Is There a (Viable) Crucial-Case Method

Bibliographic Data

ID6244164
AuthorsJohn Gerring (0000-0001-9858-2050, University of Massachusetts Boston, corresponding author)
Year2007
Volume40
Issue3
Pages231-253
Publication date2007-03-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueComparative Political Studies (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0010-4140 • E-ISSN: 1552-3829
PublisherSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/0010414006290784
OpenAlexW2076391975
LanguageEN
Citations received346
References cited53

Case study researchers use diverse methods to select their cases, a matter that has elicited considerable comment and no little consternation. Of all these methods, perhaps the most controversial is the crucial-case method, first proposed by Harry Eckstein several decades ago. Since Eckstein’s influential essay, the crucial-case approach has been used in a multitude of studies across several social science disciplines and has come to be recognized as a staple of the case study method. Yet the idea of any single case playing a crucial (or critical) role is not widely accepted. In this article, the method of the crucial case is explored, and a limited defense (somewhat less expansive than that envisioned by Eckstein) of that method is undertaken. A second method of case-selection, closely associated with the logic of the crucial case, is introduced: the pathway case

Case selection · Epistemology · Expansive · Multitude · Selection (genetic algorithm · Sociology · Artificial Intelligence · Computer Science · Evaluation and Performance Assessment · Philosophy · Political Conflict and Governance · Qualitative Comparative Analysis Research

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub