This article, written by Bent Flyvbjerg (Aalborg University, Denmark) examines five common misunderstandings about case-study research.
The misunderstandings are (a) theoretical knowledge is more valuable than practical knowledge; (b) one cannot generalize from a single case, therefore, the single-case study cannot contribute to scientific development; (c) the case study is most useful for generating hypotheses, whereas other methods are more suitable for hypotheses testing and theory building; (d) the case study contains a bias towards verification; and (e) it is often difficult to summarize specific case studies.
The article explains and corrects these misunderstandings one by one and concludes with the Kuhnian insight that a scientific discipline without a large number of thoroughly executed case studies is a discipline without systematic production of exemplars, and a discipline without exemplars is an ineffective one. Social science may be strengthened by the execution of a greater number of good case studies.
- The conventional wisdom about case-study research
- The role of cases in human learning
- Cases as "Black Swans"
- Strategies for case selection
- Do case studies contain a subjective bias?
- The irreducible quality of good case narratives
Flyvbjerg, B. (2006) Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research. Sage Publications. Retrieved from http://flyvbjerg.plan.aau.dk/Publications2006/0604FIVEMISPUBL2006.pdf