Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Case study principles for different types of cases

Case study principles for different types of cases Experimental research practices encouraging scientific control and explicit measurement have been criticized for dealing with management and organizational dynamics as if they were hypothetical, static, and unreal. There have been a number of calls for a more qualitative and relevant approach which provides more in-depth knowledge of cases. Certain principles and practices have been offered to assist researchers, yet there has been much debate on their application. Some researchers have suggested case study principles supporting intensive case analysis while others have indicated the importance of comparisons. This paper first provides a listing of common case study approaches, each of which is used for different purposes. Some of these approaches are used for descriptive research, some for encouraging discovery, and others for establishing proof. The identification of principles for a type of case study evolve out of the type of knowledge and information the researcher is seeking to gather. Narratives, explanatory, and interpretative cases tend to use historical information focused around questions, criteria, a sequence of occurrence, or testimonials. Tabulations, comparative studies, and diagnostic and experimental action research cases seem to be more complex in the variety of data they summarize. Survey cases stand on their own as researchers use them much like they are gathering survey data from a large sample. This paper suggests that different types of case studies need to be judged by unique principles or assumptions. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Quality & Quantity Springer Journals

Case study principles for different types of cases

Cunningham, J.
Quality & Quantity , Volume 31 (4) – Sep 30, 2004
Download PDF
23 pages

Loading next page...
1
 
/lp/springer_journal/case-study-principles-for-different-types-of-cases-EkEso5xi3D

References (77)

Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 1997 by Kluwer Academic Publishers
Subject
Social Sciences; Methodology of the Social Sciences; Social Sciences, general
ISSN
0033-5177
eISSN
1573-7845
DOI
10.1023/A:1004254420302
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Experimental research practices encouraging scientific control and explicit measurement have been criticized for dealing with management and organizational dynamics as if they were hypothetical, static, and unreal. There have been a number of calls for a more qualitative and relevant approach which provides more in-depth knowledge of cases. Certain principles and practices have been offered to assist researchers, yet there has been much debate on their application. Some researchers have suggested case study principles supporting intensive case analysis while others have indicated the importance of comparisons. This paper first provides a listing of common case study approaches, each of which is used for different purposes. Some of these approaches are used for descriptive research, some for encouraging discovery, and others for establishing proof. The identification of principles for a type of case study evolve out of the type of knowledge and information the researcher is seeking to gather. Narratives, explanatory, and interpretative cases tend to use historical information focused around questions, criteria, a sequence of occurrence, or testimonials. Tabulations, comparative studies, and diagnostic and experimental action research cases seem to be more complex in the variety of data they summarize. Survey cases stand on their own as researchers use them much like they are gathering survey data from a large sample. This paper suggests that different types of case studies need to be judged by unique principles or assumptions.

Journal

Quality & Quantity – Springer Journals

Published: Sep 30, 2004

There are no references for this article.