Content uploaded by A. Biba Rebolj
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by A. Biba Rebolj on Sep 16, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
28 JOURNALOFCONTEMPORARYEDUCATIONALSTUDIES1/2013 A.B.Starman
Adrijana Biba Starman
Thecasestudyasatype
ofqualitativeresearch
Abstract: Thisarticlepresentsthecasestudyasatypeofqualitativeresearch.Itsaimistogivea
detaileddescriptionofacasestudy–itsdefinition,someclassifications,andseveraladvantagesand
disadvantages– in order toprovidea better understandingofthiswidely used type of qualitative
approach.Incomparisontoothertypesofqualitativeresearch,casestudieshavebeenlittle understood
bothfromamethodologicalpointofview,wheredisagreementsexistaboutwhethercasestudiesshould
beconsideredaresearchmethodoraresearchtype,and froma contentpointofview,wherethere
areambiguitiesregardingwhatshouldbeconsideredacaseorresearchsubject.Agreatemphasisis
placedonthedisadvantagesofcasestudies,wherewetrytorefutesomeofthecriticismsconcerning
casestudies,particularlyincomparisontoquantitativeresearchapproaches.
Keywords: casestudy,qualitativeresearch,qualitativemethods
UDC:37.012
Scientificarticle
Adrijana Biba Starman, Master of library science, Bergantova 13, SI-1215 Medvode, Slovenia;
e-mail for correspondence: biba.starman@ff.uni-lj.si
JOURNALOFCONTEMPORARYEDUCATIONALSTUDIES1/2013,28–43
Thecasestudyasatypeofqualitativeresearch 29
Introduction
Casestudieswereoneofthefirsttypesofresearchtobeusedinthefieldof
qualitativemethodology.1Today,theyaccountforalargeproportionoftheresearch
presentedinbooksandarticlesinpsychology,history,education,andmedicine,
tolistjustafewofthefundamentalsciences.Muchofwhatweknowtodayabout
theempiricalworldhasbeenproducedbycasestudyresearch,andmanyofthe
mosttreasuredclassicsineachdisciplinearecasestudies2(Flyvbjerg2011,p.302).
Casestudieshavebeen largely used in thesocialsciencesand havebeen
foundtobeespeciallyvaluableinpractice-orientedfields (such aseducation,
management,publicadministration,andsocialwork).Butdespitethislonghis-
toryandwidespreaduse,casestudyresearchhasreceivedlittleattentionamong
thevariousmethodologiesinsocialscienceresearch.Accordingtotheauthorsof
theEncyclopedia of Case Study Research(Millsetal.2010),onlyafewtextsdeal
directlywithcasestudiesasa central subject and no encyclopaedic reference
providesathoroughoverviewofthedesignandmethodsincasestudyresearch
asaguidanceforstudents,researchers,andprofessionalswhoaretryingtoin-
corporatecasestudiesintoarigorousresearchprojectorprogram(ibid.,p.xxxi).
D.A.de Vaus(in Thomas 2011,p. 511)stated, “Most research methodstexts
eitherignorecasestudiesorconfuseitwithothertypesofsocialresearch.”From
this,wecanconcludethatinspiteoftheir widespreaduseandpopularity,case
studiesare characterized by ambiguities and inconsistencies in understanding
theirdefinition,subjectsofinvestigation,andmethodologicalchoice(Verschuren
2003,p. 121).Casestudiesare thereforemisunderstoodas a type, aswellas a
method,ofqualitativeresearch(Gerring2004,p.341).
1Casestudies,inthefieldofpsychology,forexample,datebacktothemiddleofthe19thcentury.
Insocialwork,theyhavebeeninusesince1920,referredtoascaseworks(Millsetal.,2010,p.109);
basedonthegroundbreakingworkofS.B.MerriaminCase Study Research in Education(Merriam
1988),there has beensignificantprogressinthe field of qualitativeresearchin general, and thus
advanceshavealsobeenmadeinthestandardizationofcasestudiesinthefieldofeducation.
2ThemostfamouscasestudiesinpsychologyarethoseofPiaget,Freud,Money,andotherfamous
psychologists(Casestudyin psychology…n.d.). Theuseof casestudiesin thefieldof education is
describedintheJournal of Case Studies in Education.
30 JOURNALOFCONTEMPORARYEDUCATIONALSTUDIES1/2013 A.B.Starman
Are case studies a qualitative research type or a qualitative research
method?
Beforedelving furtherinto this investigation,it isimportanttomakea
distinctioninhowcasestudiesareviewed;someauthorsseethemasaqualita-
tiveresearchtype(Baxterand Jack2008;Flyvbjerg2006,2011;Sagadin2004;
Simons2009;Stake2005;Sturman1997;Verschuren2003),whileothersperceive
themtobe a qualitativeresearch method(George and Bennett 2005; Gerring
2004).Inthisarticle,wewilldemonstratethatcasestudiesaremorethanjusta
methodologicalchoice;therefore,wechoosetodefinecasestudiesasaqualitative
researchtype.
Althoughcasestudieshaveoftenbeen consideredtobe part ofqualitative
researchandmethodology,theymayalsobequantitativeorcontainacombination
ofqualitativeandquantitativeapproaches.Qualitativeresearchischaracterized
byan interpretativeparadigm, which emphasizessubjectiveexperiencesand
themeaningstheyhavefor an individual. Therefore, the subjectiveviewsofa
researcheronaparticularsituationplayavitalpartinthestudyresults.Another
characteristicofqualitativeresearchisitsidiographicapproach3(Vogrinc2008,
p.14),whichemphasizesanindividual’sperspectiveontheinvestigativesituation,
process,relations,etc.(ibid.,p.19).Theinterpretativeparadigm,phenomenological
approach,andconstructivism4asaparadigmaticbasisofqualitativeresearchare
closelylinkedtothedefinitionandcharacteristicsofcasestudies.Acasestudyis
thereforemorequalitativethanquantitativeinnature,butnotexclusively,forit
canbequalitative,quantitative,oracombinationofbothapproaches(withboth
representedequallyorone approach prevailingandthe othersupplementing).
Qualitativeand quantitativeresultsshouldcomplementeachothertocreatea
meaningfulwhole according totheobjectandpurposeof the investigation(Sa-
gadin2004,p.89).
Weshouldalsoclarifysomeotherterms,suchas“comparativemethods,”“case
studymethods,”and“qualitativemethods.”Comparativemethods(comparinga
smallamountofcasesandexploringfacts,relations,orprocessesinordertofind
differencesor similarities) differfromcase studies in thatacase study covers
investigationwithinindividual cases, while the comparativemethoddoesnot.
Qualitativemethodsarecloselylinkedtocasestudies.Acasestudyisconsidered
bysomeresearcherstobeapartofqualitativeresearch–atypeand,sometimes,
amethodorscientific approach. In this article,casestudiesareplaced within
thequalitativefieldandviewedasaqualitativeresearchtype,althoughthefact
thattheycancontainsomequantitativeelements,especiallyregardingresearch
questionsandgoals,isalsotakenintoaccount.
3Theexaminationofindividualcases.
4Theinterpretiveparadigm,thephenomenologicalapproach,andconstructivismareparticularly
interestedinindividualexperiencesofreality.Objectiverealityandtruth,accordingtoconstructivists
andphenomenologists,doesnotexist,butis ratheralwaysaconstruct.Itisthereforetheideathat
peoplehaveof reality thatis importantforresearchers, notthe realityitself(Vogrinc2008, p.27).
Thecasestudyasatypeofqualitativeresearch 31
Inthispaper,wewillfirstprovidevariousdefinitionsofcasestudies,ranging
fromvery generaltomorespecific,andwilldescribethemain advantagesand
differentclassificationsofcasestudies.Lateron,wewillfocusonadetailedde-
scriptionofcasestudies’disadvantagesandcriticismsinordertoachieveabetter
understandingofthistypeofqualitativeresearchandtocreateaclearerpicture
ofwhat casestudyis, whenitisapplicableto research,andwhata researcher
shouldpayattentiontowhenconductingasurveyusingacasestudy.
Definitions and classifications of a case study
Gerring(2004)notesthattheeffortsofmanyauthorstoclarifytheconceptof
acasestudyhaveoftenleadtoadefinitionaljumblebecauseeverytimesomeone
triesto clarify theconfusionusingdefinitions,itonlymakesitmoreconfusing
(ibid.,p.342).Flyvbjerg(2011)thereforebelievesthatifadefinitionofacasestudy
isneeded,itisbetterthatitismoregeneralanddoesnotcontainaplethoraof
meticulousdescriptions(ibid.,p.302).However,wecannotsaythatthedefinition
ofacasestudyis unnecessarybecauseitisthedefinition that places the case
studywithinitsownspaceandgivesititsowncharacteristicsincomparisonto
othertypesofqualitativeresearch.Severalresearchers haveprovidedgeneral
definitionsofcasestudies.
AccordingtoSturman(1997),“[a]casestudyisageneraltermfortheexplo-
rationofanindividual, group or phenomenon” (ibid.,p.61).Therefore, a case
studyisacomprehensivedescriptionofanindividualcaseanditsanalysis;i.e.,
thecharacterizationofthecaseand the events,aswellasadescriptionofthe
discoveryprocessofthesefeaturesthat is the process ofresearchitself(Mesec
1998,p.45).Mesecoffersadefinitionofacasestudywithinthefieldofsocialwork,
butitcouldalsobeappliedtothefieldofeducation:Acasestudy“isadescrip-
tionandanalysisofanindividualmatterorcase[…]withthepurposetoidentify
variables,structures,formsandordersofinteractionbetweentheparticipantsin
thesituation(theoreticalpurpose),or,inordertoassesstheperformanceofwork
orprogressindevelopment(practicalpurpose)”(ibid.,p.383).Headdsthatone
casestudycouldservebothpurposesatthesametime(ibid.).
Formoredetaileddefinitionsofacasestudy,Sagadin(1991)statesthata“case
studyisusedwhenweanalyseanddescribe,forexampleeachpersonindividually
(hisorheractivity,specialneeds,lifesituation,lifehistory,etc.),agroupofpeople
(aschooldepartment,agroupofstudentswithspecialneeds,teachingstaff,etc.),
individualinstitutionsoraproblem(orseveralproblems),process,phenomenon
oreventinaparticularinstitution,etc.indetail.Ifweremaininsuchanalyses
onthedescriptivelevel,thenacasestudyisconsideredasaformofdescriptive
method,butifweclimbtothecausallevel,casestudyproceedstowardscausal-
experimentalmethod”(ibid.,p.31).Further,casestudieshighlightadevelopmental
factor,whichmeansthatthecasesaregeneratedandevolveovertime,oftenasa
seriesofspecificandinterrelatedeventsthatoccurin“thatparticulartimeand
thatparticular place.” Holistically speaking, this constitutes the case. Finally,
32 JOURNALOFCONTEMPORARYEDUCATIONALSTUDIES1/2013 A.B.Starman
casestudiesfocusontheenvironment;i.e.,thecontext.Outliningthebordersof
individualunits withinthesurveyestablisheswhatcountsasacaseandwhat
becomesitscontext5(ibid.,p.301).
Simons(2009)createdthe followingdefinition of a case studybased ona
criticalreviewthatsoughtcommonalitiesofvariouscasestudydefinitions:“Case
studyisanin-depthexplorationfrommultipleperspectivesofthecomplexityand
uniqueness of aparticular project, policy,institution, programor system ina
‘reallife’”(ibid.,p.21).Shealsoemphasizedthatacasestudyshouldnotbeseen
asamethodinandofitself.Rather,itisadesignframethatmayincorporatea
numberofmethods.Stakeagrees;hestatedthatacasestudyisnotamethodo-
logicalchoice,butratherachoiceofwhatistobestudied–bywhatevermethods
wechoosetostudythe case.Insodoing,wecanstudyitanalytically,holistically,
hermeneutically,culturally,andbymixedmethods,butweconcentrate,atleast
forthetimebeing,onthecase(Stake2005,p.443).Choiceofmethod,then,does
notdefineacasestudy.Itistheanalyticaleclecticismthatisessential6(Thomas
2011,p.512).Flyvbjerg(2011)sharesasimilaropinion,sayingthatifwedecide
touseacasestudyinourresearch,thisdoesnotmeantheselectionofamethod,
butratheraselectionofwhatwillbeexplored(ibid.,p.301).Anindividualcase
canbestudiedfrom differentperspectives–bothqualitativeandquantitative.7
Ifweanalysethesedefinitionsintermsofdifferencesandsimilarities,we
wouldreachaconclusioninagreementwithSimons(2009);thatis,theyallshare
commitmenttotheexaminationofcomplexityinavarietyofreal-lifesituations
andtheydonotincludevariousmethodsofdata acquisition, fortheir focus is
elsewhere.Asforthedifferencesamongthedefinitions,wecanattributethemto
thedifferentepistemologicalbasesthatvariousresearchersleanupon(Thomas
2011,p.512),suchasthepurpose(Mesec1998),level(Sagadin2004),timeframe
(Flyvbjerg2011),orcontext(ibid.;Thomas2011)oftheresearch.
Whendiscussingadefinitionofacasestudy,manyresearchersfocusonthe
individualcase(ormultiplecases)athandratherthanoncasestudiesasatype
ofresearch.AccordingtoVerschuren(2001,p.137),thisisexactlythereasonfor
themanydefinitionsofcasestudiesfromamethodologicalpointofview,since,in
hisopinion,disagreementsappearamongdefinitionswithatendencytoclassify
casestudiesasastudyofone(ormore)casesinsteadofviewingcasestudiesas
aresearchapproach.
Various classifications: Case study types and categories
Casestudydefinitionsareusuallyrathergeneralanddonotcontainvarious
classificationsortypesofcasestudies,asitisalmostimpossibletocoveralltypes
ofstudiesinonedefinition.Furthermore,authorsofferavarietyofcomplementary
ordistinguishingclassificationsaccordingtoclassificationtype.Sagadin(2004)
hasalreadymadeatransparentandcomprehensivecontributionregardingthe
5Alsocalledthe object,moreincontinuation.
6Forexample,takingoverandmergingdifferentsystems,views,findings.
7Seep.2.
Thecasestudyasatypeofqualitativeresearch 33
variousclassificationsofcasestudies8thatwill be supplementedinthispaper
withsomeadditionalclassifications.
Classificationaccordingtothetimedimension
Inacasestudy,oneormorecasescanbeinvestigated.Whenexaminingone
case,werefertoasingularcasestudy,andamultipleorpluralcasestudyisused
todescribeastudyexaminingseveralcases.Inmultiplecasestudies,eachcase
isstudiedas if it is a singularstudyandisthencomparedto othercases.The
analysisofeachfollowingcaseisbuiltontheknowledgeobtainedintheanalysis
ofpreviouscases (Mesec 1998,p.384).Forsingular and multiple casestudies,
Thomassuggestsanadditionalclassification,accordingtothetypeoftimedimen-
sion.Thetypesofsingularcasestudies,regardingtimedimension,areasfollows
(Thomas2011,p.517):
– Retrospectivecasestudies:Thesimplesttypeofstudy;itinvolvesthecollec-
tionof data relating to apastphenomenonofanykind.Theresearcheris
lookingbackonaphenomenon,situation,person,oreventandstudyingit
initshistoricalintegrity.
– Snapshotstudies:Thecaseisbeingexaminedinoneparticularperiodoftime,
suchasacurrentevent,adayinthelifeofaperson,adiary,etc.Whether
amonth,aweek,aday,orevenaperiodasshortasanhour,theanalysisis
aidedbythetemporaljuxtapositionofevents.Asthesnapshotdevelops,the
picturepresentsitselfasaGestaltoveratighttimeframe.
– Diachronicstudies:Change overtimeand are similar to longitudinal
studies.
Examplesofmultiplecasestudiesareasfollows(ibid.):
– Nestedstudies:Involvethecomparisonofelementswithinonecase(nested
elements).Withnestedstudies,thebreakdowniswithin theprincipalunitof
analysis.Anestedstudyisdistinctfromastraightforwardmultiplestudyin
thatitgainsitsintegrity–itswholeness–fromthewidercase.Forexample,
aresearchermightobservethreewardswithinonehospital.Theonlysig-
nificanceaboutthemistheirphysicalhousingatthehospital.Suchacase
wouldnotbeconsideredtobenested,astheelementsarenestedonlyina
sensethattheyformanintegralpartofabroaderpicture.Inthiscase,that
meansthewardsareobservedinordertoprovideabroaderpictureof,for
example,howtheyaffectthepatients’well-being,whatthehospital’sagenda
islike,andtherelationshipsandattitudesamongthewards,patients,staff,
etc.
8Forthe conceptualand methodologicalcriteria,see Bogdanand Biklen(1982)and Stenhouse
(1985);forthepurpose,seeStake(1994);forthethesegmentation/integrity,seeCreswell(inSagadin
2004).
34 JOURNALOFCONTEMPORARYEDUCATIONALSTUDIES1/2013 A.B.Starman
– Parallelstudies:The cases are all happening andbeingstudiedconcur-
rently.
– Sequentialstudies:Thecaseshappenconsecutively,andthereisanassump-
tionthatwhathashappenedatonetimepointorinaninterveningperiod
willinsomewayaffectthenextincident.
Classificationaccordingtothetheoryformation
GeorgeandBennett(2005)presentsixtypesofcasestudiesclassifiedaccording
towhethertheycontributetotheorybuilding(ibid.,pp.75–76):
– Atheoretical/configurative idiographic casestudies: Illustrativecasestudies
thatdonotaccumulateorcontributedirectlytotheory.
– Disciplinedconfigurative case studies:Useestablishedtheories to explain
thecase.
– Heuristiccase studies:Identifynew,unexpectedpaths;forsuchstudies,
marginal,deviant,oroutliercasesmaybeparticularlyuseful.
– Theory-testingcasestudies:Studiesthatassessthevalidityandscopecondi-
tionsofsingleorcompetingtheories.
– Plausibility probes:Preliminarystudiesusedtodeterminewhetherfurther
examinationiswarranted.
– “Building Block”studies:Studiesofparticulartypesorsubtypesofapheno-
menon,that,whenputtogether,contributetoamorecomprehensivetheory.
Inthisarticle,weonlylistafewclassificationsinordertopresentvarious
typesofcasestudiesaccordingtowhatwewanttoexplore,forwhatpurpose,what
wewanttoachieve,andhow.Someclassificationsaremutuallycomplementary.
Themoreclassificationswearefamiliarwith,thebetterandeasierwecancatego-
rizeourowncasestudy.However,atsomepoint,wehavetodrawaline,because
beingtoofocusedondetailwhenclassifyingacasestudycouldconcealthegeneral
importanceofthestudy.Therefore,classificationscanbehelpfulwhenplacingour
casestudywithinacontext,withinwhichwewillexploreacertaintopic.
Keydifferenceswithinthesedefinitionsrefertothecriteriafromwhichthe
variousclassificationsweredrawn.Whilesomeauthorsdividecasestudiesaccording
tothenumberofcasesthatwillbestudied,towhichdegreeanindividualcasewill
beanalysed,orwhetheritwillbecoveredholistically,othersrefertothecriteria
accordingtothepurpose,timedimension,ortheory/nontheorybuilding.
Afterlookingatthevariousdefinitionsofcasestudies,wedrawtheconclu-
sionsthatthedifferentclassificationsarederivedfromdifferenttheoreticalposi-
tions.Choosingaparticulartypeorkindofacasestudydependsontheresearch
purpose.Forexample,dowewanttodescribeaparticularcaseandthusremain
atthedescriptivelevelor do we wanttoexploreitonthecausallevelas well?
Dowewanttocompareseveralcases? Whatcountsasa“case”in a case study
andhowcanitbeproperlyselected?Dowewanttocheckanexistinghypothesis
ordowewanttodiscovernewones?Doweperhapsevenwanttodevelopanew
Thecasestudyasatypeofqualitativeresearch 35
theory?In the followingsection,wewillpresent a more detailed discussion of
theseplatforms.
The case (subject), research field (object), and case selection
Tobeabletodebateacasestudy,ithastobedefinedwithinananalytical
frameworkorobjectintheconstitutionofthestudy(Thomas2011,p.512),oras
GeorgeandBennettputit(2005,p.69),theinvestigatorshouldclearlyidentify
theresearchfield;thatis,the“class”or“subclass”ofeventswithinwhichasingle
caseorseveralcasesareinstancestobestudied.Thesubjectofthestudyisthus
aninstanceofsomephenomenon,andthephenomenoncomprisestheanalytical
frame;thatis,theobject(ibid.).
Casestudiesasaresearchtypemightappearabitvague.Theirloosenessand
emphasisonthecase(subject)maybewhyresearchers,students,etc.(especially
thosewhoareinexperienced),neglecttheimportanceofdefininganobjectintheir
exploration.Identifyingonlyasubjectleadstoashortageofabroaderdescription
andinterpretationandinsteadonlyoffersasimplifieddescriptionofaresearch
piece.Therefore,theobjectconsistsofananalyticalframeworkwithinwhichthe
case(subject)isunderstoodandillustrated.Itisnotnecessary,however,forthe
objecttobedefinedatthebeginningofthestudy;thisoftenoccurslaterinthe
explorationprocess(Thomas2011,p.515).
Acasestudyisabout determining what theinvestigatedcase maybe;it
isnotaboutdefining populations andselectingappropriate samples(Sagadin
1991,p.34).Acasestudyisusuallyastudyofasinglecaseora smallnumber
ofcases.Theideaofrepresentativesamplingandstatisticalgeneralizationstoa
widerpopulationshouldbe rejected,andanalyticalinductionshouldbechosen
instead.Someauthorsbelievethatthecaseinacasestudycountsasaresearch
unit,whileothersdisagree.Theuseoftheterm“unit”cancauseconfusion.Some
authorsbelievethatitrelatestothecaseorresearchsubject(e.g.,Wieviorkain
Thomas2011,p.513;Mesec1998),whileothersuseittodescribetheobjectwith
theunderstandingthattheunit(object)andthecaseinfluenceeachothermutu-
ally(VanWynsbergheandKhaninThomas2011,p.513).Inthisarticle,theterm
unitisassociatedwiththecase(subject).
Mesecsuggestsselectingsuchcaseforaresearchunit(anindividual,family
orothergroup,organization,orcommunity)whereapracticalproblemthatwe
areinterestedinexists.Wemayalsoexamineseveralindividualcasesthatare
selectedinsuch a waythattheiranalysisprovidesuswith the most diverse
informationthatweareablecollect. Weshould selectinterestingcases(e.g.,
contrasting,extreme,exceptionalcases)insteadoftypical,averagecases(Mesec
1998,p.55).Thesubject(the case) isnotselectedbased upon arepresentative
sample,but rather isselectedbecause it is interesting, unusual, striking,and
maycausechangesinthecharacteristicsandspecificitiesoftheobject(Thomas
2011,p.514).SimilartoMesec,Thomasalsosuggestschoosinganatypicalcase,
wherethesubjectandobjectinteractinadynamicrelationship.
36 JOURNALOFCONTEMPORARYEDUCATIONALSTUDIES1/2013 A.B.Starman
Ontheotherhand,Yinrecommendsselectingarepresentativeortypicalcase
(Yin2009,p.48)becauseinsodoing,wemayfindnewhypothesesanddeeperlayers
thatprevioustheoryhasmissed.Eachcasehasitsadvantagesanddisadvantages,
buttheselectionofcasesandshouldmostlydependupontheresearchproblem.
Caseselectionhasalsotargetedbysomecasestudycritics.Theircriticism
mainlyfocuseson possiblesubjectivecaseselection, theso-calledselectionbias
(i.e.,theimpactofaresearcher’spriorknowledgeaboutthecaseandhispossible
favouritismtowardcertainhypotheses)thatcanimpactthecaseselection(George
andBennett2005,p.24).However,theselectionofacasebasedonpriorknowledge
leadstoabetter research plan.Casesselectedonthebasisofpriorknowledge
aremostlikelycrucialforenablingthedevelopmentofastrongtheoreticalbase
fortheresearch,whichmakestheprocedureoftheorytestingmorerigorous.In
addition,thereareseveralmethodologicalprovisionstoprotectastudyfromthe
influence ofresearcherbias,suchas diligence and consistency inthetracking
process(ibid.). This includesanaccurateandcomprehensivedescriptionof the
datacollectionprocedures and documentation ofeverypieceofinformationin
ordertoachievereliabilityofacasestudy(ibid.,p.10).
Case study advantages
Casestudiesaregenerallystrongpreciselywherequantitativestudiesare
weaker(ibid.,p.19).GeorgeandBennetthaveidentifiedfouradvantagesofcase
studiesincomparisontoquantitativemethods9:Theirpotentialtoachievehigh
conceptualvalidity,strongproceduresforfosteringnewhypotheses,usefulness
forcloselyexaminingthehypothesizedroleofcausalmechanismsinthecontext
ofindividualcases,andtheircapacityforaddressingcausalcomplexity(ibid.).
Conceptual validity
Conceptualvalidity refers to theidentification and measurement ofthe
indicatorsthatbestpresentthetheoreticalconceptsthataresearcherwantsto
measure.Manyofthevariablesthat socialscientistsare interestedin,suchas
democracy,power,etc.,aredifficult to measure, so the researcher has to carry
outa“contextualizedcomparison,”whichautomaticallysearchesforanalytically
equivalentphenomenaeveniftheyareexpressedindifferenttermsandcontexts.
Thisrequiresadetailedconsiderationofcontextualfactors,whichisextremely
difficulttodoinquantitativeresearchbutisverycommonincasestudies.Whereas
quantitativeresearchrunstheriskof“conceptualstretching”bythrowingtogether
dissimilarcasestogetalargersample,casestudiesallowforconceptualrefine-
mentswithahighervalidityleveloverfewernumberofcases(ibid.,p.19).
9Theauthorsdefinecasestudyasamethodofqualitativeresearch;thisiswhytheycompareit
toquantitativemethods.
Thecasestudyasatypeofqualitativeresearch 37
Deriving new hypotheses
Casestudiesareverysuitableforservingtheheuristicpurposeofinductively
identifyingadditional variablesandnewhypotheses.Quantitativestudieslack
proceduresforinductivelygenerating new hypotheses.Moreover,case studies
cananalysequalitativelycomplexeventsandtakeintoaccountnumerousvari-
ablesprecisely because theydonotrequiremanycasesoralimitednumberof
variables.Casestudyresearchersarenotlimitedtoreadilyquantifiedvariables
orpre-existing,well-defineddatasets(ibid.,p.45).
Quantitativeresearchcanbe usedtoidentifydeviantcasesthatmaylead
tonewhypothesesbut, in andofthemselves,lackanyclearmeansofactually
identifyingnewhypotheses.Withoutadditionalexamination,suchasopen-ended
interviews,itisnotpossibletofindinductivemeansofidentifyingomittedvari-
ables(ibid.,p.21).
Exploring causal mechanisms10
Casestudiesexaminetheoperationofcausalmechanismsinindividualcases
indetail.Withinasinglecase,theylookatalargenumberofinterveningvariables
andinductivelyobserve anyunexpectedaspect of the operation of aparticular
causalmechanismor help identify what conditionsarepresentin a case that
activatethe causalmechanism,while quantitativestudiesintheircorrelations
lacksuchcausality(ibid., p.21).However,onemustkeepinmindthatitisnot
entirelytruethatquantitativeresearchdoesnotincludeanycausality.Weare
referringtoquantitativeresearch’sinabilitytotakeintoaccountcontextualfactors
otherthanthosethatarecodifiedwithinthe variablesbeingmeasured;inthis
situation,manyadditional variablesthatmight alsobecontextuallyimportant
aremissed.
Modelling and assessing complex causal relations
Casestudiesareableto accommodate complexcausalrelations,such as
equifinality,11complexinteractioneffects,andpathdependency.12Thisadvantage
isrelativeratherthanabsolute. Case studiescanallowforequifinalitybypro-
ducinggeneralizationsthatarenarrowerandmorecontingent.Notwithstanding
thisadvantage(moreabout generalization in continuation), otherswho prefer
quantitativemethodsappreciatetheoriesthataremoregeneralevenifthismeans
thattheyaremorevagueandmorepronetocounterexamples(ibid.,p.22).
10Causalmechanism:“YhappenedbecauseofA,inspiteofB,”whereasAmeansasetofparticipa-
tivecausesandBmeansapotentiallyemptyspaceofoppositecauses(Acannotbeempty;otherwise,
itwouldnotbeabletoexplainY).Forexample,thecardroveofftheroadduetoinappropriatespeed
andsandon theroad despitegoodroadvisibilityandthedriver’salertness(Salmon inGeorgeand
Bennett2005,p.145).
11Equifinalitymeansthatthesameendresultcanbeobtainedindifferentways(Instituteofthe
SlovenianLanguage…n.d.)
12Historicalheritageessentiallydefinesthedevelopmentalpossibilitiesoffutureevolution(e.g.,
ofeachnation)(Vehovar2005,p.309).
38 JOURNALOFCONTEMPORARYEDUCATIONALSTUDIES1/2013 A.B.Starman
Theuseofcasestudieshassomeadditionaladvantagesaswell.Theconnect-
ednesstoeverydaylifeandcasestudies’abundanceofindividualelements and
detailsareimportantforresearchersfromtwoviewpoints.First,acasestudyis
importantfordevelopingdifferentviewsofreality,includingtheawarenessthat
humanbehaviourcannotbeunderstoodmerelyasanactthatisdrivenbyarule
oratheory.Second,casestudiescancontributetotheprofessionaldevelopmentof
aresearcher,ascasestudiescanprovideconcrete,context-dependentexperience
thatincreasestheirresearchskills(Flyvbjerg2006,p.223).
Paradox, misunderstandings, and criticism
Intheintroduction,wenotedthatcasestudiesarewidelyusedbutunder-
represented.Basedonthesefindings,Gerringhasidentifiedaparadoxinwhich
hecorrectlystatesthatacasestudyexistsinastrange,curiousmethodological
limbo,which,hebelieves,isduetoalackofunderstandingofthismethod(Gerring
2004,p. 341).Flyvbjerghasthereforesought toresolvethis paradoxand,inso
doing,toachieveawideracceptanceandapplicationofresearchusingcasestudies.
Hehasidentifiedfivemisunderstandingsaboutcasestudiesthatunderminethe
credibilityandapplicationofthisresearchtype.Thesemisunderstandingsrefer
primarilytothetheory,reliability,andvalidity(Flyvbjerg2006;2011):
General,theoretical(context-independent)knowledgeismorevaluablethan1.
concrete,practical(context-dependent)knowledge.
Itis impossibletogeneralize onthebasisof an individualcase;therefore,2.
thecasestudycannotcontributetoscientificdevelopment.
Thecasestudyismostusefulforgeneratinghypotheses(thatis,inthefirst3.
stageofatotalresearchprocess),whereasothermethodsaremoresuitable
forhypothesestestingandtheorybuilding.
Casestudiescontainabiastowardverification;thatis,atendencytoconfirm4.
theresearcher’spreconceivednotions.
Itisoftendifficulttosummarizeanddevelopgeneralpropositionsandtheo-5.
riesonthebasisofspecificcasestudies.
Wewillnowattempttoresolveandclarifythesemisunderstandings.
General, theoretical knowledge is more valuable than concrete, practical case
knowledge.
Socialsciencesdonothavemuchtoofferexceptconcretecasesandcontext-
dependentknowledgebecauseresearchershavenotsucceededinproducinggeneral,
context-independenttheories.Casestudiesareespeciallywell-suitedtoproducing
thisexacttypeofknowledge.Thefirstargumentcanthereforeberevisedasthis
statement(Flyvbjerg2006;2011):“Concretecaseknowledgeismorevaluablefor
socialsciencesthanthevainsearchforpredictivetheoriesanduniversals.”
Thecasestudyasatypeofqualitativeresearch 39
Generalization upon the basis of an individual case is not possible; therefore,
case studies cannot contribute to scientific development.
Thisisatypical assumptionaboutcasestudiesamong proponents of the
naturalscienceidealwithinthe socialsciences,yetevenresearcherswithouta
strongassociationwiththisidealmaysharethisviewpoint.Giddens,forexample,
statesthatthetraditional small-scale research community ofanthropology
fieldwork,inandofitself,isnotgeneralizingstudies,butcaneasilybecomesoif
carriedoutinsomenumberssothattheirtypicaljudgementscanjustifiablybe
made(GiddensinFlyvberg2006,p.225).
Incasestudies,inferenceisbasedonanalytical induction (analytic gene-
ralization)andnotonstatisticalinduction(enumeration).Instatisticalinduction,
oneisnotinterestedinstructuralorfunctionalconnectivitycharacteristicswithin
individualunits,butonlytheirpresenceorabsenceandquantitativesignificance,
frequency,differences,andcorrelations.However,inanalyticinduction,weare
examiningaparticularcase–therelationshipsamongindividualcharacteristics,
processes,oreventsandhowtheyareconnectedtoeachother(Mesec1998,p.50).
Mesecthereforearguesthatiftheconnectionexistseveninjustonesinglecase,
itmaybetheoreticallyimportant(ibid.).
Holistics,13inparticular,believethatgeneralizationmaybepossibleevenon
thebasisofasinglecasestudy.Diesing,forexample,statesthatscienceencounters
regularity(i.e., the search forgeneralprinciplesandrules)andcreativity(i.e.,
lookingfornew,originalcases).Iftheprimaryfocusisonregularity,thecreativity
willappear,andifthefocusisoncreativity,thenprincipleseventuallyshowup.
Casestudiesincludeboththeparticularandtheuniversalwithoutbeingmutually
exclusiveandmovebetweentheparticularanduniversalingradedsteps(Diesing
inSturman1997,p.63).
Stakeholdsasimilarposition;hestatesthataprocessofnaturalisticgenerali-
zationarrivesfromthetacitknowledgeofhowthingsare,whytheyare,howpeople
feelaboutthem,andhowthesethingsarelikelytobelateronorinotherplaces
thispersonisfamiliarwith.Generalizationisthereforepossiblebyrecognizingthe
similaritiesoftheobjectsandissuesindifferentcontextsandbyunderstanding
thechanges astheyhappen (Stake1980inSturman1997,p.69).However,for
thiskindofgeneralizationtobepossible,itisessentialtoensurethatthesalient
featuresofthecasearedocumentedsothatnewsituationscanbeilluminatedby
averythoroughunderstandingofaknowncase(Sturman1997,p.63).
AcasestudyisidealforgeneralizingfindingsusingthetypeoftestthatKarl
Popper(inFlyvbjerg2006,p.228;Flyvbjerg 2011,p.305)called “falsification”;
insocialscience,thistestformspartofcriticalreflexivity.Popperbelievesthat
everytruescientifictheoryallowsrefutation(StanfordEncyclopediaofPhilosophy
2009).Falsificationthereforestatesthatahypothesisisconsideredtobescientific
whenits defenderisableto determine theconditionsunderwhichthehypoth-
13Proponentsoftheholisticapproachintheepistemologyofscienceemphasizethestudyofcom-
plexityintermsofthewhole.Inholism,thewholeismoreimportantthanthesumofitsindividual
parts.Holismis the opposite of individualism,butthey often occur in pairs–in macro and micro
perspectivesofobservingsocialreality(Mali2006,p.131).
40 JOURNALOFCONTEMPORARYEDUCATIONALSTUDIES1/2013 A.B.Starman
esiscouldberefuted.14Falsificationisoneofthemostrigorousteststowhicha
scientificpropositioncanbesubjected–ifjustoneobservationdoesnotfitwiththe
proposition,itisconsideredtonotbevalidandmustthereforebeeitherrevisedor
rejected(Flyvbjerg2011,p.305).Deviantcasesandthefalsificationstheyentail
aremainsourcesoftheorydevelopmentbecausetheypointtothedevelopment
ofnewconcepts,variables,andcausalmechanismsthatisnecessaryinorderto
accountforthedeviantcaseandothercaseslikeit(ibid.).
Flyvbjergcorrectsthesecondmisunderstandingasfollows:“Onecanoften
generalizeonthebasisof a single case, andthecasestudymaybecentralto
scientificdevelopmentviageneralization assupplementor alternativetoother
methods”(ibid.,p.305).
Case studies are useful for generating hypotheses (i.e., at the beginning of the
research process), while other methods are more suitable for hypotheses testing
and theory building.
Thesourceofthisargumentlaysinthepreviousmisunderstandingthatit
isimpossibletogeneralizefromcasestudies.Generalizationisassociated with
hypothesistestingandisthenextstepofcaseselection.ButGeorgeandBennett
areconvincedthat casestudyisespeciallywell-suitedfortheorydevelopment
becauseittacklesthefollowingtasks in the research process evenbetterthan
othermethods(foranexample,seeGeorgeandBennett2005,pp.6–9):
– Processtracingthatlinkscausesandoutcomes,
– detailedexplorationofhypothesizedcausalmechanisms,
– developmentandtestingofhistoricalexplanations,
– understandingthesensitivityofconceptstocontext,and
– formationofnewhypothesesandnewquestionstostudysparkedbydeviant
cases.
The case study contains a bias toward verification; that is, a tendency to
confirm the researcher’s preconceived notions.
Inthesectionaboutcaseselection,wehavealreadydiscussedsomeofthe
concernsregardingaresearcher’sbias.Doubtsandprejudicetowardverification
inscientificinvestigationisgeneral,buttheallegeddeficiencyofthecasestudy
andothertypesofqualitativeresearchisthattheyostensiblyallowmoreroomfor
theresearcher’ssubjectiveandarbitraryjudgmentthanquantitativeinvestigation
(Flyvbjerg2011,p. 309; George and Bennett 2005; Mesec 1998;Thomas2011).
Sturmanbelievesthat a casestudycanachieveits own form of precision
(Sturman1997,p.65)or,asWilsoncallsit,a“disciplinedsubjectivity”(Wilsonin
ibid.).Theprincipleofverifiabilityinacasestudy(andinqualitativeresearchin
general)isrealizedbydescribingtheentireresearchprocessindetail,especially
14InPopper’sfamousexampleof“allswansarewhite,”heproposedthatjustonenotionofasingle
blackswan(deviation)wouldfalsifythispropositionandinthiswaywillhavegeneralsignificanceand
willstimulatefurtherinvestigationsandtheorybuilding.Thecasestudyiswell-suitedforidentifying
“blackswans”becauseofitsin-depthapproach(Flyvbjerg2011,p.305).
Thecasestudyasatypeofqualitativeresearch 41
theanalysisprocessinwhichconceptsareshapedandtheregularityandpatterns
ofbehaviour,interaction,andexperiencearedetermined(Mesec1998,p.45).To
achievethecredibilityinacasestudy,Sturmansuggeststhefollowingstrategies
(Sturman1997,p.65):
– Proceduresfordatacollectionshouldbeexplained,
– datacollectedshouldbedisplayedandreadyforreanalysis,
– negativeinstancesshouldbereported,
– biasesshouldbeacknowledged,
– fieldworkanalysesneedtobedocumented,
– therelationshipbetweenassertionandevidenceshouldbeclarified,
– primaryevidenceshouldbe distinguished from secondaryevidenceand
descriptionandinterpretationshouldalsobedistinguished,
– diariesor logsshouldbeused totrackwhatwasactuallydoneduringdif-
ferentstagesofthestudy,and
– methodsshouldbedevisedtocheckthequalityofdata.
Ingeneral,itisknownthatmoresimilarresultsandconclusionsarepossible
whenrepeatingacertainstudy,whichleadstoincreasedreliabilityofthestudy.
Iftheexperimentisrepeatedseveraltimesandalwayshasthesameresults,then
itsreliabilityis100%.Thisisthesameformeasuring,testing,etc.Casestudies
cannotbe repeatedbecauseduringrepetition,thecaseisalreadydifferent. So
theabovedefinitionofreliabilityissomewhatmitigatedwhenitcomestoacase
study.Therefore,acasestudyismorereliable–asmuchasweareabletoshow
thatwecouldcometothesameconclusions–ifweareabletorepeatthesurvey
underanunchangedstateofcircumstances.Thisrequiresaccurateanddetailed
descriptionof data acquisition procedures as wellasdocumentingeverysingle
pieceofinformation(Mesec1998,p.148).
Mesecpointsoutthatthefindingsandresultsofacasestudyshouldbethe
first,notthelast,chapterinaparticularresearcharea.Casestudiesshouldthen
befollowedbyothersubsequentcasestudiesinordertoreinforcetheaccuracyof
thefirststudy'sfindings.Thisshouldbedonewithrevisionoftheobservations
andfindingsand,mostimportantly,byspreadingthenetworkofnewlydiscovered
connectionsamongcases.Casestudiesarecertainlymorethanjustanintroduc-
tiontoquantitativeresearch.Ifwedonotwanttocount,wedonothavetodoso
inordertolearnsomething(ibid.,p.380).
Conclusion
Quiteafewauthorshavealteredtheirviewsaboutcasestudiesasatypeof
qualitativeresearchtype(see,forexample,Campbell1975andEysenck1976in
Flyvbjerg2006).Inconsiderationaboutchanginghisview,Eysenckwrotefollowing:
“Sometimeswesimplyhavetokeepoureyesopenandlookcarefullyatindividual
cases– notinthehopeof provinganything,but ratherinthehopeoflearning
42 JOURNALOFCONTEMPORARYEDUCATIONALSTUDIES1/2013 A.B.Starman
something”(Eysenck1976inFlyvbjerg2006,p.224).Becauseofalackof“hard”
theory(theorythatcontainsexplanationsandpredictions)insocialsciences,itis
difficulttoattainstrongandcommonlyvalidrules.Butthisdoesnotmeanthat
socialscienceresearchhasnocontributiontoscienceatall–quitetheopposite,
infact.Thereisconstantprogression towardnewdiscoveriesandcognitions!A
casestudycanbehelpfulwhenweareeagertoanswerthequestionsof“how”and
“why,”whenwecannotinfluencethebehaviourofthoseinvolvedinastudy,and
whenwewanttocovercontextualconditionsbecausewebelievetheyarerelevant
tothephenomenonunderstudyorwhentheboundariesbetweenthephenomenon
andcontextarenotclear(YininBaxter&Jack2008,p.545).
Butwemustalsorecognize that acasestudyis more thanjustatype of
qualitativeresearch.Itisaticketthatallowsustoenteraresearchfieldinwhich
wediscovertheunknownwithinwell-knownborderswhilecontinuallymonitoring
ourownperformance;scalability;andourown,aswellasgeneral,existingknow-
ledge.Wehopethisarticlesupportsandfosterstheviewofcasestudiesasatype
ofqualitativeresearch.
References
Baxter,P.andJack,S.(2008).QualitativeCaseStudyMethodology:Study Design
andImplementationfor NoviceResearchers.The Qualitative Report, 13,Issue4,
pp.544–559.
Case study in psychology(n.d.).Retrievedfromhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case_study_
in_psychology#Famous_case_studies_in_psychology(Accessedon5.4.2012).
Creswell,J.(1994).Research design: qualitative and quantitative approaches.Thousand
Oaks,California:SagePublications.
Flyvbjerg,B.(2006).Fivemisunderstandingsaboutcase-studyresearch.Qualitative Inquir y,
12,Issue2,pp.219–245.
Flyvbjerg,B.(2011).Casestudy.In:N.K.DenzinandY.S.Lincoln(eds.).The Sage Hand-
book of Qualitative Research,4thed.ThousandOaks,CA:Sage,pp.301–316.
George,A.L.andBennett,A.(2005).Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social
Science.Cambridge:MITPress.
Gerring,J.(2004).What isacasestudyandwhatisitgoodfor?The American Political
Science Review,98,Issue2,pp.341–354.
Inštitut za slovenski jezik Frana Ramovša ZRC SAZU, laboratorij za korpus slovenskega
jezika(n.d.).Retrievedfrom http://bos.zrc-sazu.si/c/neva.exe?n=a_si_s&e=C_I_D_
SM_MA%2020894(Accessedon4.4.2012).
Mali,F.(2006).Epistemologija družbenih ved: razlaga in razumevanje.Ljubljana:Fakulteta
zadružbenevede.
Mesec,B.(1998).Uvod v kvalitativno raziskovanje v socialnem delu.Ljubljana:Visoka
šolazasocialnodelo.
Merriam,S.B.(1988).Case study research in education. SanFrancisco,London:Jossey-
BassPublishers.
Thecasestudyasatypeofqualitativeresearch 43
Mills,A.J.,Durepos,G.andWiebe,E.(2010).Encyclopedia of case study research.London:
Sage.
Sagadin,J.(1991).Razprave iz pedagoške metodologije.Ljubljana:Znanstveniinštitut
Filozofskefakultete.
Sagadin,J.(2004).Tipi in vloga študijprimerovvpedagoškemraziskovanju.Sodobna
pedagogika,55,Issue4,pp.88–99.
Simons,H.(2009).Case study research in practice.London:SAGE.
Stake,R. E. (2005). Qualitativecase studies. In: N. K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (eds.).
The SAGE handbook of qualitative research(3rded.).ThousandOaks,CA:Sage,
pp.443–466.
Stanford Encyclopedia of philosophy: Karl Popper(2009).Retrievedfromhttp://plato.stan-
ford.edu/entries/popper/(Accessedon4.4.2012).
Sturman,A. (1997).Casestudymethods.In: J. P.Keeves (ed.). Educational research,
methodology and measurement: an international handbook(2nded.).Oxford:Per-
gamon,pp.61–66.
Thomas,G. (2011).ATypology forthecase studyinsocialsciencefollowingareviewof
definition,discourseandstructure.Qualitative Inquiry,17,Issue6,pp.511–521.
Vehovar,U.(2005).FraneAdam,MatejMakarovič,BorutRončević,MatevžTomšič:The
challengesofsustaineddevelopment:Theroleofsocio-culturalfactorsinEast-central
Europe:recenzija.Družboslovne razprave,21,Issue49–50,pp.309–311.
Verschuren,P.J. M. (2003). Casestudy as a research strategy: some ambiguities and
opportunities.International Journal of Social Research Methodology,6, Issue 2,
pp.121–139.
Vogrinc,J.(2008).Kvalitativno raziskovanje na pedagoškem področju.Ljubljana:Pedagoška
fakulteta.
Yin,R.K.(2009).Case study research: design and methods (4thed.). ThousandOaks,CA:
Sage.