219-245
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://arxiv.org/
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2013-04-06 (All new papers)
- NEP-CWA-2013-04-06 (Central & Western Asia)
- NEP-MKT-2013-04-06 (Marketing)
- NEP-PKE-2013-04-06 (Post Keynesian Economics)
You can help add them by filling out this form.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (arXiv administrators).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.