Case study methodology

There are multiple definitions and understandings of the case study.

According to Bromley (1990), it is a “systematic inquiry into an event or a set of related events which aims to describe and explain the phenomenon of interest” (p. 302). The unit of analysis can vary from an individual to a corporation. While there is utility in applying this method retrospectively, it is most often used prospectively.

Data come largely from documentation, archival records, interviews, direct observations, participant observation and physical artifacts (Yin, 1994).

The terms “case study”, “case review” and “case report” are used loosely in the scientific and professional literature.

The key features of a “case study” are its scientific credentials and its evidence base for professional applications.

A “case review” might emphasise a critical reappraisal of a case.

A “case report” might refer to a summary of a case or to the document reporting a case, as in case law or medicine.

Case studies of individuals in health care research (to take one example) often involve in-depth interviews with participants and key informants, review of the medical records, observation, and excerpts from patients’ personal writings and diaries. Case studies in nursing, for example, have a practical function in that they can be immediately applicable to the participant’s diagnosis or treatment.

Case study as a research method is often indexed in most undergraduate research textbooks as neither quantitative nor qualitative. Little attention is paid to the usefulness of this method, with an average of two pages devoted to this research approach (Burns & Grove, 1999). This chapter will provide a step-by-step guide to this research method. The goal of this chapter is to translate this step-wise approach into a “curriculum” for teaching case study method.

In teaching case study method a primary aim is to define what case study is and what it is not. Various authors of case study methods discuss and demonstrate a variety of paradigmatic perspectives. I will discuss the most commonly cited perspectives. According to Yin (1994) the case study design must have five components: the research question(s), its propositions, its unit(s) of analysis, a determination of how the data are linked to the propositions and criteria to interpret the findings. Yin concluded that operationally defining the unit of analysis assists with replication and efforts at case comparison.

Guba and Lincoln (1981) describe case study “types”. These types are factual, interpretative and evaluative. Each case study must outline the purpose, then depending on the type of case study and the actions proposed by the researcher, the researcher could determine the possible products of the study. For example, research undertaken to describe men’s experience in living with chronic coronary heart disease (CHD) could be placed in both factual and interpretative categories (Zucker, 2001). The researcher’s actions include recording, constructing and presenting, and producing a chronicle, a profile or facts.

Additionally the researcher is construing, synthesising and clarifying, and producing a history, meanings and understandings. A student’s understanding of such activities helps him/her form the stages of the case study method.

Like this article?

Share on Linkdin