Case Study Research: Design and Methods (2nd edition)

By Robert K. Yin. 1994. Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA.

-this book attempts to argue that the well-known stereotypes of the modern case study are wrong;
that the continuing relevance of the method despite criticism seems to indicate we have
misunderstood its strengths and weaknesses and that a different perspective is needed. The
author tries to develop such a perspective by disentangling the case study as a research tool
from (a) the case study as a teaching tool, (b) ethnographies and participant-observation, and (c)
qualitative methods.
-The author defines a case study as an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary
phenomenon within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon
and context are not clearly evident. This sounds familiar. He also describes a case study
inquiry as something that copes with the technically distinctive situation in which there will be
many more variables of interest than data points, and as one result it relies on multiple sources of
evidence, with data needing to converge in a triangulating fashion; as another result it benefits
from the prior development of theoretical propositions to guide data collection and analysis.
-there are five major components to a research studys design: the studys questions, its
propositions (these direct attention to things that should be examined within the study), its units
of analysis, the logic linking the data to the propositions, and the criteria for interpreting the
findings. Establishing these five components will force the researcher to construct a preliminary
theory related to the phenomenon being studied. Existing work can provide a theoretical
framework for some topics, but others may require a more exploratory study in order to establish
some theoretical ideas.
-Case study designs should be able to pass four tests for design quality:
Construct validityestablishment of correct operational measures for the
concepts being studied.
Internal validityestablishment of a causal relationship where certain conditions
are shown to lead to other conditions.
External validityestablishment of a domain in which the studys findings can be
generalized.
Reliabilitydemonstration of repeatability with the same results.
-Deciding whether to use a single-case design or a multiple-case design. Single-case designs are
more useful when the case is extreme or unique, or when the case is revelatory (meaning the
phenomenon has been previously inaccessible). Multiple-case designs are more useful when
replication theory can be utilized. This means the ability to use each case so that it produces
similar results, or produces contrasting results for predictable reasons. Simply considering
multiple cases to be like multiple respondents in a survey or multiple subjects within an
experiment is a bad use of a multiple-case design.
-Preparing to do case study data collection should include an assessment of skills for the
investigator. These skills are especially important:
Ability to ask good questions and interpret the answers
Good at listening and not being trapped by ones own ideologies or preconception
Adaptive and flexible to newly encountered situations
Firm grasp of the issues being studied, at least theoretically
Unbiased by preconceived notions, sensitive and responsive to contradictory
evidence.
-A case study protocol is another necessary technique to facilitate proper data collection. A
protocol includes an overview of the case study project (including project objectives, relevant
readings on the topic, and related issues), a list of field procedures (access to case study sites,
sources of information, procedural reminders), case study questions (for the investigator to keep
in mind, tables for arrangement of data, potential sources of info to answer the questions), and a
guide for the report (outline, narrative format, etc.). The protocol is meant to remind the
investigator what the case study is about, force him/her to anticipate possible problems or
obstacles, and begin identifying the audience for the report.
-the center of the protocol is the questions which reflect the actual inquiry being made. These
are questions posed to the investigator, not the participants. They may act as prompts for
interview questions, but the main purpose is to keep the investigator in track. There are at least
five levels of questions that can be asked in a case study.
Level 1: questions asked of specific interviewees
Level 2: questions asked of the individual case (these are in the protocol)
Level 3: questions asked of the findings across multiple cases
Level 4: questions asked of the entire studylike information beyond the
multiple cases, including other literature
Level 5: normative questions about policy recommendations and conclusions,
which go beyond the narrow scope of the study
-a pilot case study should be the final preparation for data collection. It should help investigators
refine their data collections plans, provide some conceptual clarification for the design, and help
develop a relevant line of questions. A pilot case should be selected based on convenience,
access, and geographic proximity.
-The author lists six main sources of evidence for case study data. They are documentation,
archival records, interviews, direct observation, participant-observation, and physical artifacts.
The collection chapter also outlines three central principles to data collection: 1) use of multiple
sources of evidence, 2) creation of a case study database, and 3) maintenance of a chain of
evidence.
-Types of evidence.
Documentation. A stable form of evidence, it can be reviewed repeatedly, is
unobtrusive, exact and broad. It is also difficult to retrieve, may create biases
based on collection and author, and can be difficult to access. Documentation
may include letters, agendas, announcements, minutes of meetings, newspaper
clippings, and written reports.
Archival records. In addition to all the strengths of documentation, archival
records are also precise and quantitative. They also possess the same weaknesses
as documentation, as well as more accessibility obstacles due to privacy controls.
Archival records may include service records, maps and charts, lists of names,
survey data, and personal records like diaries.
Interviews. This is a targeted and specific form of evidence which is easy to
relate directly to the topic at hand, and it is insightful while providing good causal
relationships. However, interviews may create a bias due to poorly constructed
questions, bad memories, and reflexivity (the interviewee says what is expected).
Types of interviews include open-ended interviews, focused interviews, and
surveys.
 Direct observations. Real evidence which occurs in real time and includes
context. Time-consuming, overly selective and costly.
Participant-Observation. Same strengths as direct obs., as well as more insightful
into interpersonal behavior and motivations. Same weakness as direct obs., as
well as some inherent bias due to the investigators alteration of normal events.
Participant-observation can include being a resident in a relevant neighborhood,
serving as a staff member in an organization, or taking some other functional role
in a neighborhood or organization.
Physical artifacts. Insightful into cultural features and technical operations.
Often too selective and not very available. Artifacts can be tools, technological
devices, art, or other physical evidence.
-About the three principles of data collectionfirst, use multiple sources of evidence because it
allows for triangulation (development of converging lines of inquiry). Second, create a case
study database because it allows for separate secondary analysis of data separate from any
reports made by the original investigator. A database should include notes, documents, tabular
materials (surveys, anything else quantitative), and narratives. Third, maintain a chain of
evidence. This means following the derivation of evidence from the initial research questions to
the ultimate case study conclusions. This improves the reliability of the information.

-Analyzing case study evidence. The author presents two general strategies for analysis. The
first is to rely on theoretical propositions. Using the original objectives and design of the case
study (especially the propositions which shaped the data collection plan), focus on the data
which is relevant and decide how to present it in a way that supports the propositions. This will
naturally force a proper analysis of the data. The author presents this example: [one example], a
study of intergovernmental relationships, followed the proposition that federal funds not only had
redistributive dollar effects but also created new organizational changes at the local level. The
basic propositionthe creation of a counterpart bureaucracy in the form of local planning
organizations, citizen action groups, and other new offices within a local government itself, but
all attuned to specific federal programswas traced in case studies of several cities. For each
city, the purpose of the case study was to show how the formation and modification in local
organizations occurred after changes in related federal programs and to show how these local
organizations acted on behalf of the federal programs even though they might have been
components of the local government.
-The second strategy for analysis is to develop a case description. A descriptive framework can
organize the case study and is especially useful when the case studys goal is a descriptive one.
It can replace the previously presented strategy when theoretical propositions are absent.
-Modes of analysis which are specific analytic techniques: pattern-matching, explanation-
building (similar to theory-development), time-series analysis (comparing trends of data points
taken over time), and repeated observations.
-Writing the case study report. Only good writers ought to attempt to perform case studies;
because the report is the most important part of the case study and it must be written by the
investigator(s), its silly for bad writers to do all the research and then find themselves unable to
properly publish their findings.
-A case study report must have a specific, identified audience. Case studies can be a significant
form of communication between specialists and nonspecialists, because they convey information
about general phenomena. A case study report need not be presented in written form; it can also
be an oral presentation or a set of pictures (Im not sure how this relates to the authors point
about necessarily being a good writer). A case study report can utilize various illustrative
structures for presenting data and conclusions. These include linear-analytic structures (standard
approachsubtopics involving the issue, review of relevant literature, methods used, findings
from data, conclusions and implications), comparative structures (repeats the same study two or
more times, comparing different descriptions or conceptions of the same case), chronological
structures (presentation of evidence in chronological order), theory-building structures, suspense
structures (inversion of the analytic approachanswer first and the explanation), and
unsequenced structures (best for descriptive case studies).
-Remember: an exemplary case study must be significant, complete, considerate of alternative
perspectives, well-supported by evidence, and composed in an engaging manner