 |
What`s the Utility of the Case-Study Method for Social Science Research? A Response to Critiques from the Qualitative/Statistical Perspective
| |
| | Unformatted Document Text:
ABSTRACT
Although the case-study method is still widely-used in political science, the discipline has grown increasingly suspicious of its usefulness instead favoring “large-n”, quantitative research. In this paper, I argue that the discipline’s near “rejection” of the case-study method is based on a parochial and restrictive view of the social sciences. Critiques of the case-study method are usually predicated on the assumption that the primary task of social science research is theory-testing (hypothesis-testing). In contrast, I demonstrate the utility of the case-study method for theory-building and theory-elaboration (or theory-reconstruction). In this paper, I distinguish the case-study method from ethnography, “grounded theory,” and “doing history.” I also answer the critics’ two main criticisms of the case-study method- 1) the lack of “internal validity” and 2) the lack of “external validity”. The first criticism is only valid if the explicit purpose of analysis is the formal testing of causal relationships or hypotheses. I argue that the “internal validity” of the case-study method is largely predicated on the plausibility of analysis, the logical nature of the nexus between the dependent and independent variables, and the explanatory utility of the findings. These can be judged through the “quasi-judicial” method and collegial exchange. The second main criticism of the case-study method- the lack of “external validity”- is only valid if the explicit purpose of the research is enumerative extrapolation from a statistical sample to a parent universe. I argue that another purpose of social inquiry is analytical extrapolation by which causal processes occurring within one case are used to explain a particular social outcome, and also used to reevaluate theories explaining the general phenomenon in question. In conclusion, I argue that the case-study method is an important part of social science research. In contributes significantly to both our understanding of the world and also adds to social science theory.
2
|
| |
| |
|
|
ABSTRACT
Although the case-study method is still widely-used in political science, the discipline has
grown increasingly suspicious of its usefulness instead favoring “large-n”, quantitative
research. In this paper, I argue that the discipline’s near “rejection” of the case-study
method is based on a parochial and restrictive view of the social sciences. Critiques of
the case-study method are usually predicated on the assumption that the primary task of
social science research is theory-testing (hypothesis-testing). In contrast, I demonstrate
the utility of the case-study method for theory-building and theory-elaboration (or theory-
reconstruction). In this paper, I distinguish the case-study method from ethnography,
“grounded theory,” and “doing history.” I also answer the critics’ two main criticisms of
the case-study method- 1) the lack of “internal validity” and 2) the lack of “external
validity”. The first criticism is only valid if the explicit purpose of analysis is the formal
testing of causal relationships or hypotheses. I argue that the “internal validity” of the
case-study method is largely predicated on the plausibility of analysis, the logical nature
of the nexus between the dependent and independent variables, and the explanatory
utility of the findings. These can be judged through the “quasi-judicial” method and
collegial exchange. The second main criticism of the case-study method- the lack of
“external validity”- is only valid if the explicit purpose of the research is enumerative
extrapolation from a statistical sample to a parent universe. I argue that another purpose
of social inquiry is analytical extrapolation by which causal processes occurring within
one case are used to explain a particular social outcome, and also used to reevaluate
theories explaining the general phenomenon in question. In conclusion, I argue that the
case-study method is an important part of social science research. In contributes
significantly to both our understanding of the world and also adds to social science
theory.
2
|
|
 Convention | | Convention is an application service for managing large or small academic conferences, annual meetings, and other types of events! | | Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. | | Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! | | Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! | | Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. | | Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! | | Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! | | Click here for more information. |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
