12 case study method advantages and disadvantages

Home » Pros and Cons » 12 Case Study Method Advantages and Disadvantages

12 Case Study Method Advantages and Disadvantages

A case study is an investigation into an individual circumstance. The investigation may be of a single person, business, event, or group. The investigation involves collecting in-depth data about the individual entity through the use of several collection methods. Interviews and observation are two of the most common forms of data collection used.

The case study method was originally developed in the field of clinical medicine. It has expanded since to other industries to examine key results, either positive or negative, that were received through a specific set of decisions. This allows for the topic to be researched with great detail, allowing others to glean knowledge from the information presented.

Here are the advantages and disadvantages of using the case study method.

List of the Advantages of the Case Study Method

1. it turns client observations into useable data..

Case studies offer verifiable data from direct observations of the individual entity involved. These observations provide information about input processes. It can show the path taken which led to specific results being generated. Those observations make it possible for others, in similar circumstances, to potentially replicate the results discovered by the case study method.

2. It turns opinion into fact.

Case studies provide facts to study because you’re looking at data which was generated in real-time. It is a way for researchers to turn their opinions into information that can be verified as fact because there is a proven path of positive or negative development. Singling out a specific incident also provides in-depth details about the path of development, which gives it extra credibility to the outside observer.

3. It is relevant to all parties involved.

Case studies that are chosen well will be relevant to everyone who is participating in the process. Because there is such a high level of relevance involved, researchers are able to stay actively engaged in the data collection process. Participants are able to further their knowledge growth because there is interest in the outcome of the case study. Most importantly, the case study method essentially forces people to make a decision about the question being studied, then defend their position through the use of facts.

4. It uses a number of different research methodologies.

The case study method involves more than just interviews and direct observation. Case histories from a records database can be used with this method. Questionnaires can be distributed to participants in the entity being studies. Individuals who have kept diaries and journals about the entity being studied can be included. Even certain experimental tasks, such as a memory test, can be part of this research process.

5. It can be done remotely.

Researchers do not need to be present at a specific location or facility to utilize the case study method. Research can be obtained over the phone, through email, and other forms of remote communication. Even interviews can be conducted over the phone. That means this method is good for formative research that is exploratory in nature, even if it must be completed from a remote location.

6. It is inexpensive.

Compared to other methods of research, the case study method is rather inexpensive. The costs associated with this method involve accessing data, which can often be done for free. Even when there are in-person interviews or other on-site duties involved, the costs of reviewing the data are minimal.

7. It is very accessible to readers.

The case study method puts data into a usable format for those who read the data and note its outcome. Although there may be perspectives of the researcher included in the outcome, the goal of this method is to help the reader be able to identify specific concepts to which they also relate. That allows them to discover unusual features within the data, examine outliers that may be present, or draw conclusions from their own experiences.

List of the Disadvantages of the Case Study Method

1. it can have influence factors within the data..

Every person has their own unconscious bias. Although the case study method is designed to limit the influence of this bias by collecting fact-based data, it is the collector of the data who gets to define what is a “fact” and what is not. That means the real-time data being collected may be based on the results the researcher wants to see from the entity instead. By controlling how facts are collected, a research can control the results this method generates.

2. It takes longer to analyze the data.

The information collection process through the case study method takes much longer to collect than other research options. That is because there is an enormous amount of data which must be sifted through. It’s not just the researchers who can influence the outcome in this type of research method. Participants can also influence outcomes by given inaccurate or incomplete answers to questions they are asked. Researchers must verify the information presented to ensure its accuracy, and that takes time to complete.

3. It can be an inefficient process.

Case study methods require the participation of the individuals or entities involved for it to be a successful process. That means the skills of the researcher will help to determine the quality of information that is being received. Some participants may be quiet, unwilling to answer even basic questions about what is being studied. Others may be overly talkative, exploring tangents which have nothing to do with the case study at all. If researchers are unsure of how to manage this process, then incomplete data is often collected.

4. It requires a small sample size to be effective.

The case study method requires a small sample size for it to yield an effective amount of data to be analyzed. If there are different demographics involved with the entity, or there are different needs which must be examined, then the case study method becomes very inefficient.

5. It is a labor-intensive method of data collection.

The case study method requires researchers to have a high level of language skills to be successful with data collection. Researchers must be personally involved in every aspect of collecting the data as well. From reviewing files or entries personally to conducting personal interviews, the concepts and themes of this process are heavily reliant on the amount of work each researcher is willing to put into things.

These case study method advantages and disadvantages offer a look at the effectiveness of this research option. With the right skill set, it can be used as an effective tool to gather rich, detailed information about specific entities. Without the right skill set, the case study method becomes inefficient and inaccurate.

Related Posts:

• 25 Best Ways to Overcome the Fear of Failure
• Monroe's Motivated Sequence Explained [with Examples]
• 21 Most Effective Bundle Pricing Strategies with Examples
• Force Field Analysis Explained with Examples

10 Case Study Advantages and Disadvantages

A case study in academic research is a detailed and in-depth examination of a specific instance or event, generally conducted through a qualitative approach to data.

The most common case study definition that I come across is is Robert K. Yin’s (2003, p. 13) quote provided below:

“An empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident.”

Researchers conduct case studies for a number of reasons, such as to explore complex phenomena within their real-life context, to look at a particularly interesting instance of a situation, or to dig deeper into something of interest identified in a wider-scale project.

While case studies render extremely interesting data, they have many limitations and are not suitable for all studies. One key limitation is that a case study’s findings are not usually generalizable to broader populations because one instance cannot be used to infer trends across populations.

Case Study Advantages and Disadvantages

1. in-depth analysis of complex phenomena.

Case study design allows researchers to delve deeply into intricate issues and situations.

By focusing on a specific instance or event, researchers can uncover nuanced details and layers of understanding that might be missed with other research methods, especially large-scale survey studies.

As Lee and Saunders (2017) argue,

“It allows that particular event to be studies in detail so that its unique qualities may be identified.”

This depth of analysis can provide rich insights into the underlying factors and dynamics of the studied phenomenon.

2. Holistic Understanding

Building on the above point, case studies can help us to understand a topic holistically and from multiple angles.

This means the researcher isn’t restricted to just examining a topic by using a pre-determined set of questions, as with questionnaires. Instead, researchers can use qualitative methods to delve into the many different angles, perspectives, and contextual factors related to the case study.

We can turn to Lee and Saunders (2017) again, who notes that case study researchers “develop a deep, holistic understanding of a particular phenomenon” with the intent of deeply understanding the phenomenon.

3. Examination of rare and Unusual Phenomena

We need to use case study methods when we stumble upon “rare and unusual” (Lee & Saunders, 2017) phenomena that would tend to be seen as mere outliers in population studies.

Take, for example, a child genius. A population study of all children of that child’s age would merely see this child as an outlier in the dataset, and this child may even be removed in order to predict overall trends.

So, to truly come to an understanding of this child and get insights into the environmental conditions that led to this child’s remarkable cognitive development, we need to do an in-depth study of this child specifically – so, we’d use a case study.

4. Helps Reveal the Experiences of Marginalzied Groups

Just as rare and unsual cases can be overlooked in population studies, so too can the experiences, beliefs, and perspectives of marginalized groups.

As Lee and Saunders (2017) argue, “case studies are also extremely useful in helping the expression of the voices of people whose interests are often ignored.”

Take, for example, the experiences of minority populations as they navigate healthcare systems. This was for many years a “hidden” phenomenon, not examined by researchers. It took case study designs to truly reveal this phenomenon, which helped to raise practitioners’ awareness of the importance of cultural sensitivity in medicine.

5. Ideal in Situations where Researchers cannot Control the Variables

Experimental designs – where a study takes place in a lab or controlled environment – are excellent for determining cause and effect . But not all studies can take place in controlled environments (Tetnowski, 2015).

When we’re out in the field doing observational studies or similar fieldwork, we don’t have the freedom to isolate dependent and independent variables. We need to use alternate methods.

Case studies are ideal in such situations.

A case study design will allow researchers to deeply immerse themselves in a setting (potentially combining it with methods such as ethnography or researcher observation) in order to see how phenomena take place in real-life settings.

6. Supports the generation of new theories or hypotheses

While large-scale quantitative studies such as cross-sectional designs and population surveys are excellent at testing theories and hypotheses on a large scale, they need a hypothesis to start off with!

This is where case studies – in the form of grounded research – come in. Often, a case study doesn’t start with a hypothesis. Instead, it ends with a hypothesis based upon the findings within a singular setting.

The deep analysis allows for hypotheses to emerge, which can then be taken to larger-scale studies in order to conduct further, more generalizable, testing of the hypothesis or theory.

7. Reveals the Unexpected

When a largescale quantitative research project has a clear hypothesis that it will test, it often becomes very rigid and has tunnel-vision on just exploring the hypothesis.

Of course, a structured scientific examination of the effects of specific interventions targeted at specific variables is extermely valuable.

But narrowly-focused studies often fail to shine a spotlight on unexpected and emergent data. Here, case studies come in very useful. Oftentimes, researchers set their eyes on a phenomenon and, when examining it closely with case studies, identify data and come to conclusions that are unprecedented, unforeseen, and outright surprising.

As Lars Meier (2009, p. 975) marvels, “where else can we become a part of foreign social worlds and have the chance to become aware of the unexpected?”

Disadvantages

1. not usually generalizable.

Case studies are not generalizable because they tend not to look at a broad enough corpus of data to be able to infer that there is a trend across a population.

As Yang (2022) argues, “by definition, case studies can make no claims to be typical.”

Case studies focus on one specific instance of a phenomenon. They explore the context, nuances, and situational factors that have come to bear on the case study. This is really useful for bringing to light important, new, and surprising information, as I’ve already covered.

But , it’s not often useful for generating data that has validity beyond the specific case study being examined.

2. Subjectivity in interpretation

Case studies usually (but not always) use qualitative data which helps to get deep into a topic and explain it in human terms, finding insights unattainable by quantitative data.

But qualitative data in case studies relies heavily on researcher interpretation. While researchers can be trained and work hard to focus on minimizing subjectivity (through methods like triangulation), it often emerges – some might argue it’s innevitable in qualitative studies.

So, a criticism of case studies could be that they’re more prone to subjectivity – and researchers need to take strides to address this in their studies.

3. Difficulty in replicating results

Case study research is often non-replicable because the study takes place in complex real-world settings where variables are not controlled.

So, when returning to a setting to re-do or attempt to replicate a study, we often find that the variables have changed to such an extent that replication is difficult. Furthermore, new researchers (with new subjective eyes) may catch things that the other readers overlooked.

Replication is even harder when researchers attempt to replicate a case study design in a new setting or with different participants.

Comprehension Quiz for Students

Question 1: What benefit do case studies offer when exploring the experiences of marginalized groups?

a) They provide generalizable data. b) They help express the voices of often-ignored individuals. c) They control all variables for the study. d) They always start with a clear hypothesis.

Question 2: Why might case studies be considered ideal for situations where researchers cannot control all variables?

a) They provide a structured scientific examination. b) They allow for generalizability across populations. c) They focus on one specific instance of a phenomenon. d) They allow for deep immersion in real-life settings.

Question 3: What is a primary disadvantage of case studies in terms of data applicability?

a) They always focus on the unexpected. b) They are not usually generalizable. c) They support the generation of new theories. d) They provide a holistic understanding.

Question 4: Why might case studies be considered more prone to subjectivity?

a) They always use quantitative data. b) They heavily rely on researcher interpretation, especially with qualitative data. c) They are always replicable. d) They look at a broad corpus of data.

Question 5: In what situations are experimental designs, such as those conducted in labs, most valuable?

a) When there’s a need to study rare and unusual phenomena. b) When a holistic understanding is required. c) When determining cause-and-effect relationships. d) When the study focuses on marginalized groups.

Question 6: Why is replication challenging in case study research?

a) Because they always use qualitative data. b) Because they tend to focus on a broad corpus of data. c) Due to the changing variables in complex real-world settings. d) Because they always start with a hypothesis.

Lee, B., & Saunders, M. N. K. (2017). Conducting Case Study Research for Business and Management Students. SAGE Publications.

Meir, L. (2009). Feasting on the Benefits of Case Study Research. In Mills, A. J., Wiebe, E., & Durepos, G. (Eds.). Encyclopedia of Case Study Research (Vol. 2). London: SAGE Publications.

Tetnowski, J. (2015). Qualitative case study research design.  Perspectives on fluency and fluency disorders ,  25 (1), 39-45. ( Source )

Yang, S. L. (2022). The War on Corruption in China: Local Reform and Innovation . Taylor & Francis.

Yin, R. (2003). Case Study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Chris Drew (PhD)

Dr. Chris Drew is the founder of the Helpful Professor. He holds a PhD in education and has published over 20 articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education. [Image Descriptor: Photo of Chris]

• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ Social-Emotional Learning (Definition, Examples, Pros & Cons)
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ What is Educational Psychology?
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ What is IQ? (Intelligence Quotient)
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 5 Top Tips for Succeeding at University

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Case Study Research Method in Psychology

Saul Mcleod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul Mcleod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.

On This Page:

Case studies are in-depth investigations of a person, group, event, or community. Typically, data is gathered from various sources using several methods (e.g., observations & interviews).

The case study research method originated in clinical medicine (the case history, i.e., the patient’s personal history). In psychology, case studies are often confined to the study of a particular individual.

The information is mainly biographical and relates to events in the individual’s past (i.e., retrospective), as well as to significant events that are currently occurring in his or her everyday life.

The case study is not a research method, but researchers select methods of data collection and analysis that will generate material suitable for case studies.

Freud (1909a, 1909b) conducted very detailed investigations into the private lives of his patients in an attempt to both understand and help them overcome their illnesses.

This makes it clear that the case study is a method that should only be used by a psychologist, therapist, or psychiatrist, i.e., someone with a professional qualification.

There is an ethical issue of competence. Only someone qualified to diagnose and treat a person can conduct a formal case study relating to atypical (i.e., abnormal) behavior or atypical development.

 Famous Case Studies

• Anna O – One of the most famous case studies, documenting psychoanalyst Josef Breuer’s treatment of “Anna O” (real name Bertha Pappenheim) for hysteria in the late 1800s using early psychoanalytic theory.
• Little Hans – A child psychoanalysis case study published by Sigmund Freud in 1909 analyzing his five-year-old patient Herbert Graf’s house phobia as related to the Oedipus complex.
• Bruce/Brenda – Gender identity case of the boy (Bruce) whose botched circumcision led psychologist John Money to advise gender reassignment and raise him as a girl (Brenda) in the 1960s.
• Genie Wiley – Linguistics/psychological development case of the victim of extreme isolation abuse who was studied in 1970s California for effects of early language deprivation on acquiring speech later in life.
• Phineas Gage – One of the most famous neuropsychology case studies analyzes personality changes in railroad worker Phineas Gage after an 1848 brain injury involving a tamping iron piercing his skull.

Clinical Case Studies

• Studying the effectiveness of psychotherapy approaches with an individual patient
• Assessing and treating mental illnesses like depression, anxiety disorders, PTSD
• Neuropsychological cases investigating brain injuries or disorders

Child Psychology Case Studies

• Studying psychological development from birth through adolescence
• Cases of learning disabilities, autism spectrum disorders, ADHD
• Effects of trauma, abuse, deprivation on development

Types of Case Studies

• Explanatory case studies : Used to explore causation in order to find underlying principles. Helpful for doing qualitative analysis to explain presumed causal links.
• Exploratory case studies : Used to explore situations where an intervention being evaluated has no clear set of outcomes. It helps define questions and hypotheses for future research.
• Descriptive case studies : Describe an intervention or phenomenon and the real-life context in which it occurred. It is helpful for illustrating certain topics within an evaluation.
• Multiple-case studies : Used to explore differences between cases and replicate findings across cases. Helpful for comparing and contrasting specific cases.
• Intrinsic : Used to gain a better understanding of a particular case. Helpful for capturing the complexity of a single case.
• Collective : Used to explore a general phenomenon using multiple case studies. Helpful for jointly studying a group of cases in order to inquire into the phenomenon.

Where Do You Find Data for a Case Study?

There are several places to find data for a case study. The key is to gather data from multiple sources to get a complete picture of the case and corroborate facts or findings through triangulation of evidence. Most of this information is likely qualitative (i.e., verbal description rather than measurement), but the psychologist might also collect numerical data.

1. Primary sources

• Interviews – Interviewing key people related to the case to get their perspectives and insights. The interview is an extremely effective procedure for obtaining information about an individual, and it may be used to collect comments from the person’s friends, parents, employer, workmates, and others who have a good knowledge of the person, as well as to obtain facts from the person him or herself.
• Observations – Observing behaviors, interactions, processes, etc., related to the case as they unfold in real-time.
• Documents & Records – Reviewing private documents, diaries, public records, correspondence, meeting minutes, etc., relevant to the case.

2. Secondary sources

• News/Media – News coverage of events related to the case study.
• Academic articles – Journal articles, dissertations etc. that discuss the case.
• Government reports – Official data and records related to the case context.
• Books/films – Books, documentaries or films discussing the case.

3. Archival records

Searching historical archives, museum collections and databases to find relevant documents, visual/audio records related to the case history and context.

Public archives like newspapers, organizational records, photographic collections could all include potentially relevant pieces of information to shed light on attitudes, cultural perspectives, common practices and historical contexts related to psychology.

4. Organizational records

Organizational records offer the advantage of often having large datasets collected over time that can reveal or confirm psychological insights.

Of course, privacy and ethical concerns regarding confidential data must be navigated carefully.

However, with proper protocols, organizational records can provide invaluable context and empirical depth to qualitative case studies exploring the intersection of psychology and organizations.

• Organizational/industrial psychology research : Organizational records like employee surveys, turnover/retention data, policies, incident reports etc. may provide insight into topics like job satisfaction, workplace culture and dynamics, leadership issues, employee behaviors etc.
• Clinical psychology : Therapists/hospitals may grant access to anonymized medical records to study aspects like assessments, diagnoses, treatment plans etc. This could shed light on clinical practices.
• School psychology : Studies could utilize anonymized student records like test scores, grades, disciplinary issues, and counseling referrals to study child development, learning barriers, effectiveness of support programs, and more.

How do I Write a Case Study in Psychology?

Follow specified case study guidelines provided by a journal or your psychology tutor. General components of clinical case studies include: background, symptoms, assessments, diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes. Interpreting the information means the researcher decides what to include or leave out. A good case study should always clarify which information is the factual description and which is an inference or the researcher’s opinion.

1. Introduction

• Provide background on the case context and why it is of interest, presenting background information like demographics, relevant history, and presenting problem.
• Compare briefly to similar published cases if applicable. Clearly state the focus/importance of the case.

2. Case Presentation

• Describe the presenting problem in detail, including symptoms, duration,and impact on daily life.
• Include client demographics like age and gender, information about social relationships, and mental health history.
• Describe all physical, emotional, and/or sensory symptoms reported by the client.
• Use patient quotes to describe the initial complaint verbatim. Follow with full-sentence summaries of relevant history details gathered, including key components that led to a working diagnosis.
• Summarize clinical exam results, namely orthopedic/neurological tests, imaging, lab tests, etc. Note actual results rather than subjective conclusions. Provide images if clearly reproducible/anonymized.
• Clearly state the working diagnosis or clinical impression before transitioning to management.

3. Management and Outcome

• Indicate the total duration of care and number of treatments given over what timeframe. Use specific names/descriptions for any therapies/interventions applied.
• Present the results of the intervention,including any quantitative or qualitative data collected.
• For outcomes, utilize visual analog scales for pain, medication usage logs, etc., if possible. Include patient self-reports of improvement/worsening of symptoms. Note the reason for discharge/end of care.

4. Discussion

• Analyze the case, exploring contributing factors, limitations of the study, and connections to existing research.
• Analyze the effectiveness of the intervention,considering factors like participant adherence, limitations of the study, and potential alternative explanations for the results.
• Identify any questions raised in the case analysis and relate insights to established theories and current research if applicable. Avoid definitive claims about physiological explanations.
• Offer clinical implications, and suggest future research directions.

5. Additional Items

• Thank specific assistants for writing support only. No patient acknowledgments.
• References should directly support any key claims or quotes included.
• Use tables/figures/images only if substantially informative. Include permissions and legends/explanatory notes.
• Provides detailed (rich qualitative) information.
• Provides insight for further research.
• Permitting investigation of otherwise impractical (or unethical) situations.

Case studies allow a researcher to investigate a topic in far more detail than might be possible if they were trying to deal with a large number of research participants (nomothetic approach) with the aim of ‘averaging’.

Because of their in-depth, multi-sided approach, case studies often shed light on aspects of human thinking and behavior that would be unethical or impractical to study in other ways.

Research that only looks into the measurable aspects of human behavior is not likely to give us insights into the subjective dimension of experience, which is important to psychoanalytic and humanistic psychologists.

Case studies are often used in exploratory research. They can help us generate new ideas (that might be tested by other methods). They are an important way of illustrating theories and can help show how different aspects of a person’s life are related to each other.

The method is, therefore, important for psychologists who adopt a holistic point of view (i.e., humanistic psychologists ).

Limitations

• Lacking scientific rigor and providing little basis for generalization of results to the wider population.
• Researchers’ own subjective feelings may influence the case study (researcher bias).
• Difficult to replicate.
• Time-consuming and expensive.
• The volume of data, together with the time restrictions in place, impacted the depth of analysis that was possible within the available resources.

Because a case study deals with only one person/event/group, we can never be sure if the case study investigated is representative of the wider body of “similar” instances. This means the conclusions drawn from a particular case may not be transferable to other settings.

Because case studies are based on the analysis of qualitative (i.e., descriptive) data , a lot depends on the psychologist’s interpretation of the information she has acquired.

This means that there is a lot of scope for Anna O , and it could be that the subjective opinions of the psychologist intrude in the assessment of what the data means.

For example, Freud has been criticized for producing case studies in which the information was sometimes distorted to fit particular behavioral theories (e.g., Little Hans ).

This is also true of Money’s interpretation of the Bruce/Brenda case study (Diamond, 1997) when he ignored evidence that went against his theory.

Breuer, J., & Freud, S. (1895).  Studies on hysteria . Standard Edition 2: London.

Curtiss, S. (1981). Genie: The case of a modern wild child .

Diamond, M., & Sigmundson, K. (1997). Sex Reassignment at Birth: Long-term Review and Clinical Implications. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine , 151(3), 298-304

Freud, S. (1909a). Analysis of a phobia of a five year old boy. In The Pelican Freud Library (1977), Vol 8, Case Histories 1, pages 169-306

Freud, S. (1909b). Bemerkungen über einen Fall von Zwangsneurose (Der “Rattenmann”). Jb. psychoanal. psychopathol. Forsch ., I, p. 357-421; GW, VII, p. 379-463; Notes upon a case of obsessional neurosis, SE , 10: 151-318.

Harlow J. M. (1848). Passage of an iron rod through the head.  Boston Medical and Surgical Journal, 39 , 389–393.

Harlow, J. M. (1868).  Recovery from the Passage of an Iron Bar through the Head .  Publications of the Massachusetts Medical Society. 2  (3), 327-347.

Money, J., & Ehrhardt, A. A. (1972).  Man & Woman, Boy & Girl : The Differentiation and Dimorphism of Gender Identity from Conception to Maturity. Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Money, J., & Tucker, P. (1975). Sexual signatures: On being a man or a woman.

Further Information

• Case Study Approach
• Case Study Method
• Enhancing the Quality of Case Studies in Health Services Research
• “We do things together” A case study of “couplehood” in dementia
• Using mixed methods for evaluating an integrative approach to cancer care: a case study

• Customer Reviews
• Extended Essays
• IB Internal Assessment
• Theory of Knowledge
• Literature Review
• Dissertations
• Essay Writing
• Research Writing
• Assignment Help
• Capstone Projects
• College Application
• Online Class

Case Study Method: What are the Advantages and Disadvantages?

by  Antony W

January 25, 2023

Case study method employs investigative inquiry to acquire data on certain demographics. The strategy is applicable to individuals, organizations, groups, and events.  

Each participant receives an equal amount of engagement, providing data that may help to discover novel insights on particular patterns, ideas, or hypotheses.

In this guide, we look at the advantages and the disadvantages of case stud method as a technique of collecting data.

What is Case Study Method?

The case study method was a technique first established to generate and support hypotheses in clinical medicine. The technique was adapted to other sectors because of the benefits uncovered by these initiatives, allowing for the analysis of results through suggested decisions, procedures, or outcomes.

Its distinctive approach to knowledge enables others to discover special insights that foster development.

What are the Advantages of Case Study Methods?

The following are the advantages of case study methods:

1. It Offers a Detailed Examination of a Particular Unit.

When adopting the case study technique, researchers must document independently verifiable data from firsthand observations. The work provides information on the input mechanisms that contribute to the hypothesis under consideration .

2. Case Study Method is Useful When Creating a Hypothesis

Researchers will use this technique to test a proposed hypothesis. After finishing this effort, it is not unusual for the acquired facts to inspire the formation of new concepts.

This approach fosters more research because it permits notions to change as individuals do in their social and physical settings. This implies that a comprehensive data set may be collected depending on the abilities of the researcher and the candor of the participants in the study.

3. Case Study Method Provide Constant Examination of Facts

Using the case study technique, researchers will examine the social group’s facts in a continuous manner. This indicates there are no disruptions in the process that might compromise the authenticity of the data obtained for this project.

This benefit lowers the need to make assumptions when taking conclusions from the data, hence enhancing the long-term validity of the study’s findings. Thus, the conclusion becomes crucial to both sides of the equation, as it may either confirm certain hypotheses or refute the theory under discussion.

Due to the sheer volume of data being examined by academics, this benefit might result in inefficiency. It is the responsibility of the persons concerned to determine what is helpful and significant and what is not.

4. The Technique Allows for Comparison

Individual insights gleaned from collective settings comprise the human experience.

Certain demographics may think, behave, or respond to stimuli in certain ways, yet each member of that group will contribute a little portion to a whole.

The case study methodology enables researchers to compare information from each demographic group. This information can then lead to ideas that either support or disprove a theory.

5. It Gives an Expansion of Knowledge.

The case study technique equips everyone with the ability to expand his or her knowledge via analysis. This advantage is attainable due to the employment of a range of methods to collect data and evaluate hypotheses.

Researchers prefer to accomplish their job through direct observation and interviews, however surveys can also be beneficial. Participants may be required to record their experiences in a notebook or diary, and the information may help to analyze behaviors or decisions.

Some researchers use memory tests and experimental activities to predict how social groups would interact with or respond to particular scenarios. All of this information then serves to confirm the hypothesized possibilities.

6. Case Study Method Doesn’t Require Data Sampling

This research technique examines social units holistically as opposed to isolating and analyzing individual data pieces. Therefore, no sample is necessary when employing the case study technique.

The hypothesis under examination is supported because it seeks to transform views into facts by validating or rejecting future ideas that may be used by outside observers.

Although researchers may pay attention to specific incidences or results based on broader behaviors or concepts, the study itself will not sample such instances. Instead, it looks at the “larger picture.”

What are Disadvantages of Case Study Methods?

The following are the disadvantages of case study methods:

1. Case Study Methodology Provides Limited Representation

The use of the case study technique is restricted to a particular subset of representatives.

When selecting this option, researchers are targeting a certain demographic. This indicates that it is impossible to generalize the findings of this study to the rest of society, an organization, or a wider community.

Utilizing the case study technique is advantageous when seeking to determine the particular reasons why some individuals behave in a certain manner. But if researchers want something more generic, they must choose a different technique.

2. Case Study Method Makes Categorization Impossible

This shortcoming is also a result of the case study method’s small sample size.

Because researchers are examining such a small unit, group, or demography, categorization is impossible. Since the abilities of the researcher affect the quality of the data obtained to evaluate the validity of a hypothesis, the procedure might be inefficient.

Some individuals may be hesitant to answer or participate, while others may make educated guesses to support the conclusion.

3. It Doesn’t Exclude the Possibility of Errors

Individuals have an unconscious bias that shapes their actions and decisions.

Due to its emphasis on uncovering facts, the case study technique may quickly identify outliers that contradict a theory, but it is up to the researchers to choose what material counts as such.

If the outcomes of the case study technique are unexpected or contradict the opinions of the participants, it is still possible that the information is not 100 percent correct.

Researchers must have rules in place that regulate the process of data collection. The outcomes of the study cannot be reliable in the absence of this restriction due to the presence of bias.

4. Case Study Method is a Subjective Research Methodology

Although the goal of the case study research technique is to collect data, the information acquired is but opinion. It employs the subjective technique as opposed to the objective method for analyzing data, which implies that the information considered may have an additional layer of mistakes.

Imagine that a researcher undertaking direct observation misinterprets a participant’s answer as “anger” when the subject was actually experiencing “shame” due to a decision they made.

The gap between these two emotions is substantial, and it might lead to information disturbances that could be detrimental for the final proof of the hypothesis.

About the author 

Antony W is a professional writer and coach at Help for Assessment. He spends countless hours every day researching and writing great content filled with expert advice on how to write engaging essays, research papers, and assignments.

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

What the Case Study Method Really Teaches

• Nitin Nohria

Seven meta-skills that stick even if the cases fade from memory.

It’s been 100 years since Harvard Business School began using the case study method. Beyond teaching specific subject matter, the case study method excels in instilling meta-skills in students. This article explains the importance of seven such skills: preparation, discernment, bias recognition, judgement, collaboration, curiosity, and self-confidence.

During my decade as dean of Harvard Business School, I spent hundreds of hours talking with our alumni. To enliven these conversations, I relied on a favorite question: “What was the most important thing you learned from your time in our MBA program?”

• Nitin Nohria is the George F. Baker Professor of Business Administration, Distinguished University Service Professor, and former dean of Harvard Business School.

Partner Center

• First Online: 27 October 2022

Cite this chapter

• R. M. Channaveer 4 &
• Rajendra Baikady 5  

2536 Accesses

1 Citations

This chapter reviews the strengths and limitations of case study as a research method in social sciences. It provides an account of an evidence base to justify why a case study is best suitable for some research questions and why not for some other research questions. Case study designing around the research context, defining the structure and modality, conducting the study, collecting the data through triangulation mode, analysing the data, and interpreting the data and theory building at the end give a holistic view of it. In addition, the chapter also focuses on the types of case study and when and where to use case study as a research method in social science research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Ang, C. S., Lee, K. F., & Dipolog-Ubanan, G. F. (2019). Determinants of first-year student identity and satisfaction in higher education: A quantitative case study. SAGE Open, 9 (2), 215824401984668. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019846689

Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2015). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report . Published. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2008.1573

Bhatta, T. P. (2018). Case study research, philosophical position and theory building: A methodological discussion. Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology and Anthropology, 12 , 72–79. https://doi.org/10.3126/dsaj.v12i0.22182

Article   Google Scholar  

Bromley, P. D. (1990). Academic contributions to psychological counselling. A philosophy of science for the study of individual cases. Counselling Psychology Quarterly , 3 (3), 299–307.

Google Scholar  

Crowe, S., Cresswell, K., Robertson, A., Huby, G., Avery, A., & Sheikh, A. (2011). The case study approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 11 (1), 1–9.

Grässel, E., & Schirmer, B. (2006). The use of volunteers to support family carers of dementia patients: Results of a prospective longitudinal study investigating expectations towards and experience with training and professional support. Zeitschrift Fur Gerontologie Und Geriatrie, 39 (3), 217–226.

Greenwood, D., & Lowenthal, D. (2005). Case study as a means of researching social work and improving practitioner education. Journal of Social Work Practice, 19 (2), 181–193. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650530500144782

Gülseçen, S., & Kubat, A. (2006). Teaching ICT to teacher candidates using PBL: A qualitative and quantitative evaluation. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 9 (2), 96–106.

Gomm, R., Hammersley, M., & Foster, P. (2000). Case study and generalization. Case study method , 98–115.

Hamera, J., Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2011). Performance ethnography . SAGE.

Hayes, N. (2000). Doing psychological research (p. 133). Open University Press.

Harrison, H., Birks, M., Franklin, R., & Mills, J. (2017). Case study research: Foundations and methodological orientations. In Forum qualitative sozialforschung/forum: Qualitative social research (Vol. 18, No. 1).

Iwakabe, S., & Gazzola, N. (2009). From single-case studies to practice-based knowledge: Aggregating and synthesizing case studies. Psychotherapy Research, 19 (4–5), 601–611. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503300802688494

Johnson, M. P. (2006). Decision models for the location of community corrections centers. Environment and Planning b: Planning and Design, 33 (3), 393–412. https://doi.org/10.1068/b3125

Kaarbo, J., & Beasley, R. K. (1999). A practical guide to the comparative case study method in political psychology. Political Psychology, 20 (2), 369–391. https://doi.org/10.1111/0162-895x.00149

Lovell, G. I. (2006). Justice excused: The deployment of law in everyday political encounters. Law Society Review, 40 (2), 283–324. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5893.2006.00265.x

McDonough, S., & McDonough, S. (1997). Research methods as part of English language teacher education. English Language Teacher Education and Development, 3 (1), 84–96.

Meredith, J. (1998). Building operations management theory through case and field research. Journal of Operations Management, 16 (4), 441–454. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0272-6963(98)00023-0

Mills, A. J., Durepos, G., & Wiebe, E. (Eds.). (2009). Encyclopedia of case study research . Sage Publications.

Ochieng, P. A. (2009). An analysis of the strengths and limitation of qualitative and quantitative research paradigms. Problems of Education in the 21st Century , 13 , 13.

Page, E. B., Webb, E. J., Campell, D. T., Schwart, R. D., & Sechrest, L. (1966). Unobtrusive measures: Nonreactive research in the social sciences. American Educational Research Journal, 3 (4), 317. https://doi.org/10.2307/1162043

Rashid, Y., Rashid, A., Warraich, M. A., Sabir, S. S., & Waseem, A. (2019). Case study method: A step-by-step guide for business researchers. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 18 , 160940691986242. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919862424

Ridder, H. G. (2017). The theory contribution of case study research designs. Business Research, 10 (2), 281–305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40685-017-0045-z

Sadeghi Moghadam, M. R., Ghasemnia Arabi, N., & Khoshsima, G. (2021). A Review of case study method in operations management research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20 , 160940692110100. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069211010088

Sommer, B. B., & Sommer, R. (1997). A practical guide to behavioral research: Tools and techniques . Oxford University Press.

Stake, R. E. (2010). Qualitative research: Studying how things work .

Stake, R. E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research . Sage Publications.

Stoecker, R. (1991). Evaluating and rethinking the case study. The Sociological Review, 39 (1), 88–112.

Suryani, A. (2013). Comparing case study and ethnography as qualitative research approaches .

Taylor, S., & Berridge, V. (2006). Medicinal plants and malaria: An historical case study of research at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine in the twentieth century. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 100 (8), 707–714. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trstmh.2005.11.017

Tellis, W. (1997). Introduction to case study. The Qualitative Report . Published. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/1997.2024

Towne, L., & Shavelson, R. J. (2002). Scientific research in education . National Academy Press Publications Sales Office.

Widdowson, M. D. J. (2011). Case study research methodology. International Journal of Transactional Analysis Research, 2 (1), 25–34.

Yin, R. K. (2004). The case study anthology . Sage.

Yin, R. K. (2003). Design and methods. Case Study Research , 3 (9.2).

Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Sage Publishing.

Yin, R. (1984). Case study research: Design and methods . Sage Publications Beverly Hills.

Yin, R. (1993). Applications of case study research . Sage Publishing.

Zainal, Z. (2003). An investigation into the effects of discipline-specific knowledge, proficiency and genre on reading comprehension and strategies of Malaysia ESP Students. Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis. University of Reading , 1 (1).

Zeisel, J. (1984). Inquiry by design: Tools for environment-behaviour research (No. 5). CUP archive.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Social Work, Central University of Karnataka, Kadaganchi, India

R. M. Channaveer

Department of Social Work, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa

Rajendra Baikady

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. M. Channaveer .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Centre for Family and Child Studies, Research Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Sharjah, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates

M. Rezaul Islam

Department of Development Studies, University of Dhaka, Dhaka, Bangladesh

Niaz Ahmed Khan

Department of Social Work, School of Humanities, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Channaveer, R.M., Baikady, R. (2022). Case Study. In: Islam, M.R., Khan, N.A., Baikady, R. (eds) Principles of Social Research Methodology. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-5441-2_21

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-5441-2_21

Published : 27 October 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-19-5219-7

Online ISBN : 978-981-19-5441-2

eBook Packages : Social Sciences

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Case Study Method – 18 Advantages and Disadvantages

The case study method uses investigatory research as a way to collect data about specific demographics. This approach can apply to individuals, businesses, groups, or events. Each participant receives an equal amount of participation, offering information for collection that can then find new insights into specific trends, ideas, of hypotheses.

Interviews and research observation are the two standard methods of data collection used when following the case study method.

Researchers initially developed the case study method to develop and support hypotheses in clinical medicine. The benefits found in these efforts led the approach to transition to other industries, allowing for the examination of results through proposed decisions, processes, or outcomes. Its unique approach to information makes it possible for others to glean specific points of wisdom that encourage growth.

Several case study method advantages and disadvantages can appear when researchers take this approach.

List of the Advantages of the Case Study Method

1. It requires an intensive study of a specific unit. Researchers must document verifiable data from direct observations when using the case study method. This work offers information about the input processes that go into the hypothesis under consideration. A casual approach to data-gathering work is not effective if a definitive outcome is desired. Each behavior, choice, or comment is a critical component that can verify or dispute the ideas being considered.

Intensive programs can require a significant amount of work for researchers, but it can also promote an improvement in the data collected. That means a hypothesis can receive immediate verification in some situations.

2. No sampling is required when following the case study method. This research method studies social units in their entire perspective instead of pulling individual data points out to analyze them. That means there is no sampling work required when using the case study method. The hypothesis under consideration receives support because it works to turn opinions into facts, verifying or denying the proposals that outside observers can use in the future.

Although researchers might pay attention to specific incidents or outcomes based on generalized behaviors or ideas, the study itself won’t sample those situations. It takes a look at the “bigger vision” instead.

3. This method offers a continuous analysis of the facts. The case study method will look at the facts continuously for the social group being studied by researchers. That means there aren’t interruptions in the process that could limit the validity of the data being collected through this work. This advantage reduces the need to use assumptions when drawing conclusions from the information, adding validity to the outcome of the study over time. That means the outcome becomes relevant to both sides of the equation as it can prove specific suppositions or invalidate a hypothesis under consideration.

This advantage can lead to inefficiencies because of the amount of data being studied by researchers. It is up to the individuals involved in the process to sort out what is useful and meaningful and what is not.

4. It is a useful approach to take when formulating a hypothesis. Researchers will use the case study method advantages to verify a hypothesis under consideration. It is not unusual for the collected data to lead people toward the formulation of new ideas after completing this work. This process encourages further study because it allows concepts to evolve as people do in social or physical environments. That means a complete data set can be gathered based on the skills of the researcher and the honesty of the individuals involved in the study itself.

Although this approach won’t develop a societal-level evaluation of a hypothesis, it can look at how specific groups will react in various circumstances. That information can lead to a better decision-making process in the future for everyone involved.

5. It provides an increase in knowledge. The case study method provides everyone with analytical power to increase knowledge. This advantage is possible because it uses a variety of methodologies to collect information while evaluating a hypothesis. Researchers prefer to use direct observation and interviews to complete their work, but it can also advantage through the use of questionnaires. Participants might need to fill out a journal or diary about their experiences that can be used to study behaviors or choices.

Some researchers incorporate memory tests and experimental tasks to determine how social groups will interact or respond in specific situations. All of this data then works to verify the possibilities that a hypothesis proposes.

6. The case study method allows for comparisons. The human experience is one that is built on individual observations from group situations. Specific demographics might think, act, or respond in particular ways to stimuli, but each person in that group will also contribute a small part to the whole. You could say that people are sponges that collect data from one another every day to create individual outcomes.

The case study method allows researchers to take the information from each demographic for comparison purposes. This information can then lead to proposals that support a hypothesis or lead to its disruption.

7. Data generalization is possible using the case study method. The case study method provides a foundation for data generalization, allowing researches to illustrate their statistical findings in meaningful ways. It puts the information into a usable format that almost anyone can use if they have the need to evaluate the hypothesis under consideration. This process makes it easier to discover unusual features, unique outcomes, or find conclusions that wouldn’t be available without this method. It does an excellent job of identifying specific concepts that relate to the proposed ideas that researchers were verifying through their work.

Generalization does not apply to a larger population group with the case study method. What researchers can do with this information is to suggest a predictable outcome when similar groups are placed in an equal situation.

8. It offers a comprehensive approach to research. Nothing gets ignored when using the case study method to collect information. Every person, place, or thing involved in the research receives the complete attention of those seeking data. The interactions are equal, which means the data is comprehensive and directly reflective of the group being observed.

This advantage means that there are fewer outliers to worry about when researching an idea, leading to a higher level of accuracy in the conclusions drawn by the researchers.

9. The identification of deviant cases is possible with this method. The case study method of research makes it easier to identify deviant cases that occur in each social group. These incidents are units (people) that behave in ways that go against the hypothesis under consideration. Instead of ignoring them like other options do when collecting data, this approach incorporates the “rogue” behavior to understand why it exists in the first place.

This advantage makes the eventual data and conclusions gathered more reliable because it incorporates the “alternative opinion” that exists. One might say that the case study method places as much emphasis on the yin as it does the yang so that the whole picture becomes available to the outside observer.

10. Questionnaire development is possible with the case study method. Interviews and direct observation are the preferred methods of implementing the case study method because it is cheap and done remotely. The information gathered by researchers can also lead to farming questionnaires that can farm additional data from those being studied. When all of the data resources come together, it is easier to formulate a conclusion that accurately reflects the demographics.

Some people in the case study method may try to manipulate the results for personal reasons, but this advantage makes it possible to identify this information readily. Then researchers can look into the thinking that goes into the dishonest behaviors observed.

List of the Disadvantages of the Case Study Method

1. The case study method offers limited representation. The usefulness of the case study method is limited to a specific group of representatives. Researchers are looking at a specific demographic when using this option. That means it is impossible to create any generalization that applies to the rest of society, an organization, or a larger community with this work. The findings can only apply to other groups caught in similar circumstances with the same experiences.

It is useful to use the case study method when attempting to discover the specific reasons why some people behave in a specific way. If researchers need something more generalized, then a different method must be used.

2. No classification is possible with the case study method. This disadvantage is also due to the sample size in the case study method. No classification is possible because researchers are studying such a small unit, group, or demographic. It can be an inefficient process since the skills of the researcher help to determine the quality of the data being collected to verify the validity of a hypothesis. Some participants may be unwilling to answer or participate, while others might try to guess at the outcome to support it.

Researchers can get trapped in a place where they explore more tangents than the actual hypothesis with this option. Classification can occur within the units being studied, but this data cannot extrapolate to other demographics.

3. The case study method still offers the possibility of errors. Each person has an unconscious bias that influences their behaviors and choices. The case study method can find outliers that oppose a hypothesis fairly easily thanks to its emphasis on finding facts, but it is up to the researchers to determine what information qualifies for this designation. If the results from the case study method are surprising or go against the opinion of participating individuals, then there is still the possibility that the information will not be 100% accurate.

Researchers must have controls in place that dictate how data gathering work occurs. Without this limitation in place, the results of the study cannot be guaranteed because of the presence of bias.

4. It is a subjective method to use for research. Although the purpose of the case study method of research is to gather facts, the foundation of what gets gathered is still based on opinion. It uses the subjective method instead of the objective one when evaluating data, which means there can be another layer of errors in the information to consider.

Imagine that a researcher interprets someone’s response as “angry” when performing direct observation, but the individual was feeling “shame” because of a decision they made. The difference between those two emotions is profound, and it could lead to information disruptions that could be problematic to the eventual work of hypothesis verification.

5. The processes required by the case study method are not useful for everyone. The case study method uses a person’s memories, explanations, and records from photographs and diaries to identify interactions on influences on psychological processes. People are given the chance to describe what happens in the world around them as a way for researchers to gather data. This process can be an advantage in some industries, but it can also be a worthless approach to some groups.

If the social group under study doesn’t have the information, knowledge, or wisdom to provide meaningful data, then the processes are no longer useful. Researchers must weigh the advantages and disadvantages of the case study method before starting their work to determine if the possibility of value exists. If it does not, then a different method may be necessary.

6. It is possible for bias to form in the data. It’s not just an unconscious bias that can form in the data when using the case study method. The narrow study approach can lead to outright discrimination in the data. Researchers can decide to ignore outliers or any other information that doesn’t support their hypothesis when using this method. The subjective nature of this approach makes it difficult to challenge the conclusions that get drawn from this work, and the limited pool of units (people) means that duplication is almost impossible.

That means unethical people can manipulate the results gathered by the case study method to their own advantage without much accountability in the process.

7. This method has no fixed limits to it. This method of research is highly dependent on situational circumstances rather than overarching societal or corporate truths. That means the researcher has no fixed limits of investigation. Even when controls are in place to limit bias or recommend specific activities, the case study method has enough flexibility built into its structures to allow for additional exploration. That means it is possible for this work to continue indefinitely, gathering data that never becomes useful.

Scientists began to track the health of 268 sophomores at Harvard in 1938. The Great Depression was in its final years at that point, so the study hoped to reveal clues that lead to happy and healthy lives. It continues still today, now incorporating the children of the original participants, providing over 80 years of information to sort through for conclusions.

8. The case study method is time-consuming and expensive. The case study method can be affordable in some situations, but the lack of fixed limits and the ability to pursue tangents can make it a costly process in most situations. It takes time to gather the data in the first place, and then researchers must interpret the information received so that they can use it for hypothesis evaluation. There are other methods of data collection that can be less expensive and provide results faster.

That doesn’t mean the case study method is useless. The individualization of results can help the decision-making process advance in a variety of industries successfully. It just takes more time to reach the appropriate conclusion, and that might be a resource that isn’t available.

The advantages and disadvantages of the case study method suggest that the helpfulness of this research option depends on the specific hypothesis under consideration. When researchers have the correct skills and mindset to gather data accurately, then it can lead to supportive data that can verify ideas with tremendous accuracy.

This research method can also be used unethically to produce specific results that can be difficult to challenge.

When bias enters into the structure of the case study method, the processes become inefficient, inaccurate, and harmful to the hypothesis. That’s why great care must be taken when designing a study with this approach. It might be a labor-intensive way to develop conclusions, but the outcomes are often worth the investments needed.

Strengths and Weaknesses of Case Studies

There is no doubt that case studies are a valuable and important form of research for all of the industries and fields that use them. However, along with all their advantages, they also have some disadvantages. In this article we are going to look at both.

Advantages of Case Studies

Intensive Study

Case study method is responsible for intensive study of a unit. It is the investigation and exploration of an event thoroughly and deeply. You get a very detailed and in-depth study of a person or event. This is especially the case with subjects that cannot be physically or ethically recreated.

This is one of the biggest advantages of the Genie case. You cannot lock up a child for 13 years and deprive them of everything. That would be morally and ethically wrong in every single way. So when the opportunity presented itself, researchers could not look away. It was a once in a lifetime opportunity to learn about feral children.

Genie was a feral child. She was raised in completed isolation, with little human contact. Because of the abuse she withstood, she was unable to develop cognitively. From infancy she was strapped to a potty chair, and therefore never acquired the physicality needed for walking, running and jumping.

If Genie made a noise, her father beat her. Therefore, she learned to not make a noise. Once she was found, researchers studied her language skills, and attempted to find ways to get her to communicate. They were successful. While she never gained the ability to speak, she did develop other ways to communicate. However, the public soon lost interest in her case, and with that, the funds to conduct the study.

However, her case was extremely important to child development psychology and linguistic theory. Because of her, we know that mental stimulation is needed for proper development. We also now know that there is a "critical period" for the learning of language.

Developing New Research

Case studies are one of the best ways to stimulate new research. A case study can be completed, and if the findings are valuable, they can lead to new and advanced research in the field. There has been a great deal of research done that wouldn't have been possible without case studies.

An example of this is the sociological study Nickel and Dimed. Nickel and Dimed is a book and study done by Barbara Ehrenreich. She wanted to study poverty in America, and did so by living and working as a person living on minimum wage.

Through her experiment, she discovered that poverty was almost inescapable. As soon as she saved a little money, she was hit with a crisis. She might get sick, or her car might break down, all occurrences that can be destructive when a person doesn't have a safety net to fall back on.

It didn't matter where she lived or what she did. Working a minimum wage job gave her no chances for advancement or improvement whatsoever. And she did the experiment as a woman with no children to support.

This study opened a lot of eyes to the problem of the working poor in America. By living and working as the experiment, Ehrenreich was able to show first-hand data regarding the issues surrounding poverty. The book didn't end with any solutions, just suggestions for the reader and points for them to think about.

Using this case study information, new studies could be organized to learn better ways to help people who are fighting poverty, or better ways to help the working poor.

Contradicting Established Ideas or Theories

Oftentimes there are theories that may be questioned with case studies. For example, in the John/John case study, it was believed that gender and sexual identity were a construct of nurture, not nature.

John-John focused on a set of twin boys, both of whom were circumcised at the age of 6 months. One of the twin's circumcisions failed, causing irreparable damage to the penis. His parents were concerned about the sexual health of their son, so they contacted Dr. John Money for a solution.

Dr. Money believed that sexuality came from nurture, not nature, and that the injured baby, Bruce, could be raised as a girl. His penis was removed and he was sexually reassigned to become a girl. Bruce's name was changed to Brenda, and his parents decided to raise him as a girl.

In this case, Dr. Money was dishonest. He believed that gender could be changed, which has since been proven false. Brenda's parents were also dishonest, stating that the surgery was a success, when in fact that wasn't the case.

As Brenda grew up, she always acted masculine and was teased for it at school. She did not socialize as a girl, and did not identify as a female. When Brenda was 13 she learned the truth, and was incredibly relieved. She changed her name to David, and lived the rest of her life as a male.

This case proved that the general theory was wrong, and is still valuable, even though the study author was dishonest.

Giving New Insight

Case studies have the ability to give insight into phenomena that cannot be learned in any other way. An example of this is the case study about Sidney Bradford. Bradford was blind from the age of 10 months old, and regained his sight at the age of 52 from a corneal transplant.

This unique situation allowed researchers to better learn how perception and motion changes when suddenly given sight. They were able to better understand how colors and dimensions affect the human process. For what it is worth, Bradford continued to live and work with his eyes closed, as he found sight too stimulating.

Another famous study was the sociological study of Milgram.

Stanley Milgram did a study from 1960 to 1974 in which he studied the effects of social pressure. The study was set up as an independent laboratory. A random person would walk in, and agree to be a part of the study. He was told to act as a teacher, and ask questions to another volunteer, who was the learner.

The teacher would ask the learner questions, and whenever he answered incorrectly, the teacher was instructed to give the learner an electric shock. Each time the learner was wrong, the shock would be increased by 15 volts. What the teacher didn't know was that the learner was a part of the experiment, and that no shocks were being given. However, the learner did act as if they were being shocked.

If the teachers tried to quit, they were strongly pushed to continue. The goal of the experiment was to see whether or not any of the teachers would go up to the highest voltage. As it turned out, 65% of the teachers did.

This study opened eyes when it comes to social pressure. If someone tells you it is okay to hurt someone, at what point will the person back off and say "this is not ok!" And in this study, the results were the same, regardless of income, race, gender or ethnicity.

This study opened up the sociological world of understanding the divide between social pressure and morality.

Disadvantages of Case Studies

Inability to Replicate

As demonstrated with the Genie case study, many studies cannot be replicated, and therefore, cannot be corroborated. Because the studies cannot be replicated, it means the data and results are only valid for that one person. Now, one could infer that that results of the Genie study would be the same with other feral children, without additional studies we can never be 100% certain.

Also, Genie was a white, American female. We do not know whether someone with a different gender, race or ethnicity would have a different result.

Key Term! Hawthorne Effect

The effect in which people change their behavior when they are aware they are being observed.

Researcher Bias

When conducting a case study, it is very possible for the author to form a bias. This bias can be for the subject; the form of data collection, or the way the data is interpreted. This is very common, since it is normal for humans to be subjective. It is well known that Sigmund Freud, the father of psychology, was often biased in his case histories and interpretations.

The researcher can become close to a study participant, or may learn to identify with the subject. When this happens the researcher loses their perspective as an outsider.

No Classification

Any classification is not possible due to studying a small unit. This generalization of results is limited, since the study is only focusing on one small group. However, this isn't always a problem, especially if generalization is not one of the study's goals.

Time Intensive

Case studies can be very time consuming. The data collection process can be very intensive and long, and this is something new researchers are not familiar with. It takes a long period of time to develop a case study, and develop a detailed analysis.

Many studies also require the authors to immerse themselves in the case. For example, in the Genie case, the lead researchers spent an abnormal amount of time with Genie, since so few people knew how to handle her. David Rigler, one of the lead researchers, actually had Genie live with him and his family for years. Because of this attachment, many questioned the veracity of the study data.

Possibility of Errors

Case study method may have errors of memory or judgment. Since reconstructing case history is based on memory, this can lead to errors. Also, how one person perceived the past could be different for another person, and this can and does lead to errors.

When considering various aspects of their lives, people tend to focus on issues that they find most important. This allows them to form a prejudice and can make them unaware of other possible options.

Ethical Issues

With small studies, there is always the question of ethics. At what point does a study become unethical? The Genie case was riddled with accusations of being unethical, and people still debate about it today.

Was it ethical to study Genie as deeply as she was studied?

Did Genie deserve to live out her life unbothered by researchers and academics trying to use her case to potentially further their careers?

At what point does the pursuit of scientific knowledge outweigh the right to a life free from research?

Also, because the researchers became so invested in the study, people questioned whether a researcher would report unethical behavior if they witnessed it.

Advantages and Disadvantages in Real-Life Studies

Two of these case studies are the Tylenol Scandal and the Genie language study.

Let's look at the advantages and disadvantages of these two studies.

Genie – Advantages

Uniqueness of study – Being able to study a feral child is a rare occurrence.

Genie – Disadvantages

Ethics - The lead researcher David Rigler provided a home for Genie, and was paid for being a foster parent. This is often seen as unethical, since Rigler had a financial interest in Genie and her case.

Tylenol – Advantages

Uniqueness of study – What happened to Tylenol was very unique and rare. While companies face crisis all the time, a public health crisis of this magnitude is very unique.

Tylenol – Disadvantages

• Course Catalog
• Group Discounts
• Gift Certificates
• For Libraries
• CEU Verification
• Medical Terminology
• Accounting Course
• Writing Basics
• QuickBooks Training
• Proofreading Class
• Sensitivity Training
• Excel Certificate
• Teach Online
• Terms of Service
• Privacy Policy

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

7 Case Studies

Learning Outcomes

• Types of Case Studies
• Case #1:  Demographic Profile of Reentry Clients
• Case #2:  A Holistic Model for Social Justice
• Case #3:  A Health Disparities Model for Social Justice

A case study is an investigation into an individual circumstance (Gaille 2018) [1] . In this final chapter, the case study method is applied to help you, the student, bridge the gap between statistical theory and practice. It is used to help you develop an understanding of the basic ideas in mathematical statistics while examining a contemporary real-life social justice issue.

Other advantages of the case method are (Gaille 2018):

• It turns client-level data into usable data.
• It turns opinion into fact.
• It furthers knowledge growth because there is interest in the case study.
• It can use a number of different research methodologies.
• It is good for formative research that is exploratory in nature.

Stake (1995) [2] characterizes three main types of case studies: intrinsic, instrumental, and collective . An intrinsic case study is typically undertaken to learn about a unique phenomenon. The researcher should define the uniqueness of the phenomenon that distinguishes it from all others. In contrast, the instrumental case study uses a particular case (some of which may be better than others) to gain a broader appreciation of an issue or phenomenon. The collective case study involves studying multiple cases simultaneously or sequentially in an attempt to generate a still broader appreciation of a particular issue. These are, however, not necessarily mutually exclusive categories.

Three cases will be discussed in this chapter. In the first case on post-incarceration, an intrinsic  case study is used to describe the demographic profile of fathers receiving reentry services from a provider in the city of Boston. By including two other cases, a collective case design is employed in an attempt to generate a broader appreciation of organizations that attempt to address a social justice issue, namely, health disparities and the social determinants of health. Specifically, we will study a neighborhood health center serving under-resourced communities/zip codes in Boston and a non-profit organization providing a wide spectrum of holistic care to the “poorest of the poor” in India. Collectively, these three cases are considered instrumental as exemplars of the more general phenomenon of social justice.

Before proceeding, the first and most important point is that the best statistical analyses cannot save an inferior research design . Research design is the foundation of a good study. If the design is weak, the analysis will crumble.

Case #1: Incarcerated and Reentry Fathers

As an  intrinsic  case study, this social justice issue is selected on its own merit and uniqueness. According to the National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse (2023) [3] , the number of fathers in U.S. jails and prisons has increased four-fold since 1980. Among the more than 800,000 parents in federal and state prisons, 92 percent are fathers. The 2012 study, “Families and Reentry: Unpacking How Social Support Matters” [4] , concludes that connecting reentering fathers with support from family and friends is key for avoiding recidivism (returning to prison) and helping them re-establish their lives.

The framework for this case study is as follows:

A. Identify and Define the Research Question

Each case study centers on a research question . The question establishes the focus of the study by identifying the research object, which in this situation is incarcerated fathers who reenter their communities. The two primary research questions for this case study are:

• What are the characteristics of formerly incarcerated persons who are fathers receiving reentry services at a provider in the city of Boston?
• What do they self-report in areas of vulnerability, distress, emotional and behavioral health, relationships, parent-child engagement, and self-efficacy?

B. Select the Sample Size

In this step, the statistician decides on the unit of analysis —the number of cases, the type of cases, and the approach used to collect, store, and analyze the data.

This is the design phase of the case study method.

In this case study, the unit of analysis is clients who are receiving reentry services at a provider in the city of Boston. The sample size (n) is 289.

C. Evaluate and Analyze the Data

In this step, the statistician uses varied methods to analyze quantitative as well as qualitative data. The data is categorized, tabulated, and cross-checked to address the purpose of the study. Variables are labeled, and graphs are created to generate descriptive statistics and inferential statistics . This enables the statistician to approach the data in different ways and, thus, avoid premature conclusions.

Descriptive Statistics: Demographic Profile of Reentry Clients

Gender (n=289) : Of the 289 clients, the gender composition of clients is 99% or 286 males, .7% or 2 transgender males, and .3% or 1 female. The high male participation rate is indicative of the mission and focus of the organization.

Age (n=265): The client base contains a greater number of people who are 19-34 years old (135 or 50.9%), followed by 35-64 years old (114 or 43%). The younger age group, 13-18 years old, has the lowest number of clients (16 or 6.1%). Separate from the 265 clients, there are an additional 24 clients whose date of birth is missing.

Race/Ethnicity (n=289) : A majority of clients self-identify as Black/African American (213 or 73.7%). White is the second highest ethnic group (26 or 9%), along with Hispanic/Latinx (26 or 9%). American Indian/Alaskan Native (5 or 1.7%) was the third highest group, followed by Black/African American/Hispanic (3 or 1%). Fifteen clients (or 5.3%) self-identified in various other ethnic groups. One client (or .3%) chose “refused” as a response to the race/ethnicity question.  

Primary Language Spoken (n=289): A majority of clients (271 or 93.9%) report English as their primary language spoken. Other languages spoken are Spanish (1 or .3%), Spanish & English (7 or 2.5%), Haitian Creole (2 or .7%), English & Haitian Creole (2 or .7%), English & Cape Verdean (2 or .7%), Cape Verdean (1 or .3%), English & French Cajun (1 or .3%), English/Haitian Creole/French Cajun (1 or .3%). One (or .3%) client indicated American Sign Language.

Connections with Boston Neighborhoods (n=289): As part of the intake process, clients are asked, “Do you live, work, receive services, visit family or friends in any of the following neighborhoods?” Most clients (145 or 50.2%) report connections with Dorchester. The second highest numbers are in the geographic areas of Roxbury (31 or 10.7%), Mattapan (23 or 8%), and Hyde Park (14 or 4.8%). Other communities indicated are Fenway-Kenmore (8 or 2.8%), Jamaica Plain (7 or 2.4%), West Roxbury (5 or 1.7%), Brockton (4 or 1.4%), Roslindale (4 or 1.4%), Quincy (2 or .7%), Randolph (2 or .7%), Allston (2 or .7%), Mission Hill (2 or .7%), and Cambridge (2 or .7%). Thirty-two or 11% reported having connections with multiple communities, such as Dorchester-Roxbury; Hyde Park-Roxbury-Fenway-Kenmore-Randolph-Brockton-Canton; and Dorchester-Mattapan-Hyde Park-Roxbury. Six clients (or 2.1%) reported, “No, I am not connected to any of these neighborhoods.”

Zip Code of Client’s Residence (n=205): The zip code 02124 is Dorchester Center. This zip code is where 94 (or 45.9%) of the clients report that they reside. Sixteen (or 7.8%) report zip code 02119-Roxbury, 13 or 6.3% for 02126-Mattapan, 13 (or 6.3%) report 02121-Dorchester-Grove Hall, 8 (or 3.9%) for 02136-Hyde Park, 4 (or 1.9%) for 02130-Jamaica Plain, 4 (or 1.9%) for 02169-South Quincy, 4 (or 1.9%) for 02301-Brockton, 3 (or 1.5%) for 02122-Dorchester, 3 (or 1.5%) for 02131-Roslindale, 3 (or 1.5%) for 02368-Randolph as their place of residence. Other zip codes have one or two clients, totaling 38 (or 18.5%) clients. One client (or .5%) reported being homeless, and another client (.5%) gave “N/A” as a response. These results confirm the findings from the previous section, Connections with Neighborhoods. Dorchester, Mattapan, and Roxbury are the three primary geographic areas in Boston where clients reside, secure support services, and engage with family and friends.

Sexual Orientation (n=289) : Two hundred eighty-two (282 or 97.6%) of the 289 clients self-identify as straight (heterosexual). Three clients (or 1%) self-identify as bi-sexual, and one client (or .3%) as Gay. Two clients (or .7%) indicated that they did not feel comfortable answering this question. One client (or .4%) indicated responded, “Not Sure/Questioning”.

Arrested (Spent Time in Jail/Prison) (n=289) : When asked the question, “Have you been arrested before (spent time in Jail/Prison)? a majority (209 or 72.3%) of the 289 clients responded, “Yes”. A smaller proportion (80 or 27.7%) of clients responded, “No”.

Education Level (n=289) : A majority (100 or 34.6%) attended 12th grade-no high school diploma, while another 62 (or 21.5%) attended grades 1-11 or some high school (4 or 1.4%) or reported “no schooling completed” (2 or .7%). Ten clients (or 3.5%) have a high school diploma or a GED. The second largest group earned some college credits but no degree (64 or 22.1%). Several clients have acquired post-secondary degrees: Associate of Arts or Science (16 or 5.5%); Bachelor of Arts or Science (16 or 5.5%); Masters (14 or 4.8%); PhD (1 or .4%).

Employment (n=265): Most clients (99 or 37.4%) report being employed full-time, while 79 (or 29.8%) clients work part-time. Thirty-five (or 13.2%) indicated that they have been out of work for a year or more; 17 (or 6.4%) reported being out of work for less than one year. Other clients report being a student (13 or 5%), self-employed (12 or 4.5 %) or unable to work (9 or 3.4%). One client is retired (1 or .3).

D. Presentation of Results

The results are presented in a manner that allows the reviewer to evaluate the findings in the light of the evidence presented. The results are corroborated with sufficient evidence that all aspects of the research question have been adequately answered. Newer insights gained are highlighted as well. The analysis reveals the following attributes or characteristics of a typical client:

A “Typical Profile” of a Client

• An African American male who is between the ages of 35-64 years old.
• Speaks English as their primary language.
• Lives, work, and receive services in Dorchester, Massachusetts.
• Lives in Dorchester Center.
• Self-identifies as straight (heterosexual).
• Has spent time in jail/prison.
• Does not have a high school diploma.
• Has full-time or part-time employment.
• Worries about paying rent/mortgage.
• Has transportation to get to meetings and medical appointments.
• Feels safe at home, school, and community.
• Is the person that they want to be for their children.
• Is trying to re-engage in their children’s lives and feel confident that it will happen.
• Makes attempts to contact their children.
• Tells their children that they love them.
• Has a poor-to-fair relationship with their children’s mother.
• Sometimes feels sad or anxious about everyday living but encourages themselves by believing that everything is all right during difficult times.
• Knows where to look for job opportunities and knows how to apply for a job.
• Feels confident about achieving desired goals.

Descriptive Statistics: A Holistic Model for Social Justice

Case #2: The PRASAD Project – An International Humanitarian Expression

PRASAD (Philanthropic Relief, Altruistic Service and Development) is a philanthropic expression of the mission of the Siddha Yoga Dham Foundation in South Fallsburg, New York. The PRASAD Project was initiated in 1992 by Gurumayi Chidvilasananda, spiritual head of the Siddha Yoga path. [5]

The PRASAD Project is an independent, non-profit organization committed to improving the quality of life of economically disadvantaged people around the world. It is a non-governmental organization (NGO) in special consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. PRASAD is deeply committed to maintaining strong financial health, accountability, and transparency about its programs and operations. As a result, PRASAD has received top ratings and recognition from charity rating organizations and other publications. [6]

The mission of PRASAD : PRASAD works in partnership with people to benefit children and communities in need, regardless of race or belief. PRASAD implements innovative solutions that respond to local conditions and cultures.

Vision of PRASAD: PRASAD envisions healthy communities, prospering in harmony with the natural environment, where people are inspired to improve the quality of their own and others’ lives.

Values of PRASAD: PRASAD’s values manifest the Siddha Yoga philosophy in the arena of philanthropic work.

• recognizes the inherent dignity and worth of each person.
• respects and loves others.
• affirms the spirit of generosity that creates abundance.
• believes that human beings have within themselves great virtues, wisdom, and capabilities.

Holistic Model : PRASAD’S Holistic model is for healthy communities to thrive in harmony with the natural environment. The emphasis is on three components: sustainable community development, general and specialized healthcare, and the environment. PRASAD programs contribute to achieving these United Nations’ sustainable development goals:

• Zero hunger
• Good health and well-being
• Quality education
• Clean water and sanitation
• Decent work and economic growth
• Reduced inequalities
• Climate action
• Life on land

Since its inception, PRASAD has been partnering with people to deliver holistic, sustainable programs in India, Mexico, and the United States. Over the last 30+ years, these partnerships have produced a life-transforming impact of services:

• Restoring a smile that sparks a change in a child’s health and self-esteem;
• Providing cataract surgery that improves a person’s vision and independence; and
• Empowering women, which gives them a sense of self-worth, inspiring them to take control of their own lives, both within and outside the home.

Pediatric Dental Health : More than two decades ago, through consultations with county health and school officials, PRASAD launched its Children’s Dental Health Program (PRASAD CDHP). In Sullivan County, New York, where lack of transportation prevents many families from accessing dental care, its mobile clinic makes services accessible to students right at their schools. PRASAD CDHP has received many awards from the New York State Assembly, New York State Senate, corporations, and foundations in recognition of their leadership and excellence in maintaining children’s oral health.

Program Outcomes : Within applied statistics and research, outcome variables can be categorical (non-parametric statistics), ordinal (non-parametric statistics), or continuous (parametric statistics). Outcome variables increase the precision and accuracy of measurement (internal validity) and make study results more readily generalizable.

In this particular case study on the PRASAD Project, we are linking social justice to program evaluation to enhance the fair and just distribution of benefits and responsibilities. Social justice, a central tenet of community psychology, emphasizes equal access to resources, dissolution of power hierarchies, and the empowerment and promotion of wellness among marginalized populations (Torres-Harding, Siers, & Olson, 2012) [7] . By applying an equity lens, students in statistics are inspired to challenge the status quo,  care about the interests of the disadvantaged, and uncover weaknesses within the system that contribute to inequities within society.

To track outcomes, most government and nonprofit programs rely on performance measurement strategies rather than more expensive and complicated quasi-experimental and experimental designs. Essentially, performance measurement strategies seek to answer the question: Did the program accomplish what it set out to accomplish? Performance measurement relies on the utilization of records, staff observations, and participant self-reports. The following are statistics on the outcomes of the PRASAD Project for serving those in need for 31 years:

United States

Dental Health Education: 93,000 children

Dental visits: 31,800

Dental procedures: 98,100

Future Goal:

In the United States, PRASAD’s Children’s Dental Health Program will continue to offer high-quality dental health education and dental services to 4,000 low-income children in New York State annually.

Mobile Hospital: 1,069,098 visits

Nutrition Program: 1,414,250 servings

Eye Care: 261,057 screenings and surgeries

Medical Center: 1,005,124 visits

Tuberculosis: 95% cure rate

Kitchen Gardens: 11,030

Number of Self-Help Group (SHG) Members: 2,986 women participating

Arts & Crafts: 154,558 students

Tree Planting & Floriculture: 174,476 samplings

In India, PRASAD Chikitsa’s goals for the next year are to continue delivering medical services, providing nutritional support to 500 children at village care centers, helping 350 families start kitchen gardens, planting 50,000 trees, distributing 10,000 jasmine saplings to farmers for market crops, and helping 200 families build toilets, among other services.

Free Eye Surgeries: 34,000

Eye camps: 213

PRASAD de México’s team will organize three annual free eye surgery camps to benefit low-income people in rural areas of Mexico.

Descriptive Statistics: A Health Disparities Model for Social Justice

Case #3: Community Health Centers in Massachusetts

According to the Massachusetts League of Community Health Centers, community health centers provide primary, preventive, and dental care, as well as mental health, substance use disorder, and other community-based services to anyone in need, regardless of their insurance status or ability to pay. In Massachusetts, 52 community health center organizations provide high-quality health care to some one million state residents through more than 300 sites statewide. In addition to providing comprehensive health services to underserved people, health centers are at the leading edge of addressing some of the most vexing problems of our healthcare system, including facilitating access to health insurance coverage for low-income residents and eliminating health disparities between racial and ethnic populations. [8]

The League also reports that, in 1965, the nation’s first community health center opened its doors in Boston. Until that time, health services for low- and moderate-income people in inner city areas and isolated rural communities were nowhere to be found. In response, community members organized around the need to bring primary care to their neighborhoods. Insisting that they have a voice in how and what care should be delivered to the community, boards of directors that included a majority of health center consumers were incorporated into the model. Today, health center patients continue to drive the mission and work of community health centers. [9]

The following is an example of a Community Health Center in Massachusetts:

Codman Square Health Center (Dorchester, MA)

To serve as a resource for improving the physical, mental, and social well-being of the community.

Codman Square Health Center is our community’s first choice for comprehensive, holistic, and integrated services, and empowers individuals to lead healthy lives and build thriving communities.

Patient : Our patient is the center of the care team.

Community : The well-being of the individual is deeply connected to the health of the community.

Staff : We are a diverse, empowered, and prepared workforce.

Advocacy : We advocate for responsive policies and resources to address health disparities and promote health equity.

Innovation : We promote a culture of innovation that has a measurable and sustainable impact. Partnerships: We build and sustain diverse partnerships.

Total Number of Patients : 23,695 (in 2022)

Gender : Female (13,874 or 58.6%); Male (9,821 or 41.4%).

Race/Ethnicity: Black/African American (17,659 or 81.5%); Hispanic/Latino (2,388 or 11%); White (1,086 or 5%); Other (532 or 2.5%); Unknown (2,030 or 8.6%).

Income Status : Live at or below 100% of the poverty line (11,788 or 96%).

Service Area: Live in Dorchester, Hyde Park, Brockton, Roxbury, Mattapan, and Randolph (18,434 or 77.8%)

Types of Visits : Medical Care (81,685 or 74.1%); Behavioral Health/Mental Health (11,073 or 10%); Dental Care (7,679 or 7%); Eye/Vision (2,798 or 2.5%); Substance Use (2,633 or 2.4%); Enabling Services/Case Management (2,300 or 2.1%); Other Services-Nutrition/Podiatry/Dermatology (2,020 or 1.8%).

Selected Diagnoses : 2022 data shows patients live with Hypertension (4,818), Overweight/Obesity (3,652), Type II Diabetes (2,837), Depression (2,175), and Anxiety (1,861).

This concludes our journey to becoming equity-minded through the lens of statistics. I hope that during your journey, you enjoyed periodic pauses and had mindful quietude as you reflected on what you learned. There is so much to learn about statistics itself and how it blends so well into understanding social justice and equity issues.

In closing, I want to thank you for your steadfastness and courage to travel this journey with me. I am always available for questions and comments. You can email me at yanthony @ framingham.edu. I would love to hear from you!

• Gaille, B (2018). 12 Case Study Method Advantages and Disadvantages. https://brandongaille.com/12-case-study-method-advantages-and-disadvantages/. Retrieved on September 24, 2023. ↵
• Stake, RE (1995). The Art of Case Study Research. London: Sage Publications Ltd. ↵
• National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse (2023). Incarcerated and Reentering Fathers. https://www.fatherhood.gov/for-programs/incarcerated-and-reentering-fathers. Retrieved on September 24, 2023. ↵
• Fontaine, J, Gilchrist-Scott, D, Denver, M, & Rossman, SB (2012). Families and Reentry: Unpacking How Social Support Matters. June 2012; Washington, DC: The Urban Institute. ↵
• Siddha Yoga Dham Foundation (2023). The PRASAD Project. https://www.siddhayoga.org/prasad. Retrieved on October 8, 2023. ↵
• The PRASAD Project (2023). PRASAD: 2023 Fall Newsletter. https://www.prasad.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/PRASAD-Fall-Newsletter-Final-2023-09-12_Compress_1.pdf. Retrieved on October 8, 2023. ↵
• Torres-Harding, R.S., Siers, B., & Olson, B.D. (2012). Development and psychometric evaluation of the Social Justice Scale (SJS). American Journal of Community Psychology, 50, 77–88. ↵
• Massachusetts League of Community Health Centers (2023). Community Health Centers. https://www.massleague.org/CHC/Overview.php. Retrieved on October 8, 2023. ↵
• Ibid. ↵

Statistics Through an Equity Lens Copyright © 2023 by Yvonne E. Anthony is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

• Open access
• Published: 27 June 2011

The case study approach

• Sarah Crowe 1 ,
• Kathrin Cresswell 2 ,
• Ann Robertson 2 ,
• Guro Huby 3 ,
• Anthony Avery 1 &
• Aziz Sheikh 2  

BMC Medical Research Methodology volume  11 , Article number:  100 ( 2011 ) Cite this article

777k Accesses

1039 Citations

37 Altmetric

Metrics details

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.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

The case study approach is particularly useful to employ when there is a need to obtain an in-depth appreciation of an issue, event or phenomenon of interest, in its natural real-life context. Our aim in writing this piece is to provide insights into when to consider employing this approach and an overview of key methodological considerations in relation to the design, planning, analysis, interpretation and reporting of case studies.

The illustrative 'grand round', 'case report' and 'case series' have a long tradition in clinical practice and research. Presenting detailed critiques, typically of one or more patients, aims to provide insights into aspects of the clinical case and, in doing so, illustrate broader lessons that may be learnt. In research, the conceptually-related case study approach can be used, for example, to describe in detail a patient's episode of care, explore professional attitudes to and experiences of a new policy initiative or service development or more generally to 'investigate contemporary phenomena within its real-life context' [ 1 ]. Based on our experiences of conducting a range of case studies, we reflect on when to consider using this approach, discuss the key steps involved and illustrate, with examples, some of the practical challenges of attaining an in-depth understanding of a 'case' as an integrated whole. In keeping with previously published work, we acknowledge the importance of theory to underpin the design, selection, conduct and interpretation of case studies[ 2 ]. In so doing, we make passing reference to the different epistemological approaches used in case study research by key theoreticians and methodologists in this field of enquiry.

This paper is structured around the following main questions: What is a case study? What are case studies used for? How are case studies conducted? What are the potential pitfalls and how can these be avoided? We draw in particular on four of our own recently published examples of case studies (see Tables 1 , 2 , 3 and 4 ) and those of others to illustrate our discussion[ 3 – 7 ].

What is a case study?

A case study is a research approach that is used to generate an in-depth, multi-faceted understanding of a complex issue in its real-life context. It is an established research design that is used extensively in a wide variety of disciplines, particularly in the social sciences. A case study can be defined in a variety of ways (Table 5 ), the central tenet being the need to explore an event or phenomenon in depth and in its natural context. It is for this reason sometimes referred to as a "naturalistic" design; this is in contrast to an "experimental" design (such as a randomised controlled trial) in which the investigator seeks to exert control over and manipulate the variable(s) of interest.

Stake's work has been particularly influential in defining the case study approach to scientific enquiry. He has helpfully characterised three main types of case study: intrinsic , instrumental and collective [ 8 ]. An intrinsic case study is typically undertaken to learn about a unique phenomenon. The researcher should define the uniqueness of the phenomenon, which distinguishes it from all others. In contrast, the instrumental case study uses a particular case (some of which may be better than others) to gain a broader appreciation of an issue or phenomenon. The collective case study involves studying multiple cases simultaneously or sequentially in an attempt to generate a still broader appreciation of a particular issue.

These are however not necessarily mutually exclusive categories. In the first of our examples (Table 1 ), we undertook an intrinsic case study to investigate the issue of recruitment of minority ethnic people into the specific context of asthma research studies, but it developed into a instrumental case study through seeking to understand the issue of recruitment of these marginalised populations more generally, generating a number of the findings that are potentially transferable to other disease contexts[ 3 ]. In contrast, the other three examples (see Tables 2 , 3 and 4 ) employed collective case study designs to study the introduction of workforce reconfiguration in primary care, the implementation of electronic health records into hospitals, and to understand the ways in which healthcare students learn about patient safety considerations[ 4 – 6 ]. Although our study focusing on the introduction of General Practitioners with Specialist Interests (Table 2 ) was explicitly collective in design (four contrasting primary care organisations were studied), is was also instrumental in that this particular professional group was studied as an exemplar of the more general phenomenon of workforce redesign[ 4 ].

What are case studies used for?

According to Yin, case studies can be used to explain, describe or explore events or phenomena in the everyday contexts in which they occur[ 1 ]. These can, for example, help to understand and explain causal links and pathways resulting from a new policy initiative or service development (see Tables 2 and 3 , for example)[ 1 ]. In contrast to experimental designs, which seek to test a specific hypothesis through deliberately manipulating the environment (like, for example, in a randomised controlled trial giving a new drug to randomly selected individuals and then comparing outcomes with controls),[ 9 ] the case study approach lends itself well to capturing information on more explanatory ' how ', 'what' and ' why ' questions, such as ' how is the intervention being implemented and received on the ground?'. The case study approach can offer additional insights into what gaps exist in its delivery or why one implementation strategy might be chosen over another. This in turn can help develop or refine theory, as shown in our study of the teaching of patient safety in undergraduate curricula (Table 4 )[ 6 , 10 ]. Key questions to consider when selecting the most appropriate study design are whether it is desirable or indeed possible to undertake a formal experimental investigation in which individuals and/or organisations are allocated to an intervention or control arm? Or whether the wish is to obtain a more naturalistic understanding of an issue? The former is ideally studied using a controlled experimental design, whereas the latter is more appropriately studied using a case study design.

Case studies may be approached in different ways depending on the epistemological standpoint of the researcher, that is, whether they take a critical (questioning one's own and others' assumptions), interpretivist (trying to understand individual and shared social meanings) or positivist approach (orientating towards the criteria of natural sciences, such as focusing on generalisability considerations) (Table 6 ). Whilst such a schema can be conceptually helpful, it may be appropriate to draw on more than one approach in any case study, particularly in the context of conducting health services research. Doolin has, for example, noted that in the context of undertaking interpretative case studies, researchers can usefully draw on a critical, reflective perspective which seeks to take into account the wider social and political environment that has shaped the case[ 11 ].

How are case studies conducted?

Here, we focus on the main stages of research activity when planning and undertaking a case study; the crucial stages are: defining the case; selecting the case(s); collecting and analysing the data; interpreting data; and reporting the findings.

Defining the case

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 ]. Crucially, each case should have a pre-defined boundary which clarifies the nature and time period covered by the case study (i.e. its scope, beginning and end), the relevant social group, organisation or geographical area of interest to the investigator, the types of evidence to be collected, and the priorities for data collection and analysis (see Table 7 )[ 1 ]. A theory driven approach to defining the case may help generate knowledge that is potentially transferable to a range of clinical contexts and behaviours; using theory is also likely to result in a more informed appreciation of, for example, how and why interventions have succeeded or failed[ 13 ].

For example, in our evaluation of the introduction of electronic health records in English hospitals (Table 3 ), we defined our cases as the NHS Trusts that were receiving the new technology[ 5 ]. Our focus was on how the technology was being implemented. However, if the primary research interest had been on the social and organisational dimensions of implementation, we might have defined our case differently as a grouping of healthcare professionals (e.g. doctors and/or nurses). The precise beginning and end of the case may however prove difficult to define. Pursuing this same example, when does the process of implementation and adoption of an electronic health record system really begin or end? Such judgements will inevitably be influenced by a range of factors, including the research question, theory of interest, the scope and richness of the gathered data and the resources available to the research team.

Selecting the case(s)

The decision on how to select the case(s) to study is a very important one that merits some reflection. In an intrinsic case study, the case is selected on its own merits[ 8 ]. The case is selected not because it is representative of other cases, but because of its uniqueness, which is of genuine interest to the researchers. This was, for example, the case in our study of the recruitment of minority ethnic participants into asthma research (Table 1 ) as our earlier work had demonstrated the marginalisation of minority ethnic people with asthma, despite evidence of disproportionate asthma morbidity[ 14 , 15 ]. In another example of an intrinsic case study, Hellstrom et al.[ 16 ] studied an elderly married couple living with dementia to explore how dementia had impacted on their understanding of home, their everyday life and their relationships.

For an instrumental case study, selecting a "typical" case can work well[ 8 ]. In contrast to the intrinsic case study, the particular case which is chosen is of less importance than selecting a case that allows the researcher to investigate an issue or phenomenon. For example, in order to gain an understanding of doctors' responses to health policy initiatives, Som undertook an instrumental case study interviewing clinicians who had a range of responsibilities for clinical governance in one NHS acute hospital trust[ 17 ]. Sampling a "deviant" or "atypical" case may however prove even more informative, potentially enabling the researcher to identify causal processes, generate hypotheses and develop theory.

In collective or multiple case studies, a number of cases are carefully selected. This offers the advantage of allowing comparisons to be made across several cases and/or replication. Choosing a "typical" case may enable the findings to be generalised to theory (i.e. analytical generalisation) or to test theory by replicating the findings in a second or even a third case (i.e. replication logic)[ 1 ]. Yin suggests two or three literal replications (i.e. predicting similar results) if the theory is straightforward and five or more if the theory is more subtle. However, critics might argue that selecting 'cases' in this way is insufficiently reflexive and ill-suited to the complexities of contemporary healthcare organisations.

The selected case study site(s) should allow the research team access to the group of individuals, the organisation, the processes or whatever else constitutes the chosen unit of analysis for the study. Access is therefore a central consideration; the researcher needs to come to know the case study site(s) well and to work cooperatively with them. Selected cases need to be not only interesting but also hospitable to the inquiry [ 8 ] if they are to be informative and answer the research question(s). Case study sites may also be pre-selected for the researcher, with decisions being influenced by key stakeholders. For example, our selection of case study sites in the evaluation of the implementation and adoption of electronic health record systems (see Table 3 ) was heavily influenced by NHS Connecting for Health, the government agency that was responsible for overseeing the National Programme for Information Technology (NPfIT)[ 5 ]. This prominent stakeholder had already selected the NHS sites (through a competitive bidding process) to be early adopters of the electronic health record systems and had negotiated contracts that detailed the deployment timelines.

It is also important to consider in advance the likely burden and risks associated with participation for those who (or the site(s) which) comprise the case study. Of particular importance is the obligation for the researcher to think through the ethical implications of the study (e.g. the risk of inadvertently breaching anonymity or confidentiality) and to ensure that potential participants/participating sites are provided with sufficient information to make an informed choice about joining the study. The outcome of providing this information might be that the emotive burden associated with participation, or the organisational disruption associated with supporting the fieldwork, is considered so high that the individuals or sites decide against participation.

In our example of evaluating implementations of electronic health record systems, given the restricted number of early adopter sites available to us, we sought purposively to select a diverse range of implementation cases among those that were available[ 5 ]. We chose a mixture of teaching, non-teaching and Foundation Trust hospitals, and examples of each of the three electronic health record systems procured centrally by the NPfIT. At one recruited site, it quickly became apparent that access was problematic because of competing demands on that organisation. Recognising the importance of full access and co-operative working for generating rich data, the research team decided not to pursue work at that site and instead to focus on other recruited sites.

Collecting the data

In order to develop a thorough understanding of the case, the case study approach usually involves the collection of multiple sources of evidence, using a range of quantitative (e.g. questionnaires, audits and analysis of routinely collected healthcare data) and more commonly qualitative techniques (e.g. interviews, focus groups and observations). The use of multiple sources of data (data triangulation) has been advocated as a way of increasing the internal validity of a study (i.e. the extent to which the method is appropriate to answer the research question)[ 8 , 18 – 21 ]. An underlying assumption is that data collected in different ways should lead to similar conclusions, and approaching the same issue from different angles can help develop a holistic picture of the phenomenon (Table 2 )[ 4 ].

Brazier and colleagues used a mixed-methods case study approach to investigate the impact of a cancer care programme[ 22 ]. Here, quantitative measures were collected with questionnaires before, and five months after, the start of the intervention which did not yield any statistically significant results. Qualitative interviews with patients however helped provide an insight into potentially beneficial process-related aspects of the programme, such as greater, perceived patient involvement in care. The authors reported how this case study approach provided a number of contextual factors likely to influence the effectiveness of the intervention and which were not likely to have been obtained from quantitative methods alone.

In collective or multiple case studies, data collection needs to be flexible enough to allow a detailed description of each individual case to be developed (e.g. the nature of different cancer care programmes), before considering the emerging similarities and differences in cross-case comparisons (e.g. to explore why one programme is more effective than another). It is important that data sources from different cases are, where possible, broadly comparable for this purpose even though they may vary in nature and depth.

Analysing, interpreting and reporting case studies

Making sense and offering a coherent interpretation of the typically disparate sources of data (whether qualitative alone or together with quantitative) is far from straightforward. Repeated reviewing and sorting of the voluminous and detail-rich data are integral to the process of analysis. In collective case studies, it is helpful to analyse data relating to the individual component cases first, before making comparisons across cases. Attention needs to be paid to variations within each case and, where relevant, the relationship between different causes, effects and outcomes[ 23 ]. Data will need to be organised and coded to allow the key issues, both derived from the literature and emerging from the dataset, to be easily retrieved at a later stage. An initial coding frame can help capture these issues and can be applied systematically to the whole dataset with the aid of a qualitative data analysis software package.

The Framework approach is a practical approach, comprising of five stages (familiarisation; identifying a thematic framework; indexing; charting; mapping and interpretation) , to managing and analysing large datasets particularly if time is limited, as was the case in our study of recruitment of South Asians into asthma research (Table 1 )[ 3 , 24 ]. Theoretical frameworks may also play an important role in integrating different sources of data and examining emerging themes. For example, we drew on a socio-technical framework to help explain the connections between different elements - technology; people; and the organisational settings within which they worked - in our study of the introduction of electronic health record systems (Table 3 )[ 5 ]. Our study of patient safety in undergraduate curricula drew on an evaluation-based approach to design and analysis, which emphasised the importance of the academic, organisational and practice contexts through which students learn (Table 4 )[ 6 ].

Case study findings can have implications both for theory development and theory testing. 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 ]. These theoretical lenses should not, however, constitute a strait-jacket and the cases should not be "forced to fit" the particular theoretical framework that is being employed.

When reporting findings, it is important to provide the reader with enough contextual information to understand the processes that were followed and how the conclusions were reached. In a collective case study, researchers may choose to present the findings from individual cases separately before amalgamating across cases. Care must be taken to ensure the anonymity of both case sites and individual participants (if agreed in advance) by allocating appropriate codes or withholding descriptors. In the example given in Table 3 , we decided against providing detailed information on the NHS sites and individual participants in order to avoid the risk of inadvertent disclosure of identities[ 5 , 25 ].

What are the potential pitfalls and how can these be avoided?

The case study approach is, as with all research, not without its limitations. When investigating the formal and informal ways undergraduate students learn about patient safety (Table 4 ), for example, we rapidly accumulated a large quantity of data. The volume of data, together with the time restrictions in place, impacted on the depth of analysis that was possible within the available resources. This highlights a more general point of the importance of avoiding the temptation to collect as much data as possible; adequate time also needs to be set aside for data analysis and interpretation of what are often highly complex datasets.

Case study research has sometimes been criticised for lacking scientific rigour and providing little basis for generalisation (i.e. producing findings that may be transferable to other settings)[ 1 ]. There are several ways to address these concerns, including: the use of theoretical sampling (i.e. drawing on a particular conceptual framework); respondent validation (i.e. participants checking emerging findings and the researcher's interpretation, and providing an opinion as to whether they feel these are accurate); and transparency throughout the research process (see Table 8 )[ 8 , 18 – 21 , 23 , 26 ]. Transparency can be achieved by describing in detail the steps involved in case selection, data collection, the reasons for the particular methods chosen, and the researcher's background and level of involvement (i.e. being explicit about how the researcher has influenced data collection and interpretation). Seeking potential, alternative explanations, and being explicit about how interpretations and conclusions were reached, help readers to judge the trustworthiness of the case study report. Stake provides a critique checklist for a case study report (Table 9 )[ 8 ].

Conclusions

The case study approach allows, amongst other things, critical events, interventions, policy developments and programme-based service reforms to be studied in detail in a real-life context. It should therefore be considered when an experimental design is either inappropriate to answer the research questions posed or impossible to undertake. Considering the frequency with which implementations of innovations are now taking place in healthcare settings and how well the case study approach lends itself to in-depth, complex health service research, we believe this approach should be more widely considered by researchers. Though inherently challenging, the research case study can, if carefully conceptualised and thoughtfully undertaken and reported, yield powerful insights into many important aspects of health and healthcare delivery.

Yin RK: Case study research, design and method. 2009, London: Sage Publications Ltd., 4

Google Scholar  

Keen J, Packwood T: Qualitative research; case study evaluation. BMJ. 1995, 311: 444-446.

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Sheikh A, Halani L, Bhopal R, Netuveli G, Partridge M, Car J, et al: Facilitating the Recruitment of Minority Ethnic People into Research: Qualitative Case Study of South Asians and Asthma. PLoS Med. 2009, 6 (10): 1-11.

Article   Google Scholar  

Pinnock H, Huby G, Powell A, Kielmann T, Price D, Williams S, et al: The process of planning, development and implementation of a General Practitioner with a Special Interest service in Primary Care Organisations in England and Wales: a comparative prospective case study. Report for the National Co-ordinating Centre for NHS Service Delivery and Organisation R&D (NCCSDO). 2008, [ http://www.sdo.nihr.ac.uk/files/project/99-final-report.pdf ]

Robertson A, Cresswell K, Takian A, Petrakaki D, Crowe S, Cornford T, et al: Prospective evaluation of the implementation and adoption of NHS Connecting for Health's national electronic health record in secondary care in England: interim findings. BMJ. 2010, 41: c4564-

Pearson P, Steven A, Howe A, Sheikh A, Ashcroft D, Smith P, the Patient Safety Education Study Group: Learning about patient safety: organisational context and culture in the education of healthcare professionals. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2010, 15: 4-10. 10.1258/jhsrp.2009.009052.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

van Harten WH, Casparie TF, Fisscher OA: The evaluation of the introduction of a quality management system: a process-oriented case study in a large rehabilitation hospital. Health Policy. 2002, 60 (1): 17-37. 10.1016/S0168-8510(01)00187-7.

Stake RE: The art of case study research. 1995, London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Sheikh A, Smeeth L, Ashcroft R: Randomised controlled trials in primary care: scope and application. Br J Gen Pract. 2002, 52 (482): 746-51.

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

King G, Keohane R, Verba S: Designing Social Inquiry. 1996, Princeton: Princeton University Press

Doolin B: Information technology as disciplinary technology: being critical in interpretative research on information systems. Journal of Information Technology. 1998, 13: 301-311. 10.1057/jit.1998.8.

George AL, Bennett A: Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. 2005, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Eccles M, the Improved Clinical Effectiveness through Behavioural Research Group (ICEBeRG): Designing theoretically-informed implementation interventions. Implementation Science. 2006, 1: 1-8. 10.1186/1748-5908-1-1.

Article   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Netuveli G, Hurwitz B, Levy M, Fletcher M, Barnes G, Durham SR, Sheikh A: Ethnic variations in UK asthma frequency, morbidity, and health-service use: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2005, 365 (9456): 312-7.

Sheikh A, Panesar SS, Lasserson T, Netuveli G: Recruitment of ethnic minorities to asthma studies. Thorax. 2004, 59 (7): 634-

CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Hellström I, Nolan M, Lundh U: 'We do things together': A case study of 'couplehood' in dementia. Dementia. 2005, 4: 7-22. 10.1177/1471301205049188.

Som CV: Nothing seems to have changed, nothing seems to be changing and perhaps nothing will change in the NHS: doctors' response to clinical governance. International Journal of Public Sector Management. 2005, 18: 463-477. 10.1108/09513550510608903.

Lincoln Y, Guba E: Naturalistic inquiry. 1985, Newbury Park: Sage Publications

Barbour RS: Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog?. BMJ. 2001, 322: 1115-1117. 10.1136/bmj.322.7294.1115.

Mays N, Pope C: Qualitative research in health care: Assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ. 2000, 320: 50-52. 10.1136/bmj.320.7226.50.

Mason J: Qualitative researching. 2002, London: Sage

Brazier A, Cooke K, Moravan V: Using Mixed Methods for Evaluating an Integrative Approach to Cancer Care: A Case Study. Integr Cancer Ther. 2008, 7: 5-17. 10.1177/1534735407313395.

Miles MB, Huberman M: Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. 1994, CA: Sage Publications Inc., 2

Pope C, Ziebland S, Mays N: Analysing qualitative data. Qualitative research in health care. BMJ. 2000, 320: 114-116. 10.1136/bmj.320.7227.114.

Cresswell KM, Worth A, Sheikh A: Actor-Network Theory and its role in understanding the implementation of information technology developments in healthcare. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2010, 10 (1): 67-10.1186/1472-6947-10-67.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Malterud K: Qualitative research: standards, challenges, and guidelines. Lancet. 2001, 358: 483-488. 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)05627-6.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Yin R: Case study research: design and methods. 1994, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing, 2

Yin R: Enhancing the quality of case studies in health services research. Health Serv Res. 1999, 34: 1209-1224.

Green J, Thorogood N: Qualitative methods for health research. 2009, Los Angeles: Sage, 2

Howcroft D, Trauth E: Handbook of Critical Information Systems Research, Theory and Application. 2005, Cheltenham, UK: Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar

Book   Google Scholar  

Blakie N: Approaches to Social Enquiry. 1993, Cambridge: Polity Press

Doolin B: Power and resistance in the implementation of a medical management information system. Info Systems J. 2004, 14: 343-362. 10.1111/j.1365-2575.2004.00176.x.

Bloomfield BP, Best A: Management consultants: systems development, power and the translation of problems. Sociological Review. 1992, 40: 533-560.

Shanks G, Parr A: Positivist, single case study research in information systems: A critical analysis. Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Systems. 2003, Naples

Pre-publication history

The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2288/11/100/prepub

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the participants and colleagues who contributed to the individual case studies that we have drawn on. This work received no direct funding, but it has been informed by projects funded by Asthma UK, the NHS Service Delivery Organisation, NHS Connecting for Health Evaluation Programme, and Patient Safety Research Portfolio. We would also like to thank the expert reviewers for their insightful and constructive feedback. Our thanks are also due to Dr. Allison Worth who commented on an earlier draft of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Division of Primary Care, The University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

Sarah Crowe & Anthony Avery

Centre for Population Health Sciences, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

Kathrin Cresswell, Ann Robertson & Aziz Sheikh

School of Health in Social Science, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarah Crowe .

Additional information

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors' contributions

AS conceived this article. SC, KC and AR wrote this paper with GH, AA and AS all commenting on various drafts. SC and AS are guarantors.

Rights and permissions

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Crowe, S., Cresswell, K., Robertson, A. et al. The case study approach. BMC Med Res Methodol 11 , 100 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-100

Download citation

Received : 29 November 2010

Accepted : 27 June 2011

Published : 27 June 2011

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-100

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Case Study Approach
• Electronic Health Record System
• Case Study Design
• Case Study Site
• Case Study Report

BMC Medical Research Methodology

ISSN: 1471-2288

• General enquiries: [email protected]

Case Study Method Advantages and Disadvantages (2024)

The case study method is a widely used research methodology that allows for an in-depth analysis of a specific phenomenon or individual. It is a valuable tool for researchers seeking to explore complex issues and gain a comprehensive understanding of their subject. In this article, I will delve into the advantages and disadvantages of the case study method, providing insights to enhance your research skills and knowledge of this popular research methodology .

Key Takeaways:

• The case study method allows for an in-depth analysis of a specific phenomenon or individual.
• Advantages of the case study method include capturing complexity, generating new findings, and fostering future research themes.
• Disadvantages of the case study method include potential subjectivity, limited validity and reliability, and being time-consuming and resource-intensive.
• Researchers should consider factors such as research questions , purpose, design, and desired data type when deciding to use case studies.

To conduct a quality case study, researchers should define the case, select appropriate sampling strategies, collect and analyze data using various methods, and report findings transparently.

Understanding the Case Study Method

The case study method is a specific research approach that allows researchers to conduct a detailed analysis of a particular subject or individual. It is a valuable research methodology that offers insights into complex issues and provides an in-depth understanding of the subject matter. By utilizing this method, researchers can explore real-life situations and examine various factors that contribute to a specific phenomenon or behavior.

When employing the case study method, researchers follow a systematic research design and process. They carefully select a case or cases that are representative of the phenomenon under investigation. This selection is crucial to ensure the relevance and applicability of the findings. By collecting data through various research techniques such as interviews, observations, or document analysis, researchers can gain a comprehensive understanding of the case.

Furthermore, the case study method allows researchers to adopt a holistic approach to their research. It enables them to explore multiple dimensions of the case, including social, cultural, psychological, and environmental factors. By examining these various perspectives, researchers can uncover rich insights and identify patterns or unique aspects that may not be evident through other research approaches.

In conclusion, the case study method is a powerful research approach that allows for a detailed analysis of specific subjects or individuals. It offers advantages such as capturing complexity, generating new findings, and fostering future research themes. However, it also has disadvantages, including potential subjectivity, limited validity and reliability, and being time-consuming and resource-intensive. Researchers must weigh these factors and consider the research questions , purpose, design, and desired data type when deciding to use case studies in their research endeavors.

Advantages of the Case Study Method

The case study method offers several advantages that can enhance the research process and outcomes. It allows researchers to capture the complexity of the subject under investigation, providing a comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon or individual being studied. Through in-depth analysis and examination, case studies can reveal unique insights and generate new findings that contribute to the existing body of knowledge.

One of the key benefits of the case study method is its ability to foster future research themes. The depth and richness of data collected through case studies can inspire and guide further investigation in the field. By uncovering new research questions and highlighting important implications, case studies can serve as a catalyst for future studies and help shape the direction of research in a particular area.

Furthermore, the case study method offers researchers the opportunity to explore real-life situations and contexts in detail, providing a holistic understanding of the subject matter. This method is particularly useful when dealing with complex issues that require a nuanced approach. By examining multiple variables and their interrelationships, case studies enable researchers to analyze the intricacies of a given situation and identify patterns and trends that may not be apparent through other research approaches.

The Advantages of the Case Study Method

• Captures the complexity of the subject
• Generates new findings and insights
• Fosters future research themes
• Provides a holistic understanding of real-life situations

However, it is important to recognize that the case study method also has its limitations and challenges. Potential subjectivity is one drawback, as researchers may bring their own biases and interpretations into the analysis. Validity and reliability can also be limited, as case studies rely heavily on the researcher’s judgment and interpretation. Additionally, conducting thorough case studies can be time-consuming and resource-intensive, requiring significant investments of time, effort, and resources.

In summary, the case study method offers researchers a valuable tool for in-depth analysis and understanding of complex issues. Its advantages, including capturing complexity, generating new findings, fostering future research, and providing a holistic understanding, outweigh its disadvantages. By carefully considering research questions, purpose, design, and desired data type, researchers can make informed decisions about when to utilize case studies in their research endeavors.

Complexity and In-Depth Understanding

One of the primary advantages of the case study method is its ability to capture and analyze complex issues in depth. Unlike other research methods that may only scratch the surface, case studies allow researchers to explore the intricacies and nuances of a specific phenomenon or individual. By immersing oneself in the subject matter and gathering detailed information through various data collection methods, researchers can gain a comprehensive understanding of the complexities involved.

When conducting a case study, researchers have the opportunity to gather rich and detailed data that encompasses multiple perspectives and contextual factors. This depth of information allows for a robust analysis, enabling researchers to uncover insights and patterns that may not be apparent through other research approaches. By delving deep into the subject matter, researchers can identify hidden connections, uncover contributing factors, and develop a more comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon under investigation.

In addition, the case study method offers the flexibility to adapt to the unique circumstances of each case. Researchers can tailor their data collection methods and analysis techniques to suit the specific needs of their research, allowing for a more personalized and targeted investigation. This adaptability enhances the researcher’s ability to explore the complexities of the subject matter and ensures that no relevant detail is left unexamined.

Utilizing the Case Study Method for In-Depth Understanding

When utilizing the case study method for in-depth understanding, there are several key considerations to keep in mind. Firstly, researchers must carefully select the case or cases to be studied, ensuring that they align with the research objectives and provide sufficient opportunities for in-depth analysis. Secondly, researchers must employ appropriate data collection methods such as interviews, observations, and document analysis to gather the necessary information. It is essential to use multiple sources of evidence to build a comprehensive picture of the case.

Once the data has been collected, researchers can employ various analysis techniques to uncover patterns, themes, and relationships within the data. This may include coding and categorization, constant comparison, and theoretical sampling. By engaging in a rigorous analysis process, researchers can gain a deep understanding of the underlying dynamics and intricacies of the case.

In summary, the case study method’s ability to capture and analyze complex issues in depth makes it a valuable tool for researchers. By utilizing this methodology, researchers can gain a comprehensive understanding of the subject matter, uncover hidden insights, and develop nuanced interpretations. The case study method’s flexibility and adaptability further enhance its effectiveness in exploring the complexities of the research subject. When employed with careful consideration and rigorous analysis, the case study method can provide valuable contributions to the field of research.

Generating New Findings

The case study method often leads to the discovery of new and valuable findings that contribute to the research field. By delving into the specific details of a particular phenomenon or individual, researchers can uncover insights that may not be apparent through other research approaches.

One advantage of the case study method is its ability to capture the complexity of the subject under investigation. Through in-depth analysis and examination, researchers can gain a comprehensive understanding of the various factors and intricacies involved. This nuanced approach allows for the exploration of unique perspectives and the identification of previously unknown aspects that contribute to the body of knowledge.

Moreover, the case study method enables researchers to generate new findings that contribute to the existing research discourse. By focusing on specific cases or situations, researchers can uncover insights and outcomes that may have wider implications for the field. This can lead to the development of new research themes, highlight gaps in current knowledge, and provide valuable contributions to the overall research landscape.

In-Depth Analysis and Unique Perspectives

Through the case study method, researchers are able to conduct in-depth analyses, allowing for a detailed examination of complex issues. This can include exploring multiple data sources, conducting interviews, and observing behavior in real-life settings.

Furthermore, the case study method provides researchers with the opportunity to uncover unique perspectives and individual experiences. By studying specific cases, researchers can gain valuable insights into the thoughts, motivations, and behaviors of individuals or groups. This deep level of understanding can contribute to the development of theories, models, and frameworks that enhance the overall understanding of the research topic.

“Case studies allow researchers to go beyond the surface-level understanding and dig deeper into the intricacies of a particular phenomenon. This method allows for the exploration of individual experiences, motivations, and behavior, providing valuable insights that can inform future research and practice.” – Dr. Jane Thompson, Research Methods Scholar

In conclusion, the case study method offers researchers the opportunity to generate new and valuable findings that contribute to the research field. By capturing the complexity of the subject, conducting in-depth analyses, and uncovering unique perspectives, researchers can enhance their understanding of complex issues and contribute to the existing body of knowledge.

Fostering Future Research Themes

The case study method can serve as a catalyst for future research, guiding scholars to explore new avenues within their respective fields. By examining complex issues in depth, case studies generate valuable insights and identify research implications that can shape and inform future investigation. However, it is important for researchers to be aware of the limitations and challenges associated with case study research .

When conducting case studies, researchers should consider the broader context of their research questions, purpose, design, and desired data type. This ensures that the case study method aligns effectively with their research goals. By carefully selecting cases and applying appropriate sampling strategies, researchers can enhance the credibility and transferability of their findings.

In order to foster future research themes, it is crucial to transparently report the research process and findings. By providing a detailed account of the case study methodology , researchers allow others to build upon their work and replicate their studies. This promotes dependability and confirmability in the research, contributing to the utility of case studies in the wider research community.

Challenges and Limitations

It is important to acknowledge the challenges and limitations of case study research . Researchers may encounter difficulties in analyzing large amounts of data, ensuring data reliability, and managing potential bias. Additionally, reporting results in a concise and focused manner can be challenging, as case studies often involve rich and complex information.

Researchers must also guard against the risk of drifting away from the initial research objectives. Maintaining a clear research focus throughout the study helps to ensure that the findings remain relevant and contribute meaningfully to the existing body of knowledge.

The case study method provides researchers with a powerful tool to foster future research themes. By examining complex issues in depth, case studies generate insights and identify implications that guide scholars in exploring new avenues within their respective fields. However, it is important to consider the challenges and limitations associated with case study research , such as data analysis, data reliability, potential bias, and maintaining research focus. By addressing these challenges and highlighting the limitations, researchers can leverage the strengths of the case study method and contribute effectively to the advancement of knowledge in their fields.

“The case study method provides researchers with a valuable tool for in-depth analysis and understanding of complex issues.”

Disadvantages of the Case Study Method

While the case study method offers advantages, it also presents several challenges and limitations that researchers should consider. One of the main disadvantages is the potential for subjectivity. Since case studies rely heavily on the interpretation of researchers, there is a risk of bias and personal opinions influencing the findings. It is important for researchers to be aware of their own biases and strive for objectivity in order to maintain the integrity of the study.

Another limitation of the case study method is the limited validity and reliability of the findings. Case studies often involve a small sample size, which can make it difficult to generalize the results to a larger population. Additionally, the findings may not be replicable or consistent across different cases, affecting the overall validity and reliability of the research.

Furthermore, conducting case studies can be time-consuming and resource-intensive. The in-depth nature of case study research requires significant investments of time, effort, and resources. Researchers need to meticulously collect and analyze data, often using various methods such as interviews, observations, and document analysis. This comprehensive approach, while valuable, can be demanding and may limit the feasibility of conducting multiple case studies within a given timeframe.

In summary, the case study method has its drawbacks, including potential subjectivity, limited validity and reliability, and being time-consuming and resource-intensive. Researchers should carefully consider these limitations when deciding whether to utilize case studies in their research. By acknowledging and addressing these challenges, researchers can maximize the quality and relevance of their case study findings.

Potential Subjectivity

One of the major disadvantages of the case study method is the potential for subjective interpretations due to researcher bias. Because case studies involve a deep immersion into a specific phenomenon or individual, researchers can inadvertently bring their own preconceived notions or expectations into the study. This subjectivity can influence the data collection and analysis process, leading to biased interpretations and potentially compromising the validity and reliability of the findings.

However, it is important to note that while subjectivity is a concern in case studies, it does not render the method useless. Researchers can take steps to minimize bias and enhance objectivity. For example, involving multiple researchers in the data collection and analysis process can help mitigate individual biases. Additionally, employing rigorous data triangulation techniques, such as using multiple sources of data or conducting member checks with participants, can provide further validation and reduce the influence of subjectivity.

Strategies to Address Subjectivity

To address the potential subjectivity in case study research, several strategies can be implemented:

• Clearly define research objectives and questions to guide the study and avoid personal biases.
• Adopt a reflexive approach, acknowledging and reflecting on the researcher’s own biases and potential impact on the study.
• Engage in peer debriefing or independent audits to ensure objectivity and challenge interpretations.
• Triangulate data from multiple sources and perspectives to cross-validate findings and enhance credibility.
• Document and transparently report the research process , including any potential biases or limitations, to increase transparency and enable readers to critically assess the study.

By implementing these strategies, researchers can help mitigate the potential subjectivity associated with the case study method, strengthening the validity and reliability of their findings.

Limited Validity and Reliability

The case study method may face limitations in terms of validity and reliability, which can impact the trustworthiness of research outcomes . Validity refers to the extent to which the findings accurately represent the phenomenon or individual under study, while reliability refers to the consistency and replicability of the results. Since case studies involve a detailed examination of a specific case, there is a risk of observer bias and subjective interpretations.

It is important for researchers to acknowledge their own biases and strive for objectivity when conducting case studies. By employing rigorous data collection and analysis strategies, researchers can enhance the validity and reliability of their findings. This may involve triangulating data from multiple sources, using appropriate sampling techniques, and employing predefined criteria for evaluating and interpreting the results.

Additionally, researchers should be aware of the potential limitations that come with selecting a single case or a small number of cases for study. While the in-depth analysis offered by case studies allows for rich insights, it may not always be possible to generalize the findings to the wider population. Therefore, it is crucial that researchers clearly define the boundaries of their case study and highlight any limitations in terms of external validity.

Despite these limitations, case studies can still provide valuable insights and contribute to the body of knowledge in various fields. Researchers should weigh the advantages and disadvantages of the case study method and make informed decisions about its suitability for their specific research objectives. By carefully considering the research questions, purpose, design, and desired data type, researchers can leverage the strengths of the case study method while mitigating its limitations.

Time-Consuming and Resource-Intensive

Conducting comprehensive case studies can be time-consuming and require significant resources, making it a challenging research approach . It involves extensive planning, data collection, and analysis, which can consume substantial amounts of time. Researchers must dedicate themselves to the intricacies of each case, often spending weeks or even months immersed in the subject matter.

Moreover, case studies often demand substantial resources to ensure accuracy and comprehensiveness. Researchers must allocate adequate funding for data collection, participant recruitment, and data analysis. Additionally, case studies may require specialized equipment or software, further adding to the financial burden.

Despite the challenges posed by the time-consuming and resource-intensive nature of case studies, they offer unique insights and a comprehensive understanding of complex issues. By carefully managing time and resources, researchers can overcome these obstacles and harness the power of the case study method to advance their research.

“Conducting comprehensive case studies can be likened to solving a complex puzzle. It requires patience, dedication, and an unwavering commitment to uncovering the truth.”

The Importance of Time Management

When embarking on a case study, effective time management is crucial. It’s essential to create a realistic timeline that allows for thorough data collection and analysis, while also accounting for unexpected delays. Breaking down the research process into manageable tasks and setting clear deadlines can help researchers stay on track.

• Tip: Utilize project management techniques, such as creating a Gantt chart or using task management software, to facilitate efficient time management.

Additionally, collaboration and delegation can alleviate some of the time and resource burdens. By working with a team or partnering with research institutions, researchers can distribute responsibilities and leverage collective expertise to expedite the case study process .

While case studies may require significant investments of time and resources, the benefits they offer in terms of comprehensive insights and contributions to the field of research make them a valuable methodology to consider. By carefully managing these challenges, researchers can unlock the potential of case studies to enhance their understanding of complex phenomena and generate impactful findings.

Factors to Consider When Using Case Studies

When opting for the case study method, researchers should carefully consider various factors, including research questions, purpose, design, and desired data type. These elements play a crucial role in determining the suitability and effectiveness of using case studies as a research methodology. By aligning these factors, researchers can optimize their approach to gather valuable insights and contribute to the existing body of knowledge.

Research Questions

The formulation of clear and focused research questions is essential when conducting a case study. Researchers should identify specific objectives and explore the unique aspects of the phenomenon or individual under study. By defining precise research questions, researchers can structure their case study to address these inquiries and ensure the relevance and applicability of the findings.

Purpose and Design

Determining the purpose of the research and the appropriate design for the case study is crucial for its success. Researchers must clearly define the intended outcomes and consider whether a single case study or multiple cases would be most appropriate. Additionally, selecting the appropriate design, such as exploratory, descriptive, or explanatory, will help guide data collection and analysis methods.

Desired Data Type

Researchers should also consider the type of data they hope to obtain from their case study. This could include qualitative data, such as interviews, observations, or document analysis, or quantitative data, such as surveys or measurements. By determining the desired data type, researchers can select the most appropriate methods and tools for data collection and analysis, ensuring the robustness and accuracy of their findings.

By carefully considering these factors, researchers can ensure that their case study is methodologically rigorous, relevant, and adds value to the field of study. Understanding the research questions, purpose, design, and desired data type will enable researchers to make informed decisions and maximize the benefits of using the case study method in their research endeavors.

Conducting a Quality Case Study

To ensure a high-quality case study, researchers should follow a structured process that includes defining the case, selecting appropriate sampling strategies, and rigorously analyzing the collected data. This section will outline the essential steps involved in conducting a comprehensive case study.

1. Defining the Case

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the case or the specific phenomenon that will be investigated. This involves identifying the research questions, objectives, and the boundaries of the study. By establishing a clear focus, researchers can ensure that their case study is relevant, manageable, and aligns with their research goals.

2. Selecting Appropriate Sampling Strategies

Once the case is defined, researchers need to determine the appropriate sampling strategies to ensure the selection of relevant cases. Depending on the research objectives and the available resources, different sampling techniques such as purposive sampling, snowball sampling, or random sampling can be utilized. The choice of sampling strategies should be guided by the research question and the desired depth of analysis.

3. Rigorously Analyzing the Collected Data

After collecting the necessary data through methods like interviews, observations, or document analysis, researchers must rigorously analyze the data to derive meaningful insights. This involves organizing, categorizing, and interpreting the collected information, identifying patterns, themes, and relationships. Researchers should employ various analytical techniques like content analysis, thematic analysis, or discourse analysis to ensure a thorough understanding of the case.

By following these steps, researchers can conduct a high-quality case study that provides valuable insights into the phenomenon under investigation. It is essential to remain objective throughout the research process, critically evaluate the data collected, and maintain transparency in reporting the findings.

Evaluating Case Studies

Evaluating case studies requires considering criteria such as credibility, transferability, dependability, confirmability, and utility. These factors help researchers assess the quality and relevance of case study research, ensuring that the findings and outcomes are valid and reliable.

Credibility refers to the trustworthiness and believability of the case study findings. Researchers must establish credibility by demonstrating transparent and rigorous data collection and analysis methods. This helps ensure that the findings accurately represent the reality of the case being studied.

Transferability involves the extent to which the findings of a case study can be applied to other contexts or populations. Researchers should consider the similarities and differences between the case under study and other potential contexts, and evaluate whether the findings can be generalized beyond the specific case.

Dependability refers to the consistency and stability of the case study findings. Researchers should document and justify their decision-making processes, data collection methods, and analysis techniques, enabling others to replicate the study and verify the dependability of the findings.

Confirmability focuses on the objectivity and neutrality of the case study findings. Researchers should critically reflect on their personal biases, preconceptions, and assumptions, and document how they managed and mitigated these potential influences during the research process.

Utility considers the practicality and usefulness of the case study findings. Researchers should evaluate whether the findings contribute to theory development, inform decision-making, or have real-world applications in the relevant field of study.

“Evaluating case studies helps ensure the credibility, transferability, dependability, confirmability, and utility of research findings .” – Jane Doe, Researcher

By considering these criteria, researchers can assess and evaluate the quality and relevance of case study research. The application of these criteria enables the scientific community to make informed decisions about the applicability and significance of case study findings to their own research endeavors.

Limitations and Challenges

While case studies offer valuable insights, researchers should be aware of the limitations and challenges that can arise during the research process. It is important to acknowledge these factors and address them appropriately to ensure the validity and reliability of the findings.

One limitation of case studies is the potential for subjectivity. Since case studies often involve a detailed analysis of a specific phenomenon or individual, researchers may be influenced by their own biases and interpretations. This subjectivity can impact the objectivity of the research and raise questions about the reliability of the findings. Researchers must be vigilant in mitigating bias and maintaining transparency throughout the research process.

Additionally, case studies can face limitations in terms of validity and reliability. Validity refers to the accuracy and truthfulness of the findings, while reliability refers to the consistency and dependability of the results. Due to the in-depth nature of case studies, there is a risk of overlooking important variables or generalizing the findings to a broader population. Researchers must carefully consider sampling strategies and data collection methods to enhance the validity and reliability of their case study research.

Furthermore, conducting case studies can be time-consuming and resource-intensive. The comprehensive nature of case study research requires a significant investment of time, effort, and resources. Researchers must carefully plan and allocate resources to ensure the successful completion of the study. This includes securing access to relevant data and conducting thorough data analysis. It is important to balance the benefits of the case study method with the practical considerations of time and resources.

In conclusion, while case studies offer valuable insights into complex issues, researchers should be mindful of the limitations and challenges associated with this research method. By addressing potential subjectivity, enhancing validity and reliability, and carefully allocating time and resources, researchers can overcome these challenges and produce high-quality case study research that contributes to the existing body of knowledge.

In conclusion, the case study method offers researchers a powerful tool for in-depth analysis, but it also has its limitations and challenges that should be considered for effective research. The advantages of using the case study method are significant. It allows researchers to capture the complexity of the subject under investigation, providing a holistic understanding that may not be possible with other research methods . The case study method also has the potential to generate new findings, contributing to the existing body of knowledge and inspiring future research themes.

However, it is essential to acknowledge the disadvantages of the case study method as well. One potential drawback is the potential subjectivity that can arise in interpreting and analyzing case study data, emphasizing the importance of researcher bias and the need for maintaining objectivity. Limited validity and reliability are also challenges that researchers may face, as the findings of a case study may not always be generalizable to a larger population. Furthermore, conducting comprehensive case studies can be time-consuming and resource-intensive, requiring significant investments of time, effort, and resources.

When deciding to use case studies, researchers must carefully consider several factors. Alignment between research questions, purpose, design, and desired data type is crucial in maximizing the effectiveness of the case study method. Conducting a quality case study involves defining the case, selecting appropriate sampling strategies, collecting and analyzing data using various methods, and transparently reporting findings. Evaluation of case studies should consider criteria such as credibility, transferability, dependability, confirmability, and utility to assess the quality and relevance of the research.

Despite the limitations and challenges, the case study method remains a valuable tool for researchers seeking to gain an in-depth understanding of complex issues. By recognizing its strengths and weaknesses and following best practices, researchers can harness the power of the case study method to enhance their research endeavors and contribute to the advancement of knowledge in their respective fields.

What are the advantages of using the case study method in research?

The case study method offers several advantages, including capturing the complexity of the subject, generating new findings, and fostering future research themes.

What are the disadvantages of the case study method?

The case study method has disadvantages, such as potential subjectivity, limited validity and reliability, and being time-consuming and resource-intensive.

What factors should researchers consider when deciding to use case studies?

Researchers should consider factors like research questions, purpose, design, and desired data type when deciding to use case studies.

How can researchers conduct a quality case study?

How can case studies be evaluated.

Case studies can be evaluated based on criteria like credibility, transferability, dependability, confirmability, and utility.

What are some limitations and challenges of case studies?

Some limitations and challenges of case studies include the need for robust data analysis strategies, challenges in reporting results, and the potential for drifting away from research focus.

Source Links

• https://www.linkedin.com/advice/0/what-advantages-disadvantages-using-case-studies
• https://www.bartleby.com/essay/Major-Advantages-And-Disadvantages-Of-Case-Study-FJ3ZXUGDN3U
• https://scholarship-positions.com/what-is-a-case-study-in-research/2019/07/26/

Related posts:

• Best World Peace Campaign Slogans (2024)
• Best Catchy Mobile Notary Slogans (2024)
• Best Catchy Motorcycle Business Names (2024)
• Catchy Auto Repair Slogans and Great Taglines (2024)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Digitala Vetenskapliga Arkivet

• CSV all metadata
• CSV all metadata version 2
• modern-language-association-8th-edition
• Other style
• Other locale

Krusenvik, Linnéa

Abstract [en].

The case study as a scientific method is, and has been for a long time, a subject of heavy discussion in the scientific community. Some scientists disregard the study completely and argue that it’s nothing more than story-telling, while others claim that the case study is the most relevant research method there is. As with all scientific methods case studies have both advantages and disadvantages and the aim of this study is to present and discuss these.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages

Keywords [en], national category, identifiers, subject / course, solberg søilen, klaus, open access in diva, file information, by organisation, on the subject, search outside of diva, altmetric score.