scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Book

Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences

TL;DR: In this paper, a text that emphasizes the importance of case studies in social science scholarship and shows how to make case study practices more rigorous is presented, with a focus on case studies.
Abstract: A text that emphasizes the importance of case studies in social science scholarship and shows how to make case study practices more rigorous.
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Based on the experiences of conducting several health-related case studies, a reflect on the different types of case study design, the specific research questions this approach can help answer, the data sources that tend to be used, and the particular advantages and disadvantages of employing this methodological approach.
Abstract: The case study approach allows in-depth, multi-faceted explorations of complex issues in their real-life settings. The value of the case study approach is well recognised in the fields of business, law and policy, but somewhat less so in health services research. Based on our experiences of conducting several health-related case studies, we reflect on the different types of case study design, the specific research questions this approach can help answer, the data sources that tend to be used, and the particular advantages and disadvantages of employing this methodological approach. The paper concludes with key pointers to aid those designing and appraising proposals for conducting case study research, and a checklist to help readers assess the quality of case study reports.

1,489 citations


Cites background from "Case Studies and Theory Development..."

  • ...Carefully formulated research question(s), informed by the existing literature and a prior appreciation of the theoretical issues and setting(s), are all important in appropriately and succinctly defining the case [8,12]....

    [...]

  • ...They may establish, strengthen or weaken historical explanations of a case and, in certain circumstances, allow theoretical (as opposed to statistical) generalisation beyond the particular cases studied [12]....

    [...]

01 Jun 2007
TL;DR: In this article, the authors discuss several aspects of case studies as a research method, including the design and categories of case study and how their robustness can be achieved, as well as the advantages and disadvantages of case-study methods as research methods.
Abstract: 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.

1,336 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors discuss the use of the synthetic control method (Abadie and Gardeazabal, 2003; Abadie, Diamond, and Hainmueller, 2010) as a way to bridge the quantitative/qualitative divide in comparative politics.
Abstract: In recent years a widespread consensus has emerged about the necessity of establishing bridges between the quantitative and the qualitative approaches to empirical research in political science. In this article, we discuss the use of the synthetic control method (Abadie and Gardeazabal, 2003; Abadie, Diamond, and Hainmueller, 2010) as a way to bridge the quantitative/qualitative divide in comparative politics. The synthetic control method provides a systematic way to choose comparison units in comparative case studies. This systematization opens the door to precise quantitative inference in small-sample comparative studies, without precluding the application of qualitative approaches. That is, the synthetic control method allows researchers to put \qualitative esh on quantitative bones" (Tarrow, 1995). We illustrate the main ideas behind the synthetic control method with an application where we study the economic impact of the 1990 German reunication in West Germany.

1,278 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, a typology for the case study following a definition wherein various layers of classificatory principle are disaggregated is proposed, and a clear distinction is drawn between two parts:...
Abstract: The author proposes a typology for the case study following a definition wherein various layers of classificatory principle are disaggregated. First, a clear distinction is drawn between two parts:...

1,102 citations


Cites background from "Case Studies and Theory Development..."

  • ...…has been extensive over the past 40 years across the social sciences—see, for example, Simons (2009), Yin (2009), Mitchell (2006), Flyvbjerg (2006), George and Bennett (2005), Stake (2005), Hammersley and Gomm (2000), Bassey (1999), Ragin and Becker (1992), Merriam (1988), Eckstein (1975), and…...

    [...]

  • ...While those from sociology, education, and psychology have tended to see the case study in an interpretivist frame, those from business, politics, and other areas may espouse the interpretivist holism of case study but address this through what George and Bennett (2005, p. 5) have called “neopositivist” means via the identification of variables to be studied—see, for example, the discussions of Luker (2008) and Yin (2009)....

    [...]

  • ...While those from sociology, education, and psychology have tended to see the case study in an interpretivist frame, those from business, politics, and other areas may espouse the interpretivist holism of case study but address this through what George and Bennett (2005, p. 5) have called “neopositivist” means via the identification of variables to be studied—see, for example, the discussions of Luker (2008) and Yin (2009). By contrast, those in medicine and the law have tended to see the case study principally as a vehicle for exemplifying or illustrating novel or archetypal phenomena. Notwithstanding these differences, strong commonalities exist across disciplinary margins. Reviewing a number of definitions of case study, Simons (2009) concludes that what unites them is a commitment to studying the complexity that is involved in real situations and to defining case study other than by the methods of data collection that it employs....

    [...]

  • ...While those from sociology, education, and psychology have tended to see the case study in an interpretivist frame, those from business, politics, and other areas may espouse the interpretivist holism of case study but address this through what George and Bennett (2005, p. 5) have called “neopositivist” means via the identification of variables to be studied—see, for example, the discussions of Luker (2008) and Yin (2009). By contrast, those in medicine and the law have tended to see the case study principally as a vehicle for exemplifying or illustrating novel or archetypal phenomena....

    [...]

Posted Content
TL;DR: In this article, a new framework for carrying out process tracing is proposed, which integrates discussions of process tracing and causal-process observations, gives greater attention to description as a key contribution, and emphasizes the causal sequence in which process-tracing observations can be situated.
Abstract: Process tracing is a fundamental method of qualitative analysis. While it is often invoked by scholars as they examine qualitative data, too frequently this tool is neither adequately understood nor rigorously applied. This deficit motivates the present article, which offers a new framework for carrying out process tracing. This reformulation integrates discussions of process tracing and causal-process observations, gives greater attention to description as a key contribution, and emphasizes the causal sequence in which process-tracing observations can be situated. In the current period of major innovation in quantitative tools for causal inference, this reformulation is part of a wider, parallel effort to achieve greater systematization of qualitative methods. A key point here is that these methods can add inferential leverage too often lacking in quantitative analysis. The presentation is accompanied by teaching exercises, which focus on three examples from international relations, one from American politics, two from comparative politics, and one from public health/epidemiology.

1,101 citations


Cites background from "Case Studies and Theory Development..."

  • ...George (1979); George and McKeown (1985); George and Bennett (2005); Bennett (2008, 2010)....

    [...]

References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Arend Lijphart1
TL;DR: This paper is a systematic analysis of the comparative method, and it is argued that the case study method is closely related to theComparison method.
Abstract: This paper is a systematic analysis of the comparative method. Its emphasis is on both the limitations of the method and the ways in which, despite these limitations, it can be used to maximum advantage. The comparative method is defined and analyzed in terms of its similarities and differences vis-a-vis the experimental and statistical methods. The principal difficulty facing the comparative method is that it must generalize on the basis of relatively few empirical cases. Four specific ways in which this difficulty may be resolved are discussed and illustrated: (1) increasing the number of cases as much as possible by means of longitudinal extension and a global range of analysis, (2) reducing the property space of the analysis, (3) focusing the comparative analysis on “comparable” cases (e.g., by means of area, diachronic, or intranation comparisons), and (4) focusing on the key variables. It is argued that the case study method is closely related to the comparative method. Six types of case studies (the atheoretical, interpretative, hypothesis-generating, theory-confirming, theory-infirming, and deviant case analyses) are distinguished, and their theoretical value is analyzed.

2,595 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In a very crucial sense there is no methodology without logos, without thinking about thinking as mentioned in this paper, and if a firm distinction is drawn between methodology and technique, the latter is no substitute for the former.
Abstract: “To have mastered ‘theory’ and ‘method’ is to have become a conscious thinker, a man at work and aware of the assumptions and implications of whatever he is about. To be mastered by ‘method’ or ‘theory’ is simply to be kept from working.” The sentence applies nicely to the present plight of political science. The profession as a whole oscillates between two unsound extremes. At the one end a large majority of political scientists qualify as pure and simple unconscious thinkers. At the other end a sophisticated minority qualify as overconscious thinkers, in the sense that their standards of method and theory are drawn from the physical, “paradigmatic” sciences. The wide gap between the unconscious and the overconscious thinker is concealed by the growing sophistication of statistical and research techniques. Most of the literature introduced by the title “Methods” (in the social, behavioral or political sciences) actually deals with survey techniques and social statistics, and has little if anything to share with the crucial concern of “methodology,” which is a concern with the logical structure and procedure of scientific enquiry. In a very crucial sense there is no methodology without logos, without thinking about thinking. And if a firm distinction is drawn—as it should be—between methodology and technique, the latter is no substitute for the former. One may be a wonderful researcher and manipulator of data, and yet remain an unconscious thinker.

2,207 citations

Posted Content
TL;DR: The authors explored the strengths and weaknesses of alternative strategies of conceptual innovation that have emerged: descending and climbing Sartori's ladder of generality, generating diminished" subtypes of democracy, precising the definition of democracy by adding defining attributes, and shifting the overarching concept with which democracy is associated.
Abstract: The recent trend toward democratization in countries across the globe has challenged scholars to pursue two potentially contradictory goals. On the one hand, they seek to increase analytic differentiation in order to capture the diverse forms of democracy that have emerged. On the other hand, they are concerned with conceptual validity. Specifically, they seek to avoid the problem of conceptual stretching that arises when the concept of democracy is applied to cases for which, by relevant scholarly standards, it is not appropriate. This article argues that the pursuit of these two goals has led to a proliferation of conceptual innovations, including numerous subtypes of democracy – that is to say, democracy "with adjectives." The articles explores the strengths and weaknesses of alternative strategies of conceptual innovation that have emerged: descending and climbing Sartori's ladder of generality, generating "diminished" subtypes of democracy, "precising" the definition of democracy by adding defining attributes, and shifting the overarching concept with which democracy is associated. The goal of the analysis is to make more comprehensible the complex structure of these strategies, as well as to explore trade-offs among the strategies. Even when scholars proceed intuitively, rather than self-consciously, they tend to operate within this structure. Yet it is far more desirable for them to do so self-consciously, with a full awareness of these trade-offs.

1,464 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The logic of explanation is laid out and how it is violated when only cases that have achieved the outcome of interest are studied is shown.
Abstract: This article demonstrates how the selection of cases for study on the basis of outcomes on the dependent variable biases conclusions. It first lays out the logic of explanation and shows how it is violated when only cases that have achieved the outcome of interest are studied. It then examines three well-known and highly regarded studies in the field of comparative politics, comparing the conclusions reached in the original work with a test of the arguments on cases selected without regard for their position on the dependent variable. In each instance, conclusions based on the uncorrelated sample differ from the original conclusions.

618 citations