Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research
Dados Bibliográficos
AUTOR(ES) | |
---|---|
AFILIAÇÃO(ÕES) | Aalborg University |
ANO | 2006 |
TIPO | Artigo |
PERIÓDICO | Qualitative Inquiry |
ISSN | 1077-8004 |
E-ISSN | 1552-7565 |
EDITORA | Annual Reviews (United States) |
DOI | 10.1177/1077800405284363 |
CITAÇÕES | 189 |
ADICIONADO EM | 2025-08-18 |
MD5 |
e4c9f79150aee1562e478e4ce3b76104
|
Resumo
This article examines five common misunderstandings about case-study research: (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 toward verification; and (e) it is often difficult to summarize specific case studies. This 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.