Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research

TL;DR

This paper clarifies five common misconceptions about case-study research, emphasizing its value for scientific development, generalization, hypothesis generation, and the importance of exemplars in social science.

Contribution

It corrects five misunderstandings about case-study research and advocates for more systematic use of case studies to strengthen social science.

Findings

Case studies are valuable for theory development and exemplars.

Single case studies can contribute to scientific knowledge.

More well-executed case studies enhance social science discipline.

Abstract

This article examines five common misunderstandings about case-study research: (1) Theoretical knowledge is more valuable than practical knowledge; (2) One cannot generalize from a single case, therefore the single case study cannot contribute to scientific development; (3) The case study is most useful for generating hypotheses, while other methods are more suitable for hypotheses testing and theory building; (4) The case study contains a bias toward verification; and (5) 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 that a discipline without exemplars is an ineffective one. Social science may be strengthened by the execution of more good case studies.