B. Flyvbjerg. Qualitative Inquiry, 12 (2):
219(2006)
Abstract
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.
%0 Journal Article
%1 flyvbjerg2006
%A Flyvbjerg, B.
%D 2006
%J Qualitative Inquiry
%K case-study TOREAD epistemology
%N 2
%P 219
%T Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research
%V 12
%X 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.
@article{flyvbjerg2006,
abstract = {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.},
added-at = {2006-12-06T23:40:27.000+0100},
author = {Flyvbjerg, B.},
biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2e482af394ce60a0ec96fe65871ca6265/mstrohm},
interhash = {d99a0dfbef8b22ea782e73426161ae86},
intrahash = {e482af394ce60a0ec96fe65871ca6265},
journal = {Qualitative Inquiry},
keywords = {case-study TOREAD epistemology},
number = 2,
pages = 219,
timestamp = {2006-12-06T23:40:27.000+0100},
title = {{Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research}},
volume = 12,
year = 2006
}