case studies as research method

• Privacy Policy

Home » Case Study – Methods, Examples and Guide

Case Study – Methods, Examples and Guide

Table of Contents

A case study is a research method that involves an in-depth examination and analysis of a particular phenomenon or case, such as an individual, organization, community, event, or situation.

It is a qualitative research approach that aims to provide a detailed and comprehensive understanding of the case being studied. Case studies typically involve multiple sources of data, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts, which are analyzed using various techniques, such as content analysis, thematic analysis, and grounded theory. The findings of a case study are often used to develop theories, inform policy or practice, or generate new research questions.

Types of Case Study

Types and Methods of Case Study are as follows:

Single-Case Study

A single-case study is an in-depth analysis of a single case. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to understand a specific phenomenon in detail.

For Example , A researcher might conduct a single-case study on a particular individual to understand their experiences with a particular health condition or a specific organization to explore their management practices. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as content analysis or thematic analysis. The findings of a single-case study are often used to generate new research questions, develop theories, or inform policy or practice.

Multiple-Case Study

A multiple-case study involves the analysis of several cases that are similar in nature. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to identify similarities and differences between the cases.

For Example, a researcher might conduct a multiple-case study on several companies to explore the factors that contribute to their success or failure. The researcher collects data from each case, compares and contrasts the findings, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as comparative analysis or pattern-matching. The findings of a multiple-case study can be used to develop theories, inform policy or practice, or generate new research questions.

Exploratory Case Study

An exploratory case study is used to explore a new or understudied phenomenon. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to generate hypotheses or theories about the phenomenon.

For Example, a researcher might conduct an exploratory case study on a new technology to understand its potential impact on society. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as grounded theory or content analysis. The findings of an exploratory case study can be used to generate new research questions, develop theories, or inform policy or practice.

Descriptive Case Study

A descriptive case study is used to describe a particular phenomenon in detail. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to provide a comprehensive account of the phenomenon.

For Example, a researcher might conduct a descriptive case study on a particular community to understand its social and economic characteristics. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as content analysis or thematic analysis. The findings of a descriptive case study can be used to inform policy or practice or generate new research questions.

Instrumental Case Study

An instrumental case study is used to understand a particular phenomenon that is instrumental in achieving a particular goal. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to understand the role of the phenomenon in achieving the goal.

For Example, a researcher might conduct an instrumental case study on a particular policy to understand its impact on achieving a particular goal, such as reducing poverty. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as content analysis or thematic analysis. The findings of an instrumental case study can be used to inform policy or practice or generate new research questions.

Case Study Data Collection Methods

Here are some common data collection methods for case studies:

Interviews involve asking questions to individuals who have knowledge or experience relevant to the case study. Interviews can be structured (where the same questions are asked to all participants) or unstructured (where the interviewer follows up on the responses with further questions). Interviews can be conducted in person, over the phone, or through video conferencing.

Observations

Observations involve watching and recording the behavior and activities of individuals or groups relevant to the case study. Observations can be participant (where the researcher actively participates in the activities) or non-participant (where the researcher observes from a distance). Observations can be recorded using notes, audio or video recordings, or photographs.

Documents can be used as a source of information for case studies. Documents can include reports, memos, emails, letters, and other written materials related to the case study. Documents can be collected from the case study participants or from public sources.

Surveys involve asking a set of questions to a sample of individuals relevant to the case study. Surveys can be administered in person, over the phone, through mail or email, or online. Surveys can be used to gather information on attitudes, opinions, or behaviors related to the case study.

Artifacts are physical objects relevant to the case study. Artifacts can include tools, equipment, products, or other objects that provide insights into the case study phenomenon.

How to conduct Case Study Research

Conducting a case study research involves several steps that need to be followed to ensure the quality and rigor of the study. Here are the steps to conduct case study research:

• Define the research questions: The first step in conducting a case study research is to define the research questions. The research questions should be specific, measurable, and relevant to the case study phenomenon under investigation.
• Select the case: The next step is to select the case or cases to be studied. The case should be relevant to the research questions and should provide rich and diverse data that can be used to answer the research questions.
• Collect data: Data can be collected using various methods, such as interviews, observations, documents, surveys, and artifacts. The data collection method should be selected based on the research questions and the nature of the case study phenomenon.
• Analyze the data: The data collected from the case study should be analyzed using various techniques, such as content analysis, thematic analysis, or grounded theory. The analysis should be guided by the research questions and should aim to provide insights and conclusions relevant to the research questions.
• Draw conclusions: The conclusions drawn from the case study should be based on the data analysis and should be relevant to the research questions. The conclusions should be supported by evidence and should be clearly stated.
• Validate the findings: The findings of the case study should be validated by reviewing the data and the analysis with participants or other experts in the field. This helps to ensure the validity and reliability of the findings.
• Write the report: The final step is to write the report of the case study research. The report should provide a clear description of the case study phenomenon, the research questions, the data collection methods, the data analysis, the findings, and the conclusions. The report should be written in a clear and concise manner and should follow the guidelines for academic writing.

Examples of Case Study

Here are some examples of case study research:

• The Hawthorne Studies : Conducted between 1924 and 1932, the Hawthorne Studies were a series of case studies conducted by Elton Mayo and his colleagues to examine the impact of work environment on employee productivity. The studies were conducted at the Hawthorne Works plant of the Western Electric Company in Chicago and included interviews, observations, and experiments.
• The Stanford Prison Experiment: Conducted in 1971, the Stanford Prison Experiment was a case study conducted by Philip Zimbardo to examine the psychological effects of power and authority. The study involved simulating a prison environment and assigning participants to the role of guards or prisoners. The study was controversial due to the ethical issues it raised.
• The Challenger Disaster: The Challenger Disaster was a case study conducted to examine the causes of the Space Shuttle Challenger explosion in 1986. The study included interviews, observations, and analysis of data to identify the technical, organizational, and cultural factors that contributed to the disaster.
• The Enron Scandal: The Enron Scandal was a case study conducted to examine the causes of the Enron Corporation’s bankruptcy in 2001. The study included interviews, analysis of financial data, and review of documents to identify the accounting practices, corporate culture, and ethical issues that led to the company’s downfall.
• The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster : The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster was a case study conducted to examine the causes of the nuclear accident that occurred at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in Japan in 2011. The study included interviews, analysis of data, and review of documents to identify the technical, organizational, and cultural factors that contributed to the disaster.

Application of Case Study

Case studies have a wide range of applications across various fields and industries. Here are some examples:

Business and Management

Case studies are widely used in business and management to examine real-life situations and develop problem-solving skills. Case studies can help students and professionals to develop a deep understanding of business concepts, theories, and best practices.

Case studies are used in healthcare to examine patient care, treatment options, and outcomes. Case studies can help healthcare professionals to develop critical thinking skills, diagnose complex medical conditions, and develop effective treatment plans.

Case studies are used in education to examine teaching and learning practices. Case studies can help educators to develop effective teaching strategies, evaluate student progress, and identify areas for improvement.

Social Sciences

Case studies are widely used in social sciences to examine human behavior, social phenomena, and cultural practices. Case studies can help researchers to develop theories, test hypotheses, and gain insights into complex social issues.

Law and Ethics

Case studies are used in law and ethics to examine legal and ethical dilemmas. Case studies can help lawyers, policymakers, and ethical professionals to develop critical thinking skills, analyze complex cases, and make informed decisions.

Purpose of Case Study

The purpose of a case study is to provide a detailed analysis of a specific phenomenon, issue, or problem in its real-life context. A case study is a qualitative research method that involves the in-depth exploration and analysis of a particular case, which can be an individual, group, organization, event, or community.

The primary purpose of a case study is to generate a comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the case, including its history, context, and dynamics. Case studies can help researchers to identify and examine the underlying factors, processes, and mechanisms that contribute to the case and its outcomes. This can help to develop a more accurate and detailed understanding of the case, which can inform future research, practice, or policy.

Case studies can also serve other purposes, including:

• Illustrating a theory or concept: Case studies can be used to illustrate and explain theoretical concepts and frameworks, providing concrete examples of how they can be applied in real-life situations.
• Developing hypotheses: Case studies can help to generate hypotheses about the causal relationships between different factors and outcomes, which can be tested through further research.
• Providing insight into complex issues: Case studies can provide insights into complex and multifaceted issues, which may be difficult to understand through other research methods.
• Informing practice or policy: Case studies can be used to inform practice or policy by identifying best practices, lessons learned, or areas for improvement.

Advantages of Case Study Research

There are several advantages of case study research, including:

• In-depth exploration: Case study research allows for a detailed exploration and analysis of a specific phenomenon, issue, or problem in its real-life context. This can provide a comprehensive understanding of the case and its dynamics, which may not be possible through other research methods.
• Rich data: Case study research can generate rich and detailed data, including qualitative data such as interviews, observations, and documents. This can provide a nuanced understanding of the case and its complexity.
• Holistic perspective: Case study research allows for a holistic perspective of the case, taking into account the various factors, processes, and mechanisms that contribute to the case and its outcomes. This can help to develop a more accurate and comprehensive understanding of the case.
• Theory development: Case study research can help to develop and refine theories and concepts by providing empirical evidence and concrete examples of how they can be applied in real-life situations.
• Practical application: Case study research can inform practice or policy by identifying best practices, lessons learned, or areas for improvement.
• Contextualization: Case study research takes into account the specific context in which the case is situated, which can help to understand how the case is influenced by the social, cultural, and historical factors of its environment.

Limitations of Case Study Research

There are several limitations of case study research, including:

• Limited generalizability : Case studies are typically focused on a single case or a small number of cases, which limits the generalizability of the findings. The unique characteristics of the case may not be applicable to other contexts or populations, which may limit the external validity of the research.
• Biased sampling: Case studies may rely on purposive or convenience sampling, which can introduce bias into the sample selection process. This may limit the representativeness of the sample and the generalizability of the findings.
• Subjectivity: Case studies rely on the interpretation of the researcher, which can introduce subjectivity into the analysis. The researcher’s own biases, assumptions, and perspectives may influence the findings, which may limit the objectivity of the research.
• Limited control: Case studies are typically conducted in naturalistic settings, which limits the control that the researcher has over the environment and the variables being studied. This may limit the ability to establish causal relationships between variables.
• Time-consuming: Case studies can be time-consuming to conduct, as they typically involve a detailed exploration and analysis of a specific case. This may limit the feasibility of conducting multiple case studies or conducting case studies in a timely manner.
• Resource-intensive: Case studies may require significant resources, including time, funding, and expertise. This may limit the ability of researchers to conduct case studies in resource-constrained settings.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Descriptive Research Design – Types, Methods and...

Triangulation in Research – Types, Methods and...

Basic Research – Types, Methods and Examples

Quantitative Research – Methods, Types and...

Mixed Methods Research – Types & Analysis

Phenomenology – Methods, Examples and Guide

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• What Is a Case Study? | Definition, Examples & Methods

What Is a Case Study? | Definition, Examples & Methods

Published on May 8, 2019 by Shona McCombes . Revised on November 20, 2023.

A case study is a detailed study of a specific subject, such as a person, group, place, event, organization, or phenomenon. Case studies are commonly used in social, educational, clinical, and business research.

A case study research design usually involves qualitative methods , but quantitative methods are sometimes also used. Case studies are good for describing , comparing, evaluating and understanding different aspects of a research problem .

Table of contents

When to do a case study, step 1: select a case, step 2: build a theoretical framework, step 3: collect your data, step 4: describe and analyze the case, other interesting articles.

A case study is an appropriate research design when you want to gain concrete, contextual, in-depth knowledge about a specific real-world subject. It allows you to explore the key characteristics, meanings, and implications of the case.

Case studies are often a good choice in a thesis or dissertation . They keep your project focused and manageable when you don’t have the time or resources to do large-scale research.

You might use just one complex case study where you explore a single subject in depth, or conduct multiple case studies to compare and illuminate different aspects of your research problem.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Once you have developed your problem statement and research questions , you should be ready to choose the specific case that you want to focus on. A good case study should have the potential to:

• Provide new or unexpected insights into the subject
• Challenge or complicate existing assumptions and theories
• Propose practical courses of action to resolve a problem
• Open up new directions for future research

TipIf your research is more practical in nature and aims to simultaneously investigate an issue as you solve it, consider conducting action research instead.

Unlike quantitative or experimental research , a strong case study does not require a random or representative sample. In fact, case studies often deliberately focus on unusual, neglected, or outlying cases which may shed new light on the research problem.

Example of an outlying case studyIn the 1960s the town of Roseto, Pennsylvania was discovered to have extremely low rates of heart disease compared to the US average. It became an important case study for understanding previously neglected causes of heart disease.

However, you can also choose a more common or representative case to exemplify a particular category, experience or phenomenon.

Example of a representative case studyIn the 1920s, two sociologists used Muncie, Indiana as a case study of a typical American city that supposedly exemplified the changing culture of the US at the time.

While case studies focus more on concrete details than general theories, they should usually have some connection with theory in the field. This way the case study is not just an isolated description, but is integrated into existing knowledge about the topic. It might aim to:

• Exemplify a theory by showing how it explains the case under investigation
• Expand on a theory by uncovering new concepts and ideas that need to be incorporated
• Challenge a theory by exploring an outlier case that doesn’t fit with established assumptions

To ensure that your analysis of the case has a solid academic grounding, you should conduct a literature review of sources related to the topic and develop a theoretical framework . This means identifying key concepts and theories to guide your analysis and interpretation.

There are many different research methods you can use to collect data on your subject. Case studies tend to focus on qualitative data using methods such as interviews , observations , and analysis of primary and secondary sources (e.g., newspaper articles, photographs, official records). Sometimes a case study will also collect quantitative data.

Example of a mixed methods case studyFor a case study of a wind farm development in a rural area, you could collect quantitative data on employment rates and business revenue, collect qualitative data on local people’s perceptions and experiences, and analyze local and national media coverage of the development.

The aim is to gain as thorough an understanding as possible of the case and its context.

In writing up the case study, you need to bring together all the relevant aspects to give as complete a picture as possible of the subject.

How you report your findings depends on the type of research you are doing. Some case studies are structured like a standard scientific paper or thesis , with separate sections or chapters for the methods , results and discussion .

Others are written in a more narrative style, aiming to explore the case from various angles and analyze its meanings and implications (for example, by using textual analysis or discourse analysis ).

In all cases, though, make sure to give contextual details about the case, connect it back to the literature and theory, and discuss how it fits into wider patterns or debates.

If you want to know more about statistics , methodology , or research bias , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• Normal distribution
• Degrees of freedom
• Null hypothesis
• Discourse analysis
• Control groups
• Mixed methods research
• Non-probability sampling
• Quantitative research
• Ecological validity

Research bias

• Rosenthal effect
• Implicit bias
• Cognitive bias
• Selection bias
• Negativity bias
• Status quo bias

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, November 20). What Is a Case Study? | Definition, Examples & Methods. Scribbr. Retrieved August 30, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/case-study/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, primary vs. secondary sources | difference & examples, what is a theoretical framework | guide to organizing, what is action research | definition & examples, get unlimited documents corrected.

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

• Open access
• Published: 27 June 2011

The case study approach

• Sarah Crowe 1 ,
• Kathrin Cresswell 2 ,
• Ann Robertson 2 ,
• Guro Huby 3 ,
• Anthony Avery 1 &
• Aziz Sheikh 2  

BMC Medical Research Methodology volume  11 , Article number:  100 ( 2011 ) Cite this article

796k Accesses

1111 Citations

42 Altmetric

Metrics details

The case study approach allows in-depth, multi-faceted explorations of complex issues in their real-life settings. The value of the case study approach is well recognised in the fields of business, law and policy, but somewhat less so in health services research. Based on our experiences of conducting several health-related case studies, we reflect on the different types of case study design, the specific research questions this approach can help answer, the data sources that tend to be used, and the particular advantages and disadvantages of employing this methodological approach. The paper concludes with key pointers to aid those designing and appraising proposals for conducting case study research, and a checklist to help readers assess the quality of case study reports.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

The case study approach is particularly useful to employ when there is a need to obtain an in-depth appreciation of an issue, event or phenomenon of interest, in its natural real-life context. Our aim in writing this piece is to provide insights into when to consider employing this approach and an overview of key methodological considerations in relation to the design, planning, analysis, interpretation and reporting of case studies.

The illustrative 'grand round', 'case report' and 'case series' have a long tradition in clinical practice and research. Presenting detailed critiques, typically of one or more patients, aims to provide insights into aspects of the clinical case and, in doing so, illustrate broader lessons that may be learnt. In research, the conceptually-related case study approach can be used, for example, to describe in detail a patient's episode of care, explore professional attitudes to and experiences of a new policy initiative or service development or more generally to 'investigate contemporary phenomena within its real-life context' [ 1 ]. Based on our experiences of conducting a range of case studies, we reflect on when to consider using this approach, discuss the key steps involved and illustrate, with examples, some of the practical challenges of attaining an in-depth understanding of a 'case' as an integrated whole. In keeping with previously published work, we acknowledge the importance of theory to underpin the design, selection, conduct and interpretation of case studies[ 2 ]. In so doing, we make passing reference to the different epistemological approaches used in case study research by key theoreticians and methodologists in this field of enquiry.

This paper is structured around the following main questions: What is a case study? What are case studies used for? How are case studies conducted? What are the potential pitfalls and how can these be avoided? We draw in particular on four of our own recently published examples of case studies (see Tables 1 , 2 , 3 and 4 ) and those of others to illustrate our discussion[ 3 – 7 ].

What is a case study?

A case study is a research approach that is used to generate an in-depth, multi-faceted understanding of a complex issue in its real-life context. It is an established research design that is used extensively in a wide variety of disciplines, particularly in the social sciences. A case study can be defined in a variety of ways (Table 5 ), the central tenet being the need to explore an event or phenomenon in depth and in its natural context. It is for this reason sometimes referred to as a "naturalistic" design; this is in contrast to an "experimental" design (such as a randomised controlled trial) in which the investigator seeks to exert control over and manipulate the variable(s) of interest.

Stake's work has been particularly influential in defining the case study approach to scientific enquiry. He has helpfully characterised three main types of case study: intrinsic , instrumental and collective [ 8 ]. An intrinsic case study is typically undertaken to learn about a unique phenomenon. The researcher should define the uniqueness of the phenomenon, which distinguishes it from all others. In contrast, the instrumental case study uses a particular case (some of which may be better than others) to gain a broader appreciation of an issue or phenomenon. The collective case study involves studying multiple cases simultaneously or sequentially in an attempt to generate a still broader appreciation of a particular issue.

These are however not necessarily mutually exclusive categories. In the first of our examples (Table 1 ), we undertook an intrinsic case study to investigate the issue of recruitment of minority ethnic people into the specific context of asthma research studies, but it developed into a instrumental case study through seeking to understand the issue of recruitment of these marginalised populations more generally, generating a number of the findings that are potentially transferable to other disease contexts[ 3 ]. In contrast, the other three examples (see Tables 2 , 3 and 4 ) employed collective case study designs to study the introduction of workforce reconfiguration in primary care, the implementation of electronic health records into hospitals, and to understand the ways in which healthcare students learn about patient safety considerations[ 4 – 6 ]. Although our study focusing on the introduction of General Practitioners with Specialist Interests (Table 2 ) was explicitly collective in design (four contrasting primary care organisations were studied), is was also instrumental in that this particular professional group was studied as an exemplar of the more general phenomenon of workforce redesign[ 4 ].

What are case studies used for?

According to Yin, case studies can be used to explain, describe or explore events or phenomena in the everyday contexts in which they occur[ 1 ]. These can, for example, help to understand and explain causal links and pathways resulting from a new policy initiative or service development (see Tables 2 and 3 , for example)[ 1 ]. In contrast to experimental designs, which seek to test a specific hypothesis through deliberately manipulating the environment (like, for example, in a randomised controlled trial giving a new drug to randomly selected individuals and then comparing outcomes with controls),[ 9 ] the case study approach lends itself well to capturing information on more explanatory ' how ', 'what' and ' why ' questions, such as ' how is the intervention being implemented and received on the ground?'. The case study approach can offer additional insights into what gaps exist in its delivery or why one implementation strategy might be chosen over another. This in turn can help develop or refine theory, as shown in our study of the teaching of patient safety in undergraduate curricula (Table 4 )[ 6 , 10 ]. Key questions to consider when selecting the most appropriate study design are whether it is desirable or indeed possible to undertake a formal experimental investigation in which individuals and/or organisations are allocated to an intervention or control arm? Or whether the wish is to obtain a more naturalistic understanding of an issue? The former is ideally studied using a controlled experimental design, whereas the latter is more appropriately studied using a case study design.

Case studies may be approached in different ways depending on the epistemological standpoint of the researcher, that is, whether they take a critical (questioning one's own and others' assumptions), interpretivist (trying to understand individual and shared social meanings) or positivist approach (orientating towards the criteria of natural sciences, such as focusing on generalisability considerations) (Table 6 ). Whilst such a schema can be conceptually helpful, it may be appropriate to draw on more than one approach in any case study, particularly in the context of conducting health services research. Doolin has, for example, noted that in the context of undertaking interpretative case studies, researchers can usefully draw on a critical, reflective perspective which seeks to take into account the wider social and political environment that has shaped the case[ 11 ].

How are case studies conducted?

Here, we focus on the main stages of research activity when planning and undertaking a case study; the crucial stages are: defining the case; selecting the case(s); collecting and analysing the data; interpreting data; and reporting the findings.

Defining the case

Carefully formulated research question(s), informed by the existing literature and a prior appreciation of the theoretical issues and setting(s), are all important in appropriately and succinctly defining the case[ 8 , 12 ]. Crucially, each case should have a pre-defined boundary which clarifies the nature and time period covered by the case study (i.e. its scope, beginning and end), the relevant social group, organisation or geographical area of interest to the investigator, the types of evidence to be collected, and the priorities for data collection and analysis (see Table 7 )[ 1 ]. A theory driven approach to defining the case may help generate knowledge that is potentially transferable to a range of clinical contexts and behaviours; using theory is also likely to result in a more informed appreciation of, for example, how and why interventions have succeeded or failed[ 13 ].

For example, in our evaluation of the introduction of electronic health records in English hospitals (Table 3 ), we defined our cases as the NHS Trusts that were receiving the new technology[ 5 ]. Our focus was on how the technology was being implemented. However, if the primary research interest had been on the social and organisational dimensions of implementation, we might have defined our case differently as a grouping of healthcare professionals (e.g. doctors and/or nurses). The precise beginning and end of the case may however prove difficult to define. Pursuing this same example, when does the process of implementation and adoption of an electronic health record system really begin or end? Such judgements will inevitably be influenced by a range of factors, including the research question, theory of interest, the scope and richness of the gathered data and the resources available to the research team.

Selecting the case(s)

The decision on how to select the case(s) to study is a very important one that merits some reflection. In an intrinsic case study, the case is selected on its own merits[ 8 ]. The case is selected not because it is representative of other cases, but because of its uniqueness, which is of genuine interest to the researchers. This was, for example, the case in our study of the recruitment of minority ethnic participants into asthma research (Table 1 ) as our earlier work had demonstrated the marginalisation of minority ethnic people with asthma, despite evidence of disproportionate asthma morbidity[ 14 , 15 ]. In another example of an intrinsic case study, Hellstrom et al.[ 16 ] studied an elderly married couple living with dementia to explore how dementia had impacted on their understanding of home, their everyday life and their relationships.

For an instrumental case study, selecting a "typical" case can work well[ 8 ]. In contrast to the intrinsic case study, the particular case which is chosen is of less importance than selecting a case that allows the researcher to investigate an issue or phenomenon. For example, in order to gain an understanding of doctors' responses to health policy initiatives, Som undertook an instrumental case study interviewing clinicians who had a range of responsibilities for clinical governance in one NHS acute hospital trust[ 17 ]. Sampling a "deviant" or "atypical" case may however prove even more informative, potentially enabling the researcher to identify causal processes, generate hypotheses and develop theory.

In collective or multiple case studies, a number of cases are carefully selected. This offers the advantage of allowing comparisons to be made across several cases and/or replication. Choosing a "typical" case may enable the findings to be generalised to theory (i.e. analytical generalisation) or to test theory by replicating the findings in a second or even a third case (i.e. replication logic)[ 1 ]. Yin suggests two or three literal replications (i.e. predicting similar results) if the theory is straightforward and five or more if the theory is more subtle. However, critics might argue that selecting 'cases' in this way is insufficiently reflexive and ill-suited to the complexities of contemporary healthcare organisations.

The selected case study site(s) should allow the research team access to the group of individuals, the organisation, the processes or whatever else constitutes the chosen unit of analysis for the study. Access is therefore a central consideration; the researcher needs to come to know the case study site(s) well and to work cooperatively with them. Selected cases need to be not only interesting but also hospitable to the inquiry [ 8 ] if they are to be informative and answer the research question(s). Case study sites may also be pre-selected for the researcher, with decisions being influenced by key stakeholders. For example, our selection of case study sites in the evaluation of the implementation and adoption of electronic health record systems (see Table 3 ) was heavily influenced by NHS Connecting for Health, the government agency that was responsible for overseeing the National Programme for Information Technology (NPfIT)[ 5 ]. This prominent stakeholder had already selected the NHS sites (through a competitive bidding process) to be early adopters of the electronic health record systems and had negotiated contracts that detailed the deployment timelines.

It is also important to consider in advance the likely burden and risks associated with participation for those who (or the site(s) which) comprise the case study. Of particular importance is the obligation for the researcher to think through the ethical implications of the study (e.g. the risk of inadvertently breaching anonymity or confidentiality) and to ensure that potential participants/participating sites are provided with sufficient information to make an informed choice about joining the study. The outcome of providing this information might be that the emotive burden associated with participation, or the organisational disruption associated with supporting the fieldwork, is considered so high that the individuals or sites decide against participation.

In our example of evaluating implementations of electronic health record systems, given the restricted number of early adopter sites available to us, we sought purposively to select a diverse range of implementation cases among those that were available[ 5 ]. We chose a mixture of teaching, non-teaching and Foundation Trust hospitals, and examples of each of the three electronic health record systems procured centrally by the NPfIT. At one recruited site, it quickly became apparent that access was problematic because of competing demands on that organisation. Recognising the importance of full access and co-operative working for generating rich data, the research team decided not to pursue work at that site and instead to focus on other recruited sites.

Collecting the data

In order to develop a thorough understanding of the case, the case study approach usually involves the collection of multiple sources of evidence, using a range of quantitative (e.g. questionnaires, audits and analysis of routinely collected healthcare data) and more commonly qualitative techniques (e.g. interviews, focus groups and observations). The use of multiple sources of data (data triangulation) has been advocated as a way of increasing the internal validity of a study (i.e. the extent to which the method is appropriate to answer the research question)[ 8 , 18 – 21 ]. An underlying assumption is that data collected in different ways should lead to similar conclusions, and approaching the same issue from different angles can help develop a holistic picture of the phenomenon (Table 2 )[ 4 ].

Brazier and colleagues used a mixed-methods case study approach to investigate the impact of a cancer care programme[ 22 ]. Here, quantitative measures were collected with questionnaires before, and five months after, the start of the intervention which did not yield any statistically significant results. Qualitative interviews with patients however helped provide an insight into potentially beneficial process-related aspects of the programme, such as greater, perceived patient involvement in care. The authors reported how this case study approach provided a number of contextual factors likely to influence the effectiveness of the intervention and which were not likely to have been obtained from quantitative methods alone.

In collective or multiple case studies, data collection needs to be flexible enough to allow a detailed description of each individual case to be developed (e.g. the nature of different cancer care programmes), before considering the emerging similarities and differences in cross-case comparisons (e.g. to explore why one programme is more effective than another). It is important that data sources from different cases are, where possible, broadly comparable for this purpose even though they may vary in nature and depth.

Analysing, interpreting and reporting case studies

Making sense and offering a coherent interpretation of the typically disparate sources of data (whether qualitative alone or together with quantitative) is far from straightforward. Repeated reviewing and sorting of the voluminous and detail-rich data are integral to the process of analysis. In collective case studies, it is helpful to analyse data relating to the individual component cases first, before making comparisons across cases. Attention needs to be paid to variations within each case and, where relevant, the relationship between different causes, effects and outcomes[ 23 ]. Data will need to be organised and coded to allow the key issues, both derived from the literature and emerging from the dataset, to be easily retrieved at a later stage. An initial coding frame can help capture these issues and can be applied systematically to the whole dataset with the aid of a qualitative data analysis software package.

The Framework approach is a practical approach, comprising of five stages (familiarisation; identifying a thematic framework; indexing; charting; mapping and interpretation) , to managing and analysing large datasets particularly if time is limited, as was the case in our study of recruitment of South Asians into asthma research (Table 1 )[ 3 , 24 ]. Theoretical frameworks may also play an important role in integrating different sources of data and examining emerging themes. For example, we drew on a socio-technical framework to help explain the connections between different elements - technology; people; and the organisational settings within which they worked - in our study of the introduction of electronic health record systems (Table 3 )[ 5 ]. Our study of patient safety in undergraduate curricula drew on an evaluation-based approach to design and analysis, which emphasised the importance of the academic, organisational and practice contexts through which students learn (Table 4 )[ 6 ].

Case study findings can have implications both for theory development and theory testing. They may establish, strengthen or weaken historical explanations of a case and, in certain circumstances, allow theoretical (as opposed to statistical) generalisation beyond the particular cases studied[ 12 ]. These theoretical lenses should not, however, constitute a strait-jacket and the cases should not be "forced to fit" the particular theoretical framework that is being employed.

When reporting findings, it is important to provide the reader with enough contextual information to understand the processes that were followed and how the conclusions were reached. In a collective case study, researchers may choose to present the findings from individual cases separately before amalgamating across cases. Care must be taken to ensure the anonymity of both case sites and individual participants (if agreed in advance) by allocating appropriate codes or withholding descriptors. In the example given in Table 3 , we decided against providing detailed information on the NHS sites and individual participants in order to avoid the risk of inadvertent disclosure of identities[ 5 , 25 ].

What are the potential pitfalls and how can these be avoided?

The case study approach is, as with all research, not without its limitations. When investigating the formal and informal ways undergraduate students learn about patient safety (Table 4 ), for example, we rapidly accumulated a large quantity of data. The volume of data, together with the time restrictions in place, impacted on the depth of analysis that was possible within the available resources. This highlights a more general point of the importance of avoiding the temptation to collect as much data as possible; adequate time also needs to be set aside for data analysis and interpretation of what are often highly complex datasets.

Case study research has sometimes been criticised for lacking scientific rigour and providing little basis for generalisation (i.e. producing findings that may be transferable to other settings)[ 1 ]. There are several ways to address these concerns, including: the use of theoretical sampling (i.e. drawing on a particular conceptual framework); respondent validation (i.e. participants checking emerging findings and the researcher's interpretation, and providing an opinion as to whether they feel these are accurate); and transparency throughout the research process (see Table 8 )[ 8 , 18 – 21 , 23 , 26 ]. Transparency can be achieved by describing in detail the steps involved in case selection, data collection, the reasons for the particular methods chosen, and the researcher's background and level of involvement (i.e. being explicit about how the researcher has influenced data collection and interpretation). Seeking potential, alternative explanations, and being explicit about how interpretations and conclusions were reached, help readers to judge the trustworthiness of the case study report. Stake provides a critique checklist for a case study report (Table 9 )[ 8 ].

Conclusions

The case study approach allows, amongst other things, critical events, interventions, policy developments and programme-based service reforms to be studied in detail in a real-life context. It should therefore be considered when an experimental design is either inappropriate to answer the research questions posed or impossible to undertake. Considering the frequency with which implementations of innovations are now taking place in healthcare settings and how well the case study approach lends itself to in-depth, complex health service research, we believe this approach should be more widely considered by researchers. Though inherently challenging, the research case study can, if carefully conceptualised and thoughtfully undertaken and reported, yield powerful insights into many important aspects of health and healthcare delivery.

Yin RK: Case study research, design and method. 2009, London: Sage Publications Ltd., 4

Google Scholar  

Keen J, Packwood T: Qualitative research; case study evaluation. BMJ. 1995, 311: 444-446.

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Sheikh A, Halani L, Bhopal R, Netuveli G, Partridge M, Car J, et al: Facilitating the Recruitment of Minority Ethnic People into Research: Qualitative Case Study of South Asians and Asthma. PLoS Med. 2009, 6 (10): 1-11.

Article   Google Scholar  

Pinnock H, Huby G, Powell A, Kielmann T, Price D, Williams S, et al: The process of planning, development and implementation of a General Practitioner with a Special Interest service in Primary Care Organisations in England and Wales: a comparative prospective case study. Report for the National Co-ordinating Centre for NHS Service Delivery and Organisation R&D (NCCSDO). 2008, [ http://www.sdo.nihr.ac.uk/files/project/99-final-report.pdf ]

Robertson A, Cresswell K, Takian A, Petrakaki D, Crowe S, Cornford T, et al: Prospective evaluation of the implementation and adoption of NHS Connecting for Health's national electronic health record in secondary care in England: interim findings. BMJ. 2010, 41: c4564-

Pearson P, Steven A, Howe A, Sheikh A, Ashcroft D, Smith P, the Patient Safety Education Study Group: Learning about patient safety: organisational context and culture in the education of healthcare professionals. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2010, 15: 4-10. 10.1258/jhsrp.2009.009052.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

van Harten WH, Casparie TF, Fisscher OA: The evaluation of the introduction of a quality management system: a process-oriented case study in a large rehabilitation hospital. Health Policy. 2002, 60 (1): 17-37. 10.1016/S0168-8510(01)00187-7.

Stake RE: The art of case study research. 1995, London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Sheikh A, Smeeth L, Ashcroft R: Randomised controlled trials in primary care: scope and application. Br J Gen Pract. 2002, 52 (482): 746-51.

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

King G, Keohane R, Verba S: Designing Social Inquiry. 1996, Princeton: Princeton University Press

Doolin B: Information technology as disciplinary technology: being critical in interpretative research on information systems. Journal of Information Technology. 1998, 13: 301-311. 10.1057/jit.1998.8.

George AL, Bennett A: Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. 2005, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Eccles M, the Improved Clinical Effectiveness through Behavioural Research Group (ICEBeRG): Designing theoretically-informed implementation interventions. Implementation Science. 2006, 1: 1-8. 10.1186/1748-5908-1-1.

Article   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Netuveli G, Hurwitz B, Levy M, Fletcher M, Barnes G, Durham SR, Sheikh A: Ethnic variations in UK asthma frequency, morbidity, and health-service use: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2005, 365 (9456): 312-7.

Sheikh A, Panesar SS, Lasserson T, Netuveli G: Recruitment of ethnic minorities to asthma studies. Thorax. 2004, 59 (7): 634-

CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Hellström I, Nolan M, Lundh U: 'We do things together': A case study of 'couplehood' in dementia. Dementia. 2005, 4: 7-22. 10.1177/1471301205049188.

Som CV: Nothing seems to have changed, nothing seems to be changing and perhaps nothing will change in the NHS: doctors' response to clinical governance. International Journal of Public Sector Management. 2005, 18: 463-477. 10.1108/09513550510608903.

Lincoln Y, Guba E: Naturalistic inquiry. 1985, Newbury Park: Sage Publications

Barbour RS: Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog?. BMJ. 2001, 322: 1115-1117. 10.1136/bmj.322.7294.1115.

Mays N, Pope C: Qualitative research in health care: Assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ. 2000, 320: 50-52. 10.1136/bmj.320.7226.50.

Mason J: Qualitative researching. 2002, London: Sage

Brazier A, Cooke K, Moravan V: Using Mixed Methods for Evaluating an Integrative Approach to Cancer Care: A Case Study. Integr Cancer Ther. 2008, 7: 5-17. 10.1177/1534735407313395.

Miles MB, Huberman M: Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. 1994, CA: Sage Publications Inc., 2

Pope C, Ziebland S, Mays N: Analysing qualitative data. Qualitative research in health care. BMJ. 2000, 320: 114-116. 10.1136/bmj.320.7227.114.

Cresswell KM, Worth A, Sheikh A: Actor-Network Theory and its role in understanding the implementation of information technology developments in healthcare. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2010, 10 (1): 67-10.1186/1472-6947-10-67.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Malterud K: Qualitative research: standards, challenges, and guidelines. Lancet. 2001, 358: 483-488. 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)05627-6.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Yin R: Case study research: design and methods. 1994, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing, 2

Yin R: Enhancing the quality of case studies in health services research. Health Serv Res. 1999, 34: 1209-1224.

Green J, Thorogood N: Qualitative methods for health research. 2009, Los Angeles: Sage, 2

Howcroft D, Trauth E: Handbook of Critical Information Systems Research, Theory and Application. 2005, Cheltenham, UK: Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar

Book   Google Scholar  

Blakie N: Approaches to Social Enquiry. 1993, Cambridge: Polity Press

Doolin B: Power and resistance in the implementation of a medical management information system. Info Systems J. 2004, 14: 343-362. 10.1111/j.1365-2575.2004.00176.x.

Bloomfield BP, Best A: Management consultants: systems development, power and the translation of problems. Sociological Review. 1992, 40: 533-560.

Shanks G, Parr A: Positivist, single case study research in information systems: A critical analysis. Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Systems. 2003, Naples

Pre-publication history

The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2288/11/100/prepub

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the participants and colleagues who contributed to the individual case studies that we have drawn on. This work received no direct funding, but it has been informed by projects funded by Asthma UK, the NHS Service Delivery Organisation, NHS Connecting for Health Evaluation Programme, and Patient Safety Research Portfolio. We would also like to thank the expert reviewers for their insightful and constructive feedback. Our thanks are also due to Dr. Allison Worth who commented on an earlier draft of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Division of Primary Care, The University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

Sarah Crowe & Anthony Avery

Centre for Population Health Sciences, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

Kathrin Cresswell, Ann Robertson & Aziz Sheikh

School of Health in Social Science, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarah Crowe .

Additional information

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors' contributions

AS conceived this article. SC, KC and AR wrote this paper with GH, AA and AS all commenting on various drafts. SC and AS are guarantors.

Rights and permissions

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Crowe, S., Cresswell, K., Robertson, A. et al. The case study approach. BMC Med Res Methodol 11 , 100 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-100

Download citation

Received : 29 November 2010

Accepted : 27 June 2011

Published : 27 June 2011

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-100

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Case Study Approach
• Electronic Health Record System
• Case Study Design
• Case Study Site
• Case Study Report

BMC Medical Research Methodology

ISSN: 1471-2288

• General enquiries: [email protected]

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

What is a Case Study in Research? Definition, Methods, and Examples

Case study methodology offers researchers an exciting opportunity to explore intricate phenomena within specific contexts using a wide range of data sources and collection methods. It is highly pertinent in health and social sciences, environmental studies, social work, education, and business studies. Its diverse applications, such as advancing theory, program evaluation, and intervention development, make it an invaluable tool for driving meaningful research and fostering positive change.[ 1]  

Table of Contents

What is a Case Study?  

A case study method involves a detailed examination of a single subject, such as an individual, group, organization, event, or community, to explore and understand complex issues in real-life contexts. By focusing on one specific case, researchers can gain a deep understanding of the factors and dynamics at play, understanding their complex relationships, which might be missed in broader, more quantitative studies.  

When to do a Case Study?  

A case study design is useful when you want to explore a phenomenon in-depth and in its natural context. Here are some examples of when to use a case study :[ 2]  

• Exploratory Research: When you want to explore a new topic or phenomenon, a case study can help you understand the subject deeply. For example , a researcher studying a newly discovered plant species might use a case study to document its characteristics and behavior.  
• Descriptive Research: If you want to describe a complex phenomenon or process, a case study can provide a detailed and comprehensive description. For instance, a case study design   could describe the experiences of a group of individuals living with a rare disease.  
• Explanatory Research: When you want to understand why a particular phenomenon occurs, a case study can help you identify causal relationships. A case study design could investigate the reasons behind the success or failure of a particular business strategy.  
• Theory Building: Case studies can also be used to develop or refine theories. By systematically analyzing a series of cases, researchers can identify patterns and relationships that can contribute to developing new theories or refining existing ones.  
• Critical Instance: Sometimes, a single case can be used to study a rare or unusual phenomenon, but it is important for theoretical or practical reasons. For example , the case of Phineas Gage, a man who survived a severe brain injury, has been widely studied to understand the relationship between the brain and behavior.  
• Comparative Analysis: Case studies can also compare different cases or contexts. A case study example involves comparing the implementation of a particular policy in different countries to understand its effectiveness and identifying best practices.  

How to Create a Case Study – Step by Step  

Step 1: select a case  .

Careful case selection ensures relevance, insight, and meaningful contribution to existing knowledge in your field. Here’s how you can choose a case study design :[ 3]  

• Define Your Objectives: Clarify the purpose of your case study and what you hope to achieve. Do you want to provide new insights, challenge existing theories, propose solutions to a problem, or explore new research directions?  
• Consider Unusual or Outlying Cases: Focus on unusual, neglected, or outlying cases that can provide unique insights.  
• Choose a Representative Case: Alternatively, select a common or representative case to exemplify a particular category, experience, or phenomenon.   
• Avoid Bias: Ensure your selection process is unbiased using random or criteria-based selection.  
• Be Clear and Specific: Clearly define the boundaries of your study design , including the scope, timeframe, and key stakeholders.   
• Ethical Considerations: Consider ethical issues, such as confidentiality and informed consent.  

Step 2: Build a Theoretical Framework  

To ensure your case study has a solid academic foundation, it’s important to build a theoretical framework:   

• Conduct a Literature Review: Identify key concepts and theories relevant to your case study .  
• Establish Connections with Theory: Connect your case study with existing theories in the field.  
• Guide Your Analysis and Interpretation: Use your theoretical framework to guide your analysis, ensuring your findings are grounded in established theories and concepts.   

Step 3: Collect Your Data  

To conduct a comprehensive case study , you can use various research methods. These include interviews, observations, primary and secondary sources analysis, surveys, and a mixed methods approach. The aim is to gather rich and diverse data to enable a detailed analysis of your case study .  

Step 4: Describe and Analyze the Case  

How you report your findings will depend on the type of research you’re conducting. Here are two approaches:   

• Structured Approach: Follows a scientific paper format, making it easier for readers to follow your argument.  
• Narrative Approach: A more exploratory style aiming to analyze meanings and implications.  

Regardless of the approach you choose, it’s important to include the following elements in your case study :   

• Contextual Details: Provide background information about the case, including relevant historical, cultural, and social factors that may have influenced the outcome.  
• Literature and Theory: Connect your case study to existing literature and theory in the field. Discuss how your findings contribute to or challenge existing knowledge.  
• Wider Patterns or Debates: Consider how your case study fits into wider patterns or debates within the field. Discuss any implications your findings may have for future research or practice.  

What Are the Benefits of a Case Study   

Case studies offer a range of benefits , making them a powerful tool in research.  

1. In-Depth Analysis  

• Comprehensive Understanding: Case studies allow researchers to thoroughly explore a subject, understanding the complexities and nuances involved.  
• Rich Data: They offer rich qualitative and sometimes quantitative data, capturing the intricacies of real-life contexts.  

2. Contextual Insight  

• Real-World Application: Case studies provide insights into real-world applications, making the findings highly relevant and practical.  
• Context-Specific: They highlight how various factors interact within a specific context, offering a detailed picture of the situation.  

3. Flexibility  

• Methodological Diversity: Case studies can use various data collection methods, including interviews, observations, document analysis, and surveys.  
• Adaptability: Researchers can adapt the case study approach to fit the specific needs and circumstances of the research.  

4. Practical Solutions  

• Actionable Insights: The detailed findings from case studies can inform practical solutions and recommendations for practitioners and policymakers.  
• Problem-Solving: They help understand the root causes of problems and devise effective strategies to address them.  

5. Unique Cases  

• Rare Phenomena: Case studies are particularly valuable for studying rare or unique cases that other research methods may not capture.  
• Detailed Documentation: They document and preserve detailed information about specific instances that might otherwise be overlooked.  

What Are the Limitations of a Case Study   

While case studies offer valuable insights and a detailed understanding of complex issues, they have several limitations .  

1. Limited Generalizability  

• Specific Context: Case studies often focus on a single case or a small number of cases, which may limit the generalization of findings to broader populations or different contexts.  
• Unique Situations: The unique characteristics of the case may not be representative of other situations, reducing the applicability of the results.  

2. Subjectivity  

• Researcher Bias: The researcher’s perspectives and interpretations can influence the analysis and conclusions, potentially introducing bias.  
• Participant Bias: Participants’ responses and behaviors may be influenced by their awareness of being studied, known as the Hawthorne effect.  

3. Time-Consuming  

• Data Collection and Analysis: Gathering detailed, in-depth data requires significant time and effort, making case studies more time-consuming than other research methods.  
• Longitudinal Studies: If the case study observes changes over time, it can become even more prolonged.  

4. Resource Intensive  

• Financial and Human Resources: Conducting comprehensive case studies may require significant financial investment and human resources, including trained researchers and participant access.  
• Access to Data: Accessing relevant and reliable data sources can be challenging, particularly in sensitive or proprietary contexts.  

5. Replication Difficulties  

• Unique Contexts: A case study’s specific and detailed context makes it difficult to replicate the study exactly, limiting the ability to validate findings through repetition.  
• Variability: Differences in contexts, researchers, and methodologies can lead to variations in findings, complicating efforts to achieve consistent results.  

By acknowledging and addressing these limitations , researchers can enhance the rigor and reliability of their case study findings.  

Key Takeaways  

Case studies are valuable in research because they provide an in-depth, contextual analysis of a single subject, event, or organization. They allow researchers to explore complex issues in real-world settings, capturing detailed qualitative and quantitative data. This method is useful for generating insights, developing theories, and offering practical solutions to problems. They are versatile, applicable in diverse fields such as business, education, and health, and can complement other research methods by providing rich, contextual evidence. However, their findings may have limited generalizability due to the focus on a specific case.  

Frequently Asked Questions  

Q: What is a case study in research?  

A case study in research is an impactful tool for gaining a deep understanding of complex issues within their real-life context. It combines various data collection methods and provides rich, detailed insights that can inform theory development and practical applications.  

Q: What are the advantages of using case studies in research?  

Case studies are a powerful research method, offering advantages such as in-depth analysis, contextual insights, flexibility, rich data, and the ability to handle complex issues. They are particularly valuable for exploring new areas, generating hypotheses, and providing detailed, illustrative examples that can inform theory and practice.  

Q: Can case studies be used in quantitative research?  

While case studies are predominantly associated with qualitative research, they can effectively incorporate quantitative methods to provide a more comprehensive analysis. A mixed-methods approach leverages qualitative and quantitative research strengths, offering a powerful tool for exploring complex issues in a real-world context. For example , a new medical treatment case study can incorporate quantitative clinical outcomes (e.g., patient recovery rates and dosage levels) along with qualitative patient interviews.  

Q: What are the key components of a case study?  

A case study typically includes several key components:   

• Introductio n, which provides an overview and sets the context by presenting the problem statement and research objectives;  
• Literature review , which connects the study to existing theories and prior research;  
• Methodology , which details the case study design , data collection methods, and analysis techniques;   
• Findings , which present the data and results, including descriptions, patterns, and themes;   
• Discussion and conclusion , which interpret the findings, discuss their implications, and offer conclusions, practical applications, limitations, and suggestions for future research.  

Together, these components ensure a comprehensive, systematic, and insightful exploration of the case.  

References  

• de Vries, K. (2020). Case study methodology. In  Critical qualitative health research  (pp. 41-52). Routledge.  
• Fidel, R. (1984). The case study method: A case study.  Library and Information Science Research ,  6 (3), 273-288.  
• Thomas, G. (2021). How to do your case study.  How to do your case study , 1-320.  

Editage All Access is a subscription-based platform that unifies the best AI tools and services designed to speed up, simplify, and streamline every step of a researcher’s journey. The Editage All Access Pack is a one-of-a-kind subscription that unlocks full access to an AI writing assistant, literature recommender, journal finder, scientific illustration tool, and exclusive discounts on professional publication services from Editage.  

Based on 22+ years of experience in academia, Editage All Access empowers researchers to put their best research forward and move closer to success. Explore our top AI Tools pack, AI Tools + Publication Services pack, or Build Your Own Plan. Find everything a researcher needs to succeed, all in one place –  Get All Access now starting at just $14 a month !    

Related Posts

Back to School – Lock-in All Access Pack for a Year at the Best Price

Journal Turnaround Time: Researcher.Life and Scholarly Intelligence Join Hands to Empower Researchers with Publication Time Insights 

Case Study Research Method in Psychology

Saul McLeod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul McLeod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.

On This Page:

Case studies are in-depth investigations of a person, group, event, or community. Typically, data is gathered from various sources using several methods (e.g., observations & interviews).

The case study research method originated in clinical medicine (the case history, i.e., the patient’s personal history). In psychology, case studies are often confined to the study of a particular individual.

The information is mainly biographical and relates to events in the individual’s past (i.e., retrospective), as well as to significant events that are currently occurring in his or her everyday life.

The case study is not a research method, but researchers select methods of data collection and analysis that will generate material suitable for case studies.

Freud (1909a, 1909b) conducted very detailed investigations into the private lives of his patients in an attempt to both understand and help them overcome their illnesses.

This makes it clear that the case study is a method that should only be used by a psychologist, therapist, or psychiatrist, i.e., someone with a professional qualification.

There is an ethical issue of competence. Only someone qualified to diagnose and treat a person can conduct a formal case study relating to atypical (i.e., abnormal) behavior or atypical development.

 Famous Case Studies

• Anna O – One of the most famous case studies, documenting psychoanalyst Josef Breuer’s treatment of “Anna O” (real name Bertha Pappenheim) for hysteria in the late 1800s using early psychoanalytic theory.
• Little Hans – A child psychoanalysis case study published by Sigmund Freud in 1909 analyzing his five-year-old patient Herbert Graf’s house phobia as related to the Oedipus complex.
• Bruce/Brenda – Gender identity case of the boy (Bruce) whose botched circumcision led psychologist John Money to advise gender reassignment and raise him as a girl (Brenda) in the 1960s.
• Genie Wiley – Linguistics/psychological development case of the victim of extreme isolation abuse who was studied in 1970s California for effects of early language deprivation on acquiring speech later in life.
• Phineas Gage – One of the most famous neuropsychology case studies analyzes personality changes in railroad worker Phineas Gage after an 1848 brain injury involving a tamping iron piercing his skull.

Clinical Case Studies

• Studying the effectiveness of psychotherapy approaches with an individual patient
• Assessing and treating mental illnesses like depression, anxiety disorders, PTSD
• Neuropsychological cases investigating brain injuries or disorders

Child Psychology Case Studies

• Studying psychological development from birth through adolescence
• Cases of learning disabilities, autism spectrum disorders, ADHD
• Effects of trauma, abuse, deprivation on development

Types of Case Studies

• Explanatory case studies : Used to explore causation in order to find underlying principles. Helpful for doing qualitative analysis to explain presumed causal links.
• Exploratory case studies : Used to explore situations where an intervention being evaluated has no clear set of outcomes. It helps define questions and hypotheses for future research.
• Descriptive case studies : Describe an intervention or phenomenon and the real-life context in which it occurred. It is helpful for illustrating certain topics within an evaluation.
• Multiple-case studies : Used to explore differences between cases and replicate findings across cases. Helpful for comparing and contrasting specific cases.
• Intrinsic : Used to gain a better understanding of a particular case. Helpful for capturing the complexity of a single case.
• Collective : Used to explore a general phenomenon using multiple case studies. Helpful for jointly studying a group of cases in order to inquire into the phenomenon.

Where Do You Find Data for a Case Study?

There are several places to find data for a case study. The key is to gather data from multiple sources to get a complete picture of the case and corroborate facts or findings through triangulation of evidence. Most of this information is likely qualitative (i.e., verbal description rather than measurement), but the psychologist might also collect numerical data.

1. Primary sources

• Interviews – Interviewing key people related to the case to get their perspectives and insights. The interview is an extremely effective procedure for obtaining information about an individual, and it may be used to collect comments from the person’s friends, parents, employer, workmates, and others who have a good knowledge of the person, as well as to obtain facts from the person him or herself.
• Observations – Observing behaviors, interactions, processes, etc., related to the case as they unfold in real-time.
• Documents & Records – Reviewing private documents, diaries, public records, correspondence, meeting minutes, etc., relevant to the case.

2. Secondary sources

• News/Media – News coverage of events related to the case study.
• Academic articles – Journal articles, dissertations etc. that discuss the case.
• Government reports – Official data and records related to the case context.
• Books/films – Books, documentaries or films discussing the case.

3. Archival records

Searching historical archives, museum collections and databases to find relevant documents, visual/audio records related to the case history and context.

Public archives like newspapers, organizational records, photographic collections could all include potentially relevant pieces of information to shed light on attitudes, cultural perspectives, common practices and historical contexts related to psychology.

4. Organizational records

Organizational records offer the advantage of often having large datasets collected over time that can reveal or confirm psychological insights.

Of course, privacy and ethical concerns regarding confidential data must be navigated carefully.

However, with proper protocols, organizational records can provide invaluable context and empirical depth to qualitative case studies exploring the intersection of psychology and organizations.

• Organizational/industrial psychology research : Organizational records like employee surveys, turnover/retention data, policies, incident reports etc. may provide insight into topics like job satisfaction, workplace culture and dynamics, leadership issues, employee behaviors etc.
• Clinical psychology : Therapists/hospitals may grant access to anonymized medical records to study aspects like assessments, diagnoses, treatment plans etc. This could shed light on clinical practices.
• School psychology : Studies could utilize anonymized student records like test scores, grades, disciplinary issues, and counseling referrals to study child development, learning barriers, effectiveness of support programs, and more.

How do I Write a Case Study in Psychology?

Follow specified case study guidelines provided by a journal or your psychology tutor. General components of clinical case studies include: background, symptoms, assessments, diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes. Interpreting the information means the researcher decides what to include or leave out. A good case study should always clarify which information is the factual description and which is an inference or the researcher’s opinion.

1. Introduction

• Provide background on the case context and why it is of interest, presenting background information like demographics, relevant history, and presenting problem.
• Compare briefly to similar published cases if applicable. Clearly state the focus/importance of the case.

2. Case Presentation

• Describe the presenting problem in detail, including symptoms, duration,and impact on daily life.
• Include client demographics like age and gender, information about social relationships, and mental health history.
• Describe all physical, emotional, and/or sensory symptoms reported by the client.
• Use patient quotes to describe the initial complaint verbatim. Follow with full-sentence summaries of relevant history details gathered, including key components that led to a working diagnosis.
• Summarize clinical exam results, namely orthopedic/neurological tests, imaging, lab tests, etc. Note actual results rather than subjective conclusions. Provide images if clearly reproducible/anonymized.
• Clearly state the working diagnosis or clinical impression before transitioning to management.

3. Management and Outcome

• Indicate the total duration of care and number of treatments given over what timeframe. Use specific names/descriptions for any therapies/interventions applied.
• Present the results of the intervention,including any quantitative or qualitative data collected.
• For outcomes, utilize visual analog scales for pain, medication usage logs, etc., if possible. Include patient self-reports of improvement/worsening of symptoms. Note the reason for discharge/end of care.

4. Discussion

• Analyze the case, exploring contributing factors, limitations of the study, and connections to existing research.
• Analyze the effectiveness of the intervention,considering factors like participant adherence, limitations of the study, and potential alternative explanations for the results.
• Identify any questions raised in the case analysis and relate insights to established theories and current research if applicable. Avoid definitive claims about physiological explanations.
• Offer clinical implications, and suggest future research directions.

5. Additional Items

• Thank specific assistants for writing support only. No patient acknowledgments.
• References should directly support any key claims or quotes included.
• Use tables/figures/images only if substantially informative. Include permissions and legends/explanatory notes.
• Provides detailed (rich qualitative) information.
• Provides insight for further research.
• Permitting investigation of otherwise impractical (or unethical) situations.

Case studies allow a researcher to investigate a topic in far more detail than might be possible if they were trying to deal with a large number of research participants (nomothetic approach) with the aim of ‘averaging’.

Because of their in-depth, multi-sided approach, case studies often shed light on aspects of human thinking and behavior that would be unethical or impractical to study in other ways.

Research that only looks into the measurable aspects of human behavior is not likely to give us insights into the subjective dimension of experience, which is important to psychoanalytic and humanistic psychologists.

Case studies are often used in exploratory research. They can help us generate new ideas (that might be tested by other methods). They are an important way of illustrating theories and can help show how different aspects of a person’s life are related to each other.

The method is, therefore, important for psychologists who adopt a holistic point of view (i.e., humanistic psychologists ).

Limitations

• Lacking scientific rigor and providing little basis for generalization of results to the wider population.
• Researchers’ own subjective feelings may influence the case study (researcher bias).
• Difficult to replicate.
• Time-consuming and expensive.
• The volume of data, together with the time restrictions in place, impacted the depth of analysis that was possible within the available resources.

Because a case study deals with only one person/event/group, we can never be sure if the case study investigated is representative of the wider body of “similar” instances. This means the conclusions drawn from a particular case may not be transferable to other settings.

Because case studies are based on the analysis of qualitative (i.e., descriptive) data , a lot depends on the psychologist’s interpretation of the information she has acquired.

This means that there is a lot of scope for Anna O , and it could be that the subjective opinions of the psychologist intrude in the assessment of what the data means.

For example, Freud has been criticized for producing case studies in which the information was sometimes distorted to fit particular behavioral theories (e.g., Little Hans ).

This is also true of Money’s interpretation of the Bruce/Brenda case study (Diamond, 1997) when he ignored evidence that went against his theory.

Breuer, J., & Freud, S. (1895).  Studies on hysteria . Standard Edition 2: London.

Curtiss, S. (1981). Genie: The case of a modern wild child .

Diamond, M., & Sigmundson, K. (1997). Sex Reassignment at Birth: Long-term Review and Clinical Implications. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine , 151(3), 298-304

Freud, S. (1909a). Analysis of a phobia of a five year old boy. In The Pelican Freud Library (1977), Vol 8, Case Histories 1, pages 169-306

Freud, S. (1909b). Bemerkungen über einen Fall von Zwangsneurose (Der “Rattenmann”). Jb. psychoanal. psychopathol. Forsch ., I, p. 357-421; GW, VII, p. 379-463; Notes upon a case of obsessional neurosis, SE , 10: 151-318.

Harlow J. M. (1848). Passage of an iron rod through the head.  Boston Medical and Surgical Journal, 39 , 389–393.

Harlow, J. M. (1868).  Recovery from the Passage of an Iron Bar through the Head .  Publications of the Massachusetts Medical Society. 2  (3), 327-347.

Money, J., & Ehrhardt, A. A. (1972).  Man & Woman, Boy & Girl : The Differentiation and Dimorphism of Gender Identity from Conception to Maturity. Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Money, J., & Tucker, P. (1975). Sexual signatures: On being a man or a woman.

Further Information

• Case Study Approach
• Case Study Method
• Enhancing the Quality of Case Studies in Health Services Research
• “We do things together” A case study of “couplehood” in dementia
• Using mixed methods for evaluating an integrative approach to cancer care: a case study

Research Writing and Analysis

• NVivo Group and Study Sessions
• SPSS This link opens in a new window
• Statistical Analysis Group sessions
• Using Qualtrics
• Dissertation and Data Analysis Group Sessions
• Defense Schedule - Commons Calendar This link opens in a new window
• Research Process Flow Chart
• Research Alignment Chapter 1 This link opens in a new window
• Step 1: Seek Out Evidence
• Step 2: Explain
• Step 3: The Big Picture
• Step 4: Own It
• Step 5: Illustrate
• Annotated Bibliography
• Seminal Authors
• Systematic Reviews & Meta-Analyses
• How to Synthesize and Analyze
• Synthesis and Analysis Practice
• Synthesis and Analysis Group Sessions
• Problem Statement
• Purpose Statement
• Conceptual Framework
• Theoretical Framework
• Locating Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworks This link opens in a new window
• Quantitative Research Questions
• Qualitative Research Questions
• Trustworthiness of Qualitative Data
• Analysis and Coding Example- Qualitative Data
• Thematic Data Analysis in Qualitative Design
• Dissertation to Journal Article This link opens in a new window
• International Journal of Online Graduate Education (IJOGE) This link opens in a new window
• Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning (JRIT&L) This link opens in a new window

Writing a Case Study

What is a case study?

A Case study is: 

• An in-depth research design that primarily uses a qualitative methodology but sometimes​​ includes quantitative methodology.
• Used to examine an identifiable problem confirmed through research.
• Used to investigate an individual, group of people, organization, or event.
• Used to mostly answer "how" and "why" questions.

What are the different types of case studies?

Note: These are the primary case studies. As you continue to research and learn

about case studies you will begin to find a robust list of different types. 

Who are your case study participants?

What is triangulation ? 

Validity and credibility are an essential part of the case study. Therefore, the researcher should include triangulation to ensure trustworthiness while accurately reflecting what the researcher seeks to investigate.

How to write a Case Study?

When developing a case study, there are different ways you could present the information, but remember to include the five parts for your case study.

Was this resource helpful?

• << Previous: Thematic Data Analysis in Qualitative Design
• Next: Journal Article Reporting Standards (JARS) >>
• Last Updated: Aug 30, 2024 8:27 AM
• URL: https://resources.nu.edu/researchtools

The Case Study as Research Method: A Practical Handbook

Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management

ISSN : 1176-6093

Article publication date: 21 June 2011

Scapens, R.W. (2011), "The Case Study as Research Method: A Practical Handbook", Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management , Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 201-204. https://doi.org/10.1108/11766091111137582

Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2011, Emerald Group Publishing Limited

This book aims to provide case‐study researchers with a step‐by‐step practical guide to “help them conduct the study with the required degree of rigour” (p. xi).

It seeks to “demonstrate that the case study is indeed a scientific method” (p. 104) and to show “the usefulness of the case method as one tool in the researcher's methodological arsenal” (p. 105). The individual chapters cover the various stages in conducting case‐study research, and each chapter sets out a number of practical steps which have to be taken by the researcher. The following are the eight stages/chapters and, in brackets, the number of steps in each stages:

Assessing appropriateness and usefulness (4).

Ensuring accuracy of results (21).

Preparation (6).

Selecting cases (4).

Collecting data (7).

Analyzing data (4).

Interpreting data (3).

Reporting results (4).

It is particularly noticeable that ensuring accuracy of results has by far the largest number of number of steps – 21 steps compared to seven or fewer steps in the other stages. This reflects Gagnon's concern to demonstrate the scientific rigour of case‐study research. In the forward, he explains that the book draws on his experience in conducting his own PhD research, which was closely supervised by three professors, one of whom was inclined towards quantitative research. Consequently, his research was underpinned by the principles and philosophy of quantitative research. This is clearly reflected in the approach taken in this book, which seeks to show that case‐study research is just as rigorous and scientific as quantitative research, and it can produce an objective and accurate representation of the observed reality.

There is no discussion of the methodological issues relating to the use of case‐study research methods. This is acknowledged in the forward, although Gagnon refers to them as philosophical or epistemological issues (p. xii), as he tends to use the terms methodology and method interchangeably – as is common in quantitative research. Although he starts (step 1.1) by trying to distance case and other qualitative research from the work of positivists, arguing that society is socially constructed, he nevertheless sees social reality as objective and independent of the researcher. So for Gagnon, the aim of case research is to accurately reflect that reality. At various points in the book the notion of interpretation is used – evidence is interpreted and the (objective) case findings have to be interpreted.

So although there is a distancing from positivist research (p. 1), the approach taken in this book retains an objective view of the social reality which is being researched; a view which is rather different to the subjective view of reality taken by many interpretive case researchers. This distinction between an objective and a subjective view of the social reality being researched – and especially its use in contrasting positivist and interpretive research – has its origins the taxonomy of Burrell and Morgan (1979) . Although there have been various developments in the so‐called “objective‐subjective debate”, and recently some discussion in relation to management accounting research ( Kakkuri‐Knuuttila et al. , 2008 ; Ahrens, 2008 ), this debate is not mentioned in the book. Nevertheless, it is clear that Gagnon is firmly in the objective camp. In a recent paper, Johnson et al. (2006, p. 138) provide a more contemporary classification of the different types of qualitative research. In their terms, the approach taken in this book could be described as neo‐empiricist – an approach which they characterise as “qualitative positivists”.

The approach taken in this handbook leaves case studies open to the criticisms that they are a small sample, and consequently difficult to generalise, and to arguments that case studies are most appropriate for exploratory research which can subsequently be generalised though quantitative research. Gagnon explains that this was the approach he used after completing his thesis (p. xi). The handbook only seems to recognise two types of case studies, namely exploratory and raw empirical case studies – the latter being used where “the researcher is interested in a subject without having formed any preconceived ideas about it” (p. 15) – which has echoes of Glaser and Strauss (1967) . However, limiting case studies to these two types ignores other potential types; in particular, explanatory case studies which are where interpretive case‐study research can make important contributions ( Ryan et al. , 2002 ).

This limited approach to case studies comes through in the practical steps which are recommended in the handbook, and especially in the discussion of reliability and validity. The suggested steps seem to be designed to keep very close to the notions of reliability and validity used in quantitative research. There is no mention of the recent discussion of “validity” in interpretive accounting research, which emphasises the importance of authenticity and credibility and their implications for writing up qualitative and case‐study research ( Lukka and Modell, 2010 ). Although the final stage of Gagnon's handbook makes some very general comments about reporting the results, it does not mention, for example, Baxter and Chua's (2008) paper in QRAM which discusses the importance of demonstrating authenticity, credibility and transferability in writing qualitative research.

Despite Gagnon's emphasis on traditional notions of reliability and validity the handbook provides some useful practical advice for all case‐study researchers. For example, case‐study research needs a very good research design; case‐study researchers must work hard to gain access to and acceptance in the research settings; a clear strategy is needed for data collection; the case researcher should create field notes (in a field notebook, or otherwise) to record all the thoughts, ideas, observations, etc. that would not otherwise be collected; and the vast amount of data that case‐study research can generate needs to be carefully managed. Furthermore, because of what Gagnon calls the “risk of mortality” (p. 54) (i.e. the risk that access to a research site may be lost – for instance, if the organisation goes bankrupt) it is crucial for some additional site(s) to be selected at the outset to ensure that the planned research can be completed. This is what I call “insurance cases” when talking to my own PhD students. Interestingly, Gagnon recognises the ethical issues involved in doing case studies – something which is not always mentioned by the more objectivist type of case‐study researchers. He emphasises that it is crucial to honour confidentiality agreements, to ensure data are stored securely and that commitments are met and promises kept.

There is an interesting discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of using computer methods in analysing data (in stage 6). However, the discussion of coding appears to be heavily influenced by grounded theory, and is clearly concerned with producing an accurate reflection of an objective reality. In addition, Gagnon's depiction of case analysis is overly focussed on content analysis – possibly because it is a quantitative type of technique. There is no reference to the other approaches available to qualitative researchers. For example, there is no mention of the various visualisation techniques set out in Miles and Huberman (1994) .

To summarise, Gagnon's book is particularly useful for case‐study researchers who see the reality they are researching as objective and researcher independent. However, this is a sub‐set of case‐study researchers. Although some of the practical guidance offered is relevant for other types of case‐study researchers, those who see multiple realities in the social actors and/or recognise the subjectivity of the research process might have difficulty with some of the steps in this handbook. Gagnon's aim to show that the case study is a scientific method, gives the handbook a focus on traditional (quantitatively inspired) notions rigour and validity, and a tendency to ignore (or at least marginalise) other types of case study research. For example, the focus on exploratory cases, which need to be supplemented by broad based quantitative research, overlooks the real potential of case study research which lies in explanatory cases. Furthermore, Gagnon is rather worried about participant research, as the researcher may play a role which is “not consistent with scientific method” (p. 42), and which may introduce researcher bias and thereby damage “the impartiality of the study” (p. 53). Leaving aside the philosophical question about whether any social science research, including quantitative research, can be impartial, this stance could severely limit the potential of case‐study research and it would rule out both the early work on the sociology of mass production and the recent calls for interventionist research. Clearly, there could be a problem where a researcher is trying to sell consulting services, but there is a long tradition of social researchers working within organisations that they are studying. Furthermore, if interpretive research is to be relevant for practice, researchers may have to work with organisations to introduce new ideas and new ways of analysing problems. Gagnon would seem to want to avoid all such research – as it would not be “impartial”.

Consequently, although there is some good practical advice for case study researchers in this handbook, some of the recommendations have to be treated cautiously, as it is a book which sees case‐study research in a very specific way. As mentioned earlier, in the Forward Gagnon explicitly recognises that the book does not take a position on the methodological debates surrounding the use of case studies as a research method, and he says that “The reader should therefore use and judge this handbook with these considerations in mind” (p. xii). This is very good advice – caveat emptor .

Ahrens , T. ( 2008 ), “ A comment on Marja‐Liisa Kakkuri‐Knuuttila ”, Accounting, Organizations and Society , Vol. 33 Nos 2/3 , pp. 291 ‐ 7 , Kari Lukka and Jaakko Kuorikoski.

Baxter , J. and Chua , W.F. ( 2008 ), “ The field researcher as author‐writer ”, Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management , Vol. 5 No. 2 , pp. 101 ‐ 21 .

Burrell , G. and Morgan , G. ( 1979 ), Sociological Paradigms and Organizational Analysis , Heinneman , London .

Glaser , B.G. and Strauss , A.L. ( 1967 ), The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research , Aldine , New York, NY .

Johnson , P. , Buehring , A. , Cassell , C. and Symon , G. ( 2006 ), “ Evaluating qualitative management research: towards a contingent critieriology ”, International Journal of Management Reviews , Vol. 8 No. 3 , pp. 131 ‐ 56 .

Kakkuri‐Knuuttila , M.‐L. , Lukka , K. and Kuorikoski , J. ( 2008 ), “ Straddling between paradigms: a naturalistic philosophical case study on interpretive research in management accounting ”, Accounting, Organizations and Society , Vol. 33 Nos 2/3 , pp. 267 ‐ 91 .

Lukka , K. and Modell , S. ( 2010 ), “ Validation in interpretive management accounting research ”, Accounting, Organizations and Society , Vol. 35 , pp. 462 ‐ 77 .

Miles , M.B. and Huberman , A.M. ( 1994 ), Qualitative Data Analysis: A Source Book of New Methods , 2nd ed. , Sage , London .

Ryan , R.J. , Scapens , R.W. and Theobald , M. ( 2002 ), Research Methods and Methodology in Finance and Accounting , 2nd ed. , Thomson Learning , London .

Related articles

All feedback is valuable.

Please share your general feedback

Report an issue or find answers to frequently asked questions

Contact Customer Support

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Sage Choice
• PMC11334375

Methodologic and Data-Analysis Triangulation in Case Studies: A Scoping Review

Margarithe charlotte schlunegger.

1 Department of Health Professions, Applied Research & Development in Nursing, Bern University of Applied Sciences, Bern, Switzerland

2 Faculty of Health, School of Nursing Science, Witten/Herdecke University, Witten, Germany

Maya Zumstein-Shaha

Rebecca palm.

3 Department of Health Care Research, Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany

Associated Data

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-wjn-10.1177_01939459241263011 for Methodologic and Data-Analysis Triangulation in Case Studies: A Scoping Review by Margarithe Charlotte Schlunegger, Maya Zumstein-Shaha and Rebecca Palm in Western Journal of Nursing Research

We sought to explore the processes of methodologic and data-analysis triangulation in case studies using the example of research on nurse practitioners in primary health care.

Design and methods:

We conducted a scoping review within Arksey and O’Malley’s methodological framework, considering studies that defined a case study design and used 2 or more data sources, published in English or German before August 2023.

Data sources:

The databases searched were MEDLINE and CINAHL, supplemented with hand searching of relevant nursing journals. We also examined the reference list of all the included studies.

In total, 63 reports were assessed for eligibility. Ultimately, we included 8 articles. Five studies described within-method triangulation, whereas 3 provided information on between/across-method triangulation. No study reported within-method triangulation of 2 or more quantitative data-collection procedures. The data-collection procedures were interviews, observation, documentation/documents, service records, and questionnaires/assessments. The data-analysis triangulation involved various qualitative and quantitative methods of analysis. Details about comparing or contrasting results from different qualitative and mixed-methods data were lacking.

Conclusions:

Various processes for methodologic and data-analysis triangulation are described in this scoping review but lack detail, thus hampering standardization in case study research, potentially affecting research traceability. Triangulation is complicated by terminological confusion. To advance case study research in nursing, authors should reflect critically on the processes of triangulation and employ existing tools, like a protocol or mixed-methods matrix, for transparent reporting. The only existing reporting guideline should be complemented with directions on methodologic and data-analysis triangulation.

Case study research is defined as “an empirical method that investigates a contemporary phenomenon (the ‘case’) in depth and within its real-world context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context may not be clearly evident. A case study relies on multiple sources of evidence, with data needing to converge in a triangulating fashion.” 1 (p15) This design is described as a stand-alone research approach equivalent to grounded theory and can entail single and multiple cases. 1 , 2 However, case study research should not be confused with single clinical case reports. “Case reports are familiar ways of sharing events of intervening with single patients with previously unreported features.” 3 (p107) As a methodology, case study research encompasses substantially more complexity than a typical clinical case report. 1 , 3

A particular characteristic of case study research is the use of various data sources, such as quantitative data originating from questionnaires as well as qualitative data emerging from interviews, observations, or documents. Therefore, a case study always draws on multiple sources of evidence, and the data must converge in a triangulating manner. 1 When using multiple data sources, a case or cases can be examined more convincingly and accurately, compensating for the weaknesses of the respective data sources. 1 Another characteristic is the interaction of various perspectives. This involves comparing or contrasting perspectives of people with different points of view, eg, patients, staff, or leaders. 4 Through triangulation, case studies contribute to the completeness of the research on complex topics, such as role implementation in clinical practice. 1 , 5 Triangulation involves a combination of researchers from various disciplines, of theories, of methods, and/or of data sources. By creating connections between these sources (ie, investigator, theories, methods, data sources, and/or data analysis), a new understanding of the phenomenon under study can be obtained. 6 , 7

This scoping review focuses on methodologic and data-analysis triangulation because concrete procedures are missing, eg, in reporting guidelines. Methodologic triangulation has been called methods, mixed methods, or multimethods. 6 It can encompass within-method triangulation and between/across-method triangulation. 7 “Researchers using within-method triangulation use at least 2 data-collection procedures from the same design approach.” 6 (p254) Within-method triangulation is either qualitative or quantitative but not both. Therefore, within-method triangulation can also be considered data source triangulation. 8 In contrast, “researchers using between/across-method triangulation employ both qualitative and quantitative data-collection methods in the same study.” 6 (p254) Hence, methodologic approaches are combined as well as various data sources. For this scoping review, the term “methodologic triangulation” is maintained to denote between/across-method triangulation. “Data-analysis triangulation is the combination of 2 or more methods of analyzing data.” 6 (p254)

Although much has been published on case studies, there is little consensus on the quality of the various data sources, the most appropriate methods, or the procedures for conducting methodologic and data-analysis triangulation. 5 According to the EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) clearinghouse for reporting guidelines, one standard exists for organizational case studies. 9 Organizational case studies provide insights into organizational change in health care services. 9 Rodgers et al 9 pointed out that, although high-quality studies are being funded and published, they are sometimes poorly articulated and methodologically inadequate. In the reporting checklist by Rodgers et al, 9 a description of the data collection is included, but reporting directions on methodologic and data-analysis triangulation are missing. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the process of methodologic and data-analysis triangulation in case studies. Accordingly, we conducted a scoping review to elicit descriptions of and directions for triangulation methods and analysis, drawing on case studies of nurse practitioners (NPs) in primary health care as an example. Case studies are recommended to evaluate the implementation of new roles in (primary) health care, such as that of NPs. 1 , 5 Case studies on new role implementation can generate a unique and in-depth understanding of specific roles (individual), teams (smaller groups), family practices or similar institutions (organization), and social and political processes in health care systems. 1 , 10 The integration of NPs into health care systems is at different stages of progress around the world. 11 Therefore, studies are needed to evaluate this process.

The methodological framework by Arksey and O’Malley 12 guided this scoping review. We examined the current scientific literature on the use of methodologic and data-analysis triangulation in case studies on NPs in primary health care. The review process included the following stages: (1) establishing the research question; (2) identifying relevant studies; (3) selecting the studies for inclusion; (4) charting the data; (5) collating, summarizing, and reporting the results; and (6) consulting experts in the field. 12 Stage 6 was not performed due to a lack of financial resources. The reporting of the review followed the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Review) guideline by Tricco et al 13 (guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses [ Supplementary Table A ]). Scoping reviews are not eligible for registration in PROSPERO.

Stage 1: Establishing the Research Question

The aim of this scoping review was to examine the process of triangulating methods and analysis in case studies on NPs in primary health care to improve the reporting. We sought to answer the following question: How have methodologic and data-analysis triangulation been conducted in case studies on NPs in primary health care? To answer the research question, we examined the following elements of the selected studies: the research question, the study design, the case definition, the selected data sources, and the methodologic and data-analysis triangulation.

Stage 2: Identifying Relevant Studies

A systematic database search was performed in the MEDLINE (via PubMed) and CINAHL (via EBSCO) databases between July and September 2020 to identify relevant articles. The following terms were used as keyword search strategies: (“Advanced Practice Nursing” OR “nurse practitioners”) AND (“primary health care” OR “Primary Care Nursing”) AND (“case study” OR “case studies”). Searches were limited to English- and German-language articles. Hand searches were conducted in the journals Nursing Inquiry , BMJ Open , and BioMed Central ( BMC ). We also screened the reference lists of the studies included. The database search was updated in August 2023. The complete search strategy for all the databases is presented in Supplementary Table B .

Stage 3: Selecting the Studies

Inclusion and exclusion criteria.

We used the inclusion and exclusion criteria reported in Table 1 . We included studies of NPs who had at least a master’s degree in nursing according to the definition of the International Council of Nurses. 14 This scoping review considered studies that were conducted in primary health care practices in rural, urban, and suburban regions. We excluded reviews and study protocols in which no data collection had occurred. Articles were included without limitations on the time period or country of origin.

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria.

Screening process

After the search, we collated and uploaded all the identified records into EndNote v.X8 (Clarivate Analytics, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania) and removed any duplicates. Two independent reviewers (MCS and SA) screened the titles and abstracts for assessment in line with the inclusion criteria. They retrieved and assessed the full texts of the selected studies while applying the inclusion criteria. Any disagreements about the eligibility of studies were resolved by discussion or, if no consensus could be reached, by involving experienced researchers (MZ-S and RP).

Stages 4 and 5: Charting the Data and Collating, Summarizing, and Reporting the Results

The first reviewer (MCS) extracted data from the selected publications. For this purpose, an extraction tool developed by the authors was used. This tool comprised the following criteria: author(s), year of publication, country, research question, design, case definition, data sources, and methodologic and data-analysis triangulation. First, we extracted and summarized information about the case study design. Second, we narratively summarized the way in which the data and methodological triangulation were described. Finally, we summarized the information on within-case or cross-case analysis. This process was performed using Microsoft Excel. One reviewer (MCS) extracted data, whereas another reviewer (SA) cross-checked the data extraction, making suggestions for additions or edits. Any disagreements between the reviewers were resolved through discussion.

A total of 149 records were identified in 2 databases. We removed 20 duplicates and screened 129 reports by title and abstract. A total of 46 reports were assessed for eligibility. Through hand searches, we identified 117 additional records. Of these, we excluded 98 reports after title and abstract screening. A total of 17 reports were assessed for eligibility. From the 2 databases and the hand search, 63 reports were assessed for eligibility. Ultimately, we included 8 articles for data extraction. No further articles were included after the reference list screening of the included studies. A PRISMA flow diagram of the study selection and inclusion process is presented in Figure 1 . As shown in Tables 2 and ​ and3, 3 , the articles included in this scoping review were published between 2010 and 2022 in Canada (n = 3), the United States (n = 2), Australia (n = 2), and Scotland (n = 1).

PRISMA flow diagram.

Characteristics of Articles Included.

Overview of Within-Method, Between/Across-Method, and Data-Analysis Triangulation.

Research Question, Case Definition, and Case Study Design

The following sections describe the research question, case definition, and case study design. Case studies are most appropriate when asking “how” or “why” questions. 1 According to Yin, 1 how and why questions are explanatory and lead to the use of case studies, histories, and experiments as the preferred research methods. In 1 study from Canada, eg, the following research question was presented: “How and why did stakeholders participate in the system change process that led to the introduction of the first nurse practitioner-led Clinic in Ontario?” (p7) 19 Once the research question has been formulated, the case should be defined and, subsequently, the case study design chosen. 1 In typical case studies with mixed methods, the 2 types of data are gathered concurrently in a convergent design and the results merged to examine a case and/or compare multiple cases. 10

Research question

“How” or “why” questions were found in 4 studies. 16 , 17 , 19 , 22 Two studies additionally asked “what” questions. Three studies described an exploratory approach, and 1 study presented an explanatory approach. Of these 4 studies, 3 studies chose a qualitative approach 17 , 19 , 22 and 1 opted for mixed methods with a convergent design. 16

In the remaining studies, either the research questions were not clearly stated or no “how” or “why” questions were formulated. For example, “what” questions were found in 1 study. 21 No information was provided on exploratory, descriptive, and explanatory approaches. Schadewaldt et al 21 chose mixed methods with a convergent design.

Case definition and case study design

A total of 5 studies defined the case as an organizational unit. 17 , 18 - 20 , 22 Of the 8 articles, 4 reported multiple-case studies. 16 , 17 , 22 , 23 Another 2 publications involved single-case studies. 19 , 20 Moreover, 2 publications did not state the case study design explicitly.

Within-Method Triangulation

This section describes within-method triangulation, which involves employing at least 2 data-collection procedures within the same design approach. 6 , 7 This can also be called data source triangulation. 8 Next, we present the single data-collection procedures in detail. In 5 studies, information on within-method triangulation was found. 15 , 17 - 19 , 22 Studies describing a quantitative approach and the triangulation of 2 or more quantitative data-collection procedures could not be included in this scoping review.

Qualitative approach

Five studies used qualitative data-collection procedures. Two studies combined face-to-face interviews and documents. 15 , 19 One study mixed in-depth interviews with observations, 18 and 1 study combined face-to-face interviews and documentation. 22 One study contained face-to-face interviews, observations, and documentation. 17 The combination of different qualitative data-collection procedures was used to present the case context in an authentic and complex way, to elicit the perspectives of the participants, and to obtain a holistic description and explanation of the cases under study.

All 5 studies used qualitative interviews as the primary data-collection procedure. 15 , 17 - 19 , 22 Face-to-face, in-depth, and semi-structured interviews were conducted. The topics covered in the interviews included processes in the introduction of new care services and experiences of barriers and facilitators to collaborative work in general practices. Two studies did not specify the type of interviews conducted and did not report sample questions. 15 , 18

Observations

In 2 studies, qualitative observations were carried out. 17 , 18 During the observations, the physical design of the clinical patients’ rooms and office spaces was examined. 17 Hungerford et al 18 did not explain what information was collected during the observations. In both studies, the type of observation was not specified. Observations were generally recorded as field notes.

Public documents

In 3 studies, various qualitative public documents were studied. 15 , 19 , 22 These documents included role description, education curriculum, governance frameworks, websites, and newspapers with information about the implementation of the role and general practice. Only 1 study failed to specify the type of document and the collected data. 15

Electronic health records

In 1 study, qualitative documentation was investigated. 17 This included a review of dashboards (eg, provider productivity reports or provider quality dashboards in the electronic health record) and quality performance reports (eg, practice-wide or co-management team-wide performance reports).

Between/Across-Method Triangulation

This section describes the between/across methods, which involve employing both qualitative and quantitative data-collection procedures in the same study. 6 , 7 This procedure can also be denoted “methodologic triangulation.” 8 Subsequently, we present the individual data-collection procedures. In 3 studies, information on between/across triangulation was found. 16 , 20 , 21

Mixed methods

Three studies used qualitative and quantitative data-collection procedures. One study combined face-to-face interviews, documentation, and self-assessments. 16 One study employed semi-structured interviews, direct observation, documents, and service records, 20 and another study combined face-to-face interviews, non-participant observation, documents, and questionnaires. 23

All 3 studies used qualitative interviews as the primary data-collection procedure. 16 , 20 , 23 Face-to-face and semi-structured interviews were conducted. In the interviews, data were collected on the introduction of new care services and experiences of barriers to and facilitators of collaborative work in general practices.

Observation

In 2 studies, direct and non-participant qualitative observations were conducted. 20 , 23 During the observations, the interaction between health professionals or the organization and the clinical context was observed. Observations were generally recorded as field notes.

In 2 studies, various qualitative public documents were examined. 20 , 23 These documents included role description, newspapers, websites, and practice documents (eg, flyers). In the documents, information on the role implementation and role description of NPs was collected.

Individual journals

In 1 study, qualitative individual journals were studied. 16 These included reflective journals from NPs, who performed the role in primary health care.

Service records

Only 1 study involved quantitative service records. 20 These service records were obtained from the primary care practices and the respective health authorities. They were collected before and after the implementation of an NP role to identify changes in patients’ access to health care, the volume of patients served, and patients’ use of acute care services.

Questionnaires/Assessment

In 2 studies, quantitative questionnaires were used to gather information about the teams’ satisfaction with collaboration. 16 , 21 In 1 study, 3 validated scales were used. The scales measured experience, satisfaction, and belief in the benefits of collaboration. 21 Psychometric performance indicators of these scales were provided. However, the time points of data collection were not specified; similarly, whether the questionnaires were completed online or by hand was not mentioned. A competency self-assessment tool was used in another study. 16 The assessment comprised 70 items and included topics such as health promotion, protection, disease prevention and treatment, the NP-patient relationship, the teaching-coaching function, the professional role, managing and negotiating health care delivery systems, monitoring and ensuring the quality of health care practice, and cultural competence. Psychometric performance indicators were provided. The assessment was completed online with 2 measurement time points (pre self-assessment and post self-assessment).

Data-Analysis Triangulation

This section describes data-analysis triangulation, which involves the combination of 2 or more methods of analyzing data. 6 Subsequently, we present within-case analysis and cross-case analysis.

Mixed-methods analysis

Three studies combined qualitative and quantitative methods of analysis. 16 , 20 , 21 Two studies involved deductive and inductive qualitative analysis, and qualitative data were analyzed thematically. 20 , 21 One used deductive qualitative analysis. 16 The method of analysis was not specified in the studies. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics in 3 studies. 16 , 20 , 23 The descriptive statistics comprised the calculation of the mean, median, and frequencies.

Qualitative methods of analysis

Two studies combined deductive and inductive qualitative analysis, 19 , 22 and 2 studies only used deductive qualitative analysis. 15 , 18 Qualitative data were analyzed thematically in 1 study, 22 and data were treated with content analysis in the other. 19 The method of analysis was not specified in the 2 studies.

Within-case analysis

In 7 studies, a within-case analysis was performed. 15 - 20 , 22 Six studies used qualitative data for the within-case analysis, and 1 study employed qualitative and quantitative data. Data were analyzed separately, consecutively, or in parallel. The themes generated from qualitative data were compared and then summarized. The individual cases were presented mostly as a narrative description. Quantitative data were integrated into the qualitative description with tables and graphs. Qualitative and quantitative data were also presented as a narrative description.

Cross-case analyses

Of the multiple-case studies, 5 carried out cross-case analyses. 15 - 17 , 20 , 22 Three studies described the cross-case analysis using qualitative data. Two studies reported a combination of qualitative and quantitative data for the cross-case analysis. In each multiple-case study, the individual cases were contrasted to identify the differences and similarities between the cases. One study did not specify whether a within-case or a cross-case analysis was conducted. 23

Confirmation or contradiction of data

This section describes confirmation or contradiction through qualitative and quantitative data. 1 , 4 Qualitative and quantitative data were reported separately, with little connection between them. As a result, the conclusions on neither the comparisons nor the contradictions could be clearly determined.

Confirmation or contradiction among qualitative data

In 3 studies, the consistency of the results of different types of qualitative data was highlighted. 16 , 19 , 21 In particular, documentation and interviews or interviews and observations were contrasted:

• Confirmation between interviews and documentation: The data from these sources corroborated the existence of a common vision for an NP-led clinic. 19
• Confirmation among interviews and observation: NPs experienced pressure to find and maintain their position within the existing system. Nurse practitioners and general practitioners performed complete episodes of care, each without collaborative interaction. 21
• Contradiction among interviews and documentation: For example, interviewees mentioned that differentiating the scope of practice between NPs and physicians is difficult as there are too many areas of overlap. However, a clear description of the scope of practice for the 2 roles was provided. 21

Confirmation through a combination of qualitative and quantitative data

Both types of data showed that NPs and general practitioners wanted to have more time in common to discuss patient cases and engage in personal exchanges. 21 In addition, the qualitative and quantitative data confirmed the individual progression of NPs from less competent to more competent. 16 One study pointed out that qualitative and quantitative data obtained similar results for the cases. 20 For example, integrating NPs improved patient access by increasing appointment availability.

Contradiction through a combination of qualitative and quantitative data

Although questionnaire results indicated that NPs and general practitioners experienced high levels of collaboration and satisfaction with the collaborative relationship, the qualitative results drew a more ambivalent picture of NPs’ and general practitioners’ experiences with collaboration. 21

Research Question and Design

The studies included in this scoping review evidenced various research questions. The recommended formats (ie, how or why questions) were not applied consistently. Therefore, no case study design should be applied because the research question is the major guide for determining the research design. 2 Furthermore, case definitions and designs were applied variably. The lack of standardization is reflected in differences in the reporting of these case studies. Generally, case study research is viewed as allowing much more freedom and flexibility. 5 , 24 However, this flexibility and the lack of uniform specifications lead to confusion.

Methodologic Triangulation

Methodologic triangulation, as described in the literature, can be somewhat confusing as it can refer to either data-collection methods or research designs. 6 , 8 For example, methodologic triangulation can allude to qualitative and quantitative methods, indicating a paradigmatic connection. Methodologic triangulation can also point to qualitative and quantitative data-collection methods, analysis, and interpretation without specific philosophical stances. 6 , 8 Regarding “data-collection methods with no philosophical stances,” we would recommend using the wording “data source triangulation” instead. Thus, the demarcation between the method and the data-collection procedures will be clearer.

Within-Method and Between/Across-Method Triangulation

Yin 1 advocated the use of multiple sources of evidence so that a case or cases can be investigated more comprehensively and accurately. Most studies included multiple data-collection procedures. Five studies employed a variety of qualitative data-collection procedures, and 3 studies used qualitative and quantitative data-collection procedures (mixed methods). In contrast, no study contained 2 or more quantitative data-collection procedures. In particular, quantitative data-collection procedures—such as validated, reliable questionnaires, scales, or assessments—were not used exhaustively. The prerequisites for using multiple data-collection procedures are availability, the knowledge and skill of the researcher, and sufficient financial funds. 1 To meet these prerequisites, research teams consisting of members with different levels of training and experience are necessary. Multidisciplinary research teams need to be aware of the strengths and weaknesses of different data sources and collection procedures. 1

Qualitative methods of analysis and results

When using multiple data sources and analysis methods, it is necessary to present the results in a coherent manner. Although the importance of multiple data sources and analysis has been emphasized, 1 , 5 the description of triangulation has tended to be brief. Thus, traceability of the research process is not always ensured. The sparse description of the data-analysis triangulation procedure may be due to the limited number of words in publications or the complexity involved in merging the different data sources.

Only a few concrete recommendations regarding the operationalization of the data-analysis triangulation with the qualitative data process were found. 25 A total of 3 approaches have been proposed 25 : (1) the intuitive approach, in which researchers intuitively connect information from different data sources; (2) the procedural approach, in which each comparative or contrasting step in triangulation is documented to ensure transparency and replicability; and (3) the intersubjective approach, which necessitates a group of researchers agreeing on the steps in the triangulation process. For each case study, one of these 3 approaches needs to be selected, carefully carried out, and documented. Thus, in-depth examination of the data can take place. Farmer et al 25 concluded that most researchers take the intuitive approach; therefore, triangulation is not clearly articulated. This trend is also evident in our scoping review.

Mixed-methods analysis and results

Few studies in this scoping review used a combination of qualitative and quantitative analysis. However, creating a comprehensive stand-alone picture of a case from both qualitative and quantitative methods is challenging. Findings derived from different data types may not automatically coalesce into a coherent whole. 4 O’Cathain et al 26 described 3 techniques for combining the results of qualitative and quantitative methods: (1) developing a triangulation protocol; (2) following a thread by selecting a theme from 1 component and following it across the other components; and (3) developing a mixed-methods matrix.

The most detailed description of the conducting of triangulation is the triangulation protocol. The triangulation protocol takes place at the interpretation stage of the research process. 26 This protocol was developed for multiple qualitative data but can also be applied to a combination of qualitative and quantitative data. 25 , 26 It is possible to determine agreement, partial agreement, “silence,” or dissonance between the results of qualitative and quantitative data. The protocol is intended to bring together the various themes from the qualitative and quantitative results and identify overarching meta-themes. 25 , 26

The “following a thread” technique is used in the analysis stage of the research process. To begin, each data source is analyzed to identify the most important themes that need further investigation. Subsequently, the research team selects 1 theme from 1 data source and follows it up in the other data source, thereby creating a thread. The individual steps of this technique are not specified. 26 , 27

A mixed-methods matrix is used at the end of the analysis. 26 All the data collected on a defined case are examined together in 1 large matrix, paying attention to cases rather than variables or themes. In a mixed-methods matrix (eg, a table), the rows represent the cases for which both qualitative and quantitative data exist. The columns show the findings for each case. This technique allows the research team to look for congruency, surprises, and paradoxes among the findings as well as patterns across multiple cases. In our review, we identified only one of these 3 approaches in the study by Roots and MacDonald. 20 These authors mentioned that a causal network analysis was performed using a matrix. However, no further details were given, and reference was made to a later publication. We could not find this publication.

Case Studies in Nursing Research and Recommendations

Because it focused on the implementation of NPs in primary health care, the setting of this scoping review was narrow. However, triangulation is essential for research in this area. This type of research was found to provide a good basis for understanding methodologic and data-analysis triangulation. Despite the lack of traceability in the description of the data and methodological triangulation, we believe that case studies are an appropriate design for exploring new nursing roles in existing health care systems. This is evidenced by the fact that case study research is widely used in many social science disciplines as well as in professional practice. 1 To strengthen this research method and increase the traceability in the research process, we recommend using the reporting guideline and reporting checklist by Rodgers et al. 9 This reporting checklist needs to be complemented with methodologic and data-analysis triangulation. A procedural approach needs to be followed in which each comparative step of the triangulation is documented. 25 A triangulation protocol or a mixed-methods matrix can be used for this purpose. 26 If there is a word limit in a publication, the triangulation protocol or mixed-methods matrix needs to be identified. A schematic representation of methodologic and data-analysis triangulation in case studies can be found in Figure 2 .

Schematic representation of methodologic and data-analysis triangulation in case studies (own work).

Limitations

This study suffered from several limitations that must be acknowledged. Given the nature of scoping reviews, we did not analyze the evidence reported in the studies. However, 2 reviewers independently reviewed all the full-text reports with respect to the inclusion criteria. The focus on the primary care setting with NPs (master’s degree) was very narrow, and only a few studies qualified. Thus, possible important methodological aspects that would have contributed to answering the questions were omitted. Studies describing the triangulation of 2 or more quantitative data-collection procedures could not be included in this scoping review due to the inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Conclusions

Given the various processes described for methodologic and data-analysis triangulation, we can conclude that triangulation in case studies is poorly standardized. Consequently, the traceability of the research process is not always given. Triangulation is complicated by the confusion of terminology. To advance case study research in nursing, we encourage authors to reflect critically on methodologic and data-analysis triangulation and use existing tools, such as the triangulation protocol or mixed-methods matrix and the reporting guideline checklist by Rodgers et al, 9 to ensure more transparent reporting.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Methodology
• Case Study | Definition, Examples & Methods

Case Study | Definition, Examples & Methods

Published on 5 May 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on 30 January 2023.

A case study is a detailed study of a specific subject, such as a person, group, place, event, organisation, or phenomenon. Case studies are commonly used in social, educational, clinical, and business research.

A case study research design usually involves qualitative methods , but quantitative methods are sometimes also used. Case studies are good for describing , comparing, evaluating, and understanding different aspects of a research problem .

Table of contents

When to do a case study, step 1: select a case, step 2: build a theoretical framework, step 3: collect your data, step 4: describe and analyse the case.

A case study is an appropriate research design when you want to gain concrete, contextual, in-depth knowledge about a specific real-world subject. It allows you to explore the key characteristics, meanings, and implications of the case.

Case studies are often a good choice in a thesis or dissertation . They keep your project focused and manageable when you don’t have the time or resources to do large-scale research.

You might use just one complex case study where you explore a single subject in depth, or conduct multiple case studies to compare and illuminate different aspects of your research problem.

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Once you have developed your problem statement and research questions , you should be ready to choose the specific case that you want to focus on. A good case study should have the potential to:

• Provide new or unexpected insights into the subject
• Challenge or complicate existing assumptions and theories
• Propose practical courses of action to resolve a problem
• Open up new directions for future research

Unlike quantitative or experimental research, a strong case study does not require a random or representative sample. In fact, case studies often deliberately focus on unusual, neglected, or outlying cases which may shed new light on the research problem.

If you find yourself aiming to simultaneously investigate and solve an issue, consider conducting action research . As its name suggests, action research conducts research and takes action at the same time, and is highly iterative and flexible. 

However, you can also choose a more common or representative case to exemplify a particular category, experience, or phenomenon.

While case studies focus more on concrete details than general theories, they should usually have some connection with theory in the field. This way the case study is not just an isolated description, but is integrated into existing knowledge about the topic. It might aim to:

• Exemplify a theory by showing how it explains the case under investigation
• Expand on a theory by uncovering new concepts and ideas that need to be incorporated
• Challenge a theory by exploring an outlier case that doesn’t fit with established assumptions

To ensure that your analysis of the case has a solid academic grounding, you should conduct a literature review of sources related to the topic and develop a theoretical framework . This means identifying key concepts and theories to guide your analysis and interpretation.

There are many different research methods you can use to collect data on your subject. Case studies tend to focus on qualitative data using methods such as interviews, observations, and analysis of primary and secondary sources (e.g., newspaper articles, photographs, official records). Sometimes a case study will also collect quantitative data .

The aim is to gain as thorough an understanding as possible of the case and its context.

In writing up the case study, you need to bring together all the relevant aspects to give as complete a picture as possible of the subject.

How you report your findings depends on the type of research you are doing. Some case studies are structured like a standard scientific paper or thesis, with separate sections or chapters for the methods , results , and discussion .

Others are written in a more narrative style, aiming to explore the case from various angles and analyse its meanings and implications (for example, by using textual analysis or discourse analysis ).

In all cases, though, make sure to give contextual details about the case, connect it back to the literature and theory, and discuss how it fits into wider patterns or debates.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the ‘Cite this Scribbr article’ button to automatically add the citation to our free Reference Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, January 30). Case Study | Definition, Examples & Methods. Scribbr. Retrieved 30 August 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/case-studies/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, correlational research | guide, design & examples, a quick guide to experimental design | 5 steps & examples, descriptive research design | definition, methods & examples.

Case Studies

Case studies are a popular research method in business area. Case studies aim to analyze specific issues within the boundaries of a specific environment, situation or organization.

According to its design, case studies in business research can be divided into three categories: explanatory, descriptive and exploratory.

Explanatory case studies aim to answer ‘how’ or ’why’ questions with little control on behalf of researcher over occurrence of events. This type of case studies focus on phenomena within the contexts of real-life situations. Example: “An investigation into the reasons of the global financial and economic crisis of 2008 – 2010.”

Descriptive case studies aim to analyze the sequence of interpersonal events after a certain amount of time has passed. Studies in business research belonging to this category usually describe culture or sub-culture, and they attempt to discover the key phenomena. Example: “Impact of increasing levels of multiculturalism on marketing practices: A case study of McDonald’s Indonesia.”

Exploratory case studies aim to find answers to the questions of ‘what’ or ‘who’. Exploratory case study data collection method is often accompanied by additional data collection method(s) such as interviews, questionnaires, experiments etc. Example: “A study into differences of leadership practices between private and public sector organizations in Atlanta, USA.”

Advantages of case study method include data collection and analysis within the context of phenomenon, integration of qualitative and quantitative data in data analysis, and the ability to capture complexities of real-life situations so that the phenomenon can be studied in greater levels of depth. Case studies do have certain disadvantages that may include lack of rigor, challenges associated with data analysis and very little basis for generalizations of findings and conclusions.

John Dudovskiy

How to Write a Case Study in 5 Steps: A Guide

What is a case study and how do you write one? We explain everything there is to know about case studies and provide you with a checklist that will make you succeed on your first try.

First things first:

• A case study examines organizations, people, places or events in order to gain (new) insights into familiar problems or to identify new problems.
• There are four types of case studies: Case-Study-Method, Case-Problem-Method, Case-Incident-Method, and Stated-Problem-Method
• There are five steps in conducting a case study: a research objective, a case, suitable literature, a precise description of your case and a link between your case and existing theories.

What is a case study?

A case study is a research method that is typically used in qualitative research and is often applied in academic papers such as bachelor’s or master’s theses. Having originated from the social sciences , the case study is now used in many other fields such as economics, political science and media studies.

The case study examines a specific example of an event or phenomenon in the real world. All relevant details of the case are thoroughly analyzed, always taking into account the surrounding context and existing theoretical frameworks. If several cases are compared with each other, this is referred to as a comparative case study or a multiple case study .

Objectives and methods of case studies

The main objective of a case study is to gain comprehensive insights into a specific phenomenon and to develop new solutions or perspectives. Both qualitative and quantitative methods are useful for collecting and analyzing relevant data for the case study. Organizations, people, places or events that offer important insights are examined.

Case studies allow you to analyze complex problems in detail , making them an indispensable tool in scientific research.

Case studies: different types and approaches

Depending on your research question, there are different types of case studies you can consider. Each type of case study has its own special features, and the transitions are sometimes fluid. The following paragraphs introduce four common types of case studies to give you an idea of the different approaches:

• Case Study Method : This classic type of case study is often used when you are familiar with a specific case but have not yet identified the hidden problems within it. During your investigation, you will recognize both the challenges and possible solutions. This method helps you to dive deep into the details of the case and gain unexpected insights.
• Case-Problem Method : This type of case study focuses on evaluating different approaches to a solution. You analyze the advantages and disadvantages of each method, evaluate its effectiveness and look for alternatives if necessary. This approach is ideal for case studies that aim to optimize processes or improve strategies.
• Case-Incident Method : This form of case study is often the most challenging as it works with incomplete or missing data. Your task is to create a sound case study despite these limitations. This requires creative methods of data collection and analysis to get a clear picture of the situation.
• Stated-Problem Method : This is the exact opposite of the first methos. You start with a known problem and look for the causes and possible solutions through your case study. This method is particularly useful if you want to explore the deeper roots of a problem.

By choosing the right type of case study, you can ensure that your research is both thorough and focused. Each of these approaches offers different perspectives and methods to arrive at valuable insights that can be explored in detail in the case studies.

How is a case study conducted?

Companies are often looking for a case study that offers a solution to a complex problem. You don’t have to reinvent the wheel. You should simply collect and structure all the relevant information for your case study. At GRIN, you will find numerous case studies that give you a good insight into the structure of this type of text. These practical examples, which are often based on data from real companies, will help you understand how to successfully complete a case study.

The 5 steps of conducting a case study

Define your research objective

Start your case study by first defining a clear research objective and formulating a precise research question. Decide whether your aim is exploratory (discovering), descriptive (describing) or explanatory (explaining/justifying), or a combination of these , to determine your research direction. Since case studies are qualitative research, how or why questions are particularly suitable.

Choose your case

For your case study, you should of course choose an example that is relevant to your research objective . If you are writing about a specific company, you already have the case automatically, but events, people, places or phenomena are also suitable. To choose a suitable example, you can use the following criteria as a guide:

• Take an unusual or atypical example that firstly makes you curious yourself and secondly provides new insights into a known problem.
• The example should critically question existing assumptions or theories.
• Ideally, your case should open up new approaches for future research.

Link your case study to existing theories and literature

Once you have defined your research objective and case for your case study, the next step is to link it to existing literature and the current state of research . Conduct a comprehensive literature review to compare your findings with relevant thematic texts.

To create a solid theoretical framework, draw on an appropriate theory that allows you to understand and explain the case in depth. When analyzing your results, you can then discuss how they behave in the context of this theory and what they say about the topic.

Describe your case study

Once you have finished researching existing theories and literature, start describing your case in detail. If it is an event, a timeline can be helpful, showing all the important events along with their causes and effects. The aim is to clearly differentiate your case study from other studies and research questions.

An important part of the case study is the description of the initial situation , the framework conditions and the problems to be solved . It is essential that your (possibly fictitious) customer recognizes themselves in the description. Be authentic and use the technical vocabulary of the respective industry . This increases the relevance of your case study.

Analyze the case

The final step in your case study is to comprehensively analyze the collected data. Evaluating and explaining this information will allow you to answer your research question . You can embed your findings in a broader theoretical context by drawing connections to existing literature and theories that you identified during your literature review.

In this section of your case study, you also explain how you analyzed the situation, what kind of strategy you developed and how you implemented it operationally. It is also important to mention any problems and obstacles you encountered.

Analysis tools for solving a case study

When working on business case studies in particular, there are a number of models, so-called frameworks , that can be of great help. Which framework is suitable for which problem depends on the type of case study. These can basically be divided into three categories:

External problem

This example focuses on external factors: e.g. the market environment of the company under investigation. The five forces model and the PESTEL analysis are suitable for identifying and analyzing such research areas.

Internal problem definition

Internal company issues are considered here, e.g. low employee satisfaction. The value chain analysis or the BCG matrix are suitable for such internal analyses.

Internal and external problems

Most case studies examine external and internal problems in equal measure, as mixed cases are often considered, e.g. a decline in a company’s sales. These cases can be analyzed using the profit equation , the four-C concept , the SWOT analysis , or the Ansoff matrix.

Checklist: Case study for companies

Case studies for companies always follow the same structure. You can therefore use this checklist as a guide:

• Title of the case study: What is it about in a nutshell?
• Introduction of the company: Who is the case study aimed at?
• Problem/research question: What is it about (specifically), what are the current challenges and what should be changed?
• Facts : What does the company offer? What is the market and market environment like? Which target group should be addressed?
• Results: What follows from the facts analyzed?
• Graphics: Graphical representations are always good for case studies. Present the facts in table form, create diagrams and add them to your continuous text. This will enhance your study.
• Solution: What specific recommendations for action do you give to the company you have analyzed?

Key Takeaways

A case study is a research method that allows you to analyze specific cases such as organizations, people, or events from different perspectives and relate them to existing theories. This method is particularly valuable for bachelor’s and master’s theses, as it provides in-depth insights into the research topic.

The goal of a case study is to understand and explain a specific case by analyzing it in detail and linking it to existing theories identified during the literature review. This method helps to answer open questions and develop solutions to existing problems.

You will conduct a case study in five steps: you define your research goal, select a case, find suitable literature and theory, describe the case, and analyze it by examining it comprehensively and linking it to existing theories.

Choosing a case study has a few advantages: You can investigate a real case that interests you, which makes your study more relevant. Case studies also require less organizational effort than interviews or surveys, and can uncover previously unknown problems or questions that are of interest for further research. And another advantage: Case studies are used in many companies in the application process to test applicants. If you have already gained experience with it during your studies, this can be an advantage for you later on.

A good case study must definitely be relevant to your study. In addition, it should provide new insights into a known problem, critically question existing assumptions and open up new approaches for future research.

Examples for case studies in the GRIN shop:

Corporate Social Responsibility and its Impact on Consumer Buying Behaviour. A Case Study on H&M

Supply Chain Management. Case Study on Amazon

A Microsoft Case Study. Managing a Culturally Diverse Workforce

The Facebook acquisition of Instagram. A Case Study

Do you like our magazine? Then sign up for our GRIN newsletter now!

• Future Students
• Parents/Families
• Alumni/Friends
• Current Students
• Faculty/Staff
• MyOHIO Student Center
• Visit Athens Campus
• Regional Campuses
• OHIO Online
• Faculty/Staff Directory
• University Community
• Research & Impact
• Alumni & Friends
• Search All News
• OHIO Today Magazine
• Colleges & Campuses
• For the Media

Helpful Links

Navigate OHIO

Connect With Us

University Libraries purchases Sage Research Methods package

Ohio University Libraries has purchased Sage Research Methods, a platform that includes textbooks, foundation research guidelines, data sets, code books, peer-reviewed case studies and more with updates through 2029.

If members of the OHIO community are looking to explore a new research methodology, hoping to reduce textbook costs or needing a case study for a course, Sage Research Methods can help.

The platform boasts more than 500 downloadable datasets, with code books and instructional materials that provide step by step walk-throughs of the data analysis. The platform also includes quantitative data sets that come with software guides that can assist in understanding tools like SPSS, R, Stata, and Python.

Ohio University now has access to more than 1,000 book titles (including the quantitative social sciences "little green books") that support a variety of research methodologies and approaches from beginner to expert. The OHIO package also includes peer-reviewed case studies with accompanying discussion questions and multiple-choice quiz questions and can be embedded into Canvas courses. Further, the collection includes a Diversifying and Decolonizing Research subcollection that highlights the importance of inclusive research, perspectives from marginalized populations and cultures, and minimizing bias in data analysis. 

Highlighted features within Sage Research Methods include:

• Ability to browse content, including datasets, by disciplines and/or methodology. 
• Informational and instructional videos that cover topics like market research, data visualization, ethics and integrity, and Big Data. The videos are easy to embed, too.
• Interactive research tools that help with research plan development: Methods Map visualizer, Project Planner for outlining, and Reading Lists. 
• Permalinks are easy to access by just copying and pasting the URL into Canvas or your syllabus.

Learn more about Sage Research Methods. 

University Libraries strives to support the OHIO community in and out of the classroom by supporting varying pedagogic approaches and finding ways to make learning more affordable for our students. Further, the Libraries aims to provide access and discoverability to research materials to support Ohio University’s innovative research enterprise. Purchasing Sage Research Methods supports both initiatives as this resource can be used by all students, faculty and staff at Ohio University for research support and instructors for course materials.

Students, faculty and staff Interested in learning more about any of the resources mentioned above are encouraged to reach out to Head of Learning Services and Education Librarian Dr. Chris Guder , Head of Research Services and Health Sciences Librarian Hanna Schmillen or a subject librarian.

Be sure to explore Sage Research Methods on your own; the platform can be accessed through Ohio University Libraries . In addition, there are training sessions and videos from Sage on its training website.

• DOI: 10.1108/dts-03-2024-0040
• Corpus ID: 272057826

Digital humanities in US academic libraries: case studies

• Kelda Habing , Lian Ruan
• Published in Digital Transformation and… 16 August 2024

23 References

Scanning the digital: using survey data to support digital scholarship initiatives at the university of mississippi, what contributes to a qualified digital humanities librarian and ideal digital humanities pedagogy an exploratory qualitative study, exploring the digital humanities research agenda: a text mining approach, digital humanities degrees and supplemental credentials in information schools (ischools), the wrong side of the spreadsheets: a life in the digital humanities, from collection curation to knowledge creation: exploring new roles of academic librarians in digital humanities research, teaching gis in a digital humanities environment, digital humanities research: interdisciplinary collaborations, themes and implications to library and information science, 17 librarians and one big undertaking: creating a digital project from start to finish, facilitating collaborative metadata creation for faculty-initiated digital projects, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Methodology for selection of sustainable public transit routes: case study of amman city, jordan.

1. Introduction

2. research aims and contributions, 3. the literature review, 4. methodology, 4.1. problem fomulation, 4.1.1. objective functions, 4.1.2. constraints, 4.2. multi-objective optimization process.

• Right of way (ROW): all links that have the number of lanes less than two lanes per directions are eliminated.
• The horizontal alignment: all links that have a deflection angle more than 60° are eliminated.
• Vertical alignment: all links that have a gradient more than 6% are eliminated.

4.3. Input Data

4.3.1. case study, 4.3.2. road network, 4.3.3. travel demand and modal split, 4.3.4. travel times, 4.3.5. emission rates, 4.3.6. traffic safety measures, 4.4. assessment process, 4.4.1. total emissions measures, 4.4.2. safety measures, 6. discussions, 7. conclusions, author contributions, data availability statement, acknowledgments, conflicts of interest.

• Steg, L.; Gifford, R. Sustainable Transportation and Quality of Life. J. Transp. Geogr. 2005 , 13 , 59–69. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dwivedi, A.K.; Pratap, S.; Zhou, F. Antecedents of Freight Transportation for Sustainable Supply Chain in the Post-Covid Era: An Emerging Market Study. Int. J. Emerg. Mark. 2023 , 18 , 1453–1471. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Karjalainen, L.E.; Juhola, S. Framework for Assessing Public Transportation Sustainability in Planning and Policy-Making. Sustainability 2019 , 11 , 1028. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Amiegbebhor, D.; Boluwatife, P. The Lagos Bus Rapid Transit: Review of Users’ Perception. Am. J. Humanit. Social Sci. Res. 2018 , 2 , 88–108. [ Google Scholar ]
• Satiennam, T.; Jaensirisak, S.; Satiennam, W.; Detdamrong, S. Potential for modal shift by passenger car and motorcycle users towards Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) in an Asian developing city. IATSS Res. 2016 , 39 , 121–129. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chakroborty, P. Genetic algorithms for optimal urban transit network design. Comput. Civ. Infrastruct. Eng. 2003 , 18 , 184–200. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Farahani, R.Z.; Miandoabchi, E.; Szeto, W.Y.; Rashidi, H. A review of urban transportation network design problems. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2013 , 229 , 281–302. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Arbex, R.O.; da Cunha, C.B. Efficient transit network design and frequencies setting multi-objective optimization by alternating objective genetic algorithm. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 2015 , 81 , 355–376. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Owais, M.; Osman, M.K. Complete hierarchical multi-objective genetic algorithm for transit network design problem. Expert Syst. Appl. 2018 , 114 , 143–154. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wang, C.; Ye, Z.; Wang, W. A Multi-Objective Optimization and Hybrid Heuristic Approach for Urban Bus Route Network Design. IEEE Access 2020 , 8 , 12154–12167. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chandra, A.; Sharath, M.N.; Pani, A.; Sahu, P.K. A multi-objective genetic algorithm approach to design optimal zoning systems for freight transportation planning. J. Transp. Geogr. 2021 , 92 , 103037. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jha, S.B.; Jha, J.K.; Tiwari, M.K. A multi-objective meta-heuristic approach for transit network design and frequency setting problem in a bus transit system. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2019 , 130 , 166–186. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Amiripour, S.M.M.; Ceder, A.; Mohaymany, A.S. Hybrid method for bus network design with high seasonal demand variation. J. Transp. Eng. 2014 , 140 , 4014015. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mahdi Amiripour, S.M.; Mohaymany, A.S.; Ceder, A. Optimal modification of urban bus network routes using a genetic algorithm. J. Transp. Eng. 2015 , 141 , 4014081. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bielli, M.; Caramia, M.; Carotenuto, P. Genetic algorithms in bus network optimization. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2002 , 10 , 19–34. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Martínez, F.; Baldoquín, M.G.; Mauttone, A. Model and solution method to a simultaneous route design and frequency setting problem for a bus rapid transit system in Colombia. Pesqui. Oper. 2017 , 37 , 403–434. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Al Tamseh, A.; Osama, A.; Hussain, M.; Alsobky, A. Multi-objective optimization for BRT routes using genetic algorithm: New cairo case study. J. Southwest Jiaotong Univ. 2023 , 58 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pardo, C.; Weinstock, A. The BRT Planning Guide. Itdp . 2018. Available online: https://brtguide.itdp.org/branch/master/guide/why-brt/impacts#social-impacts (accessed on 5 January 2022).
• Shbeeb, L. A Review of Public Transport Service in Jordan: Challenges and Opportunities. Al-Balqa J. Res. Stud. 2018 , 21 , 9–28. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Greater Amman Municipality (GAM). Transport and Mobility Master Plan for Amman. 2010, 66. Available online: http://www.ammanbrt.jo/contents/Articles/2020/4/20/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%AE%D8%B7%D8%B7%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B4%D9%85%D9%88%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%84%D9%84%D9%86%D9%82%D9%84%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AD%D8%B1%D9%83%D9%87%D9%81%D9%8A%D9%85%D8%AF%D9%8A%D9%86%D8%A9%D8%B9%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%86160322.pdf (accessed on 14 June 2023).
• The World Bank Group. Jordan- Country Climate and Development Report. Elgar Encycl. Hum. Rights 2022 , 600–605. Available online: https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/jordan/publication/jordan-country-climate-and-development-report (accessed on 12 July 2024).

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Al Tamseh, A.; Osama, A.; Hussain, M.; Alsobky, A. Methodology for Selection of Sustainable Public Transit Routes: Case Study of Amman City, Jordan. Infrastructures 2024 , 9 , 147. https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures9090147

Al Tamseh A, Osama A, Hussain M, Alsobky A. Methodology for Selection of Sustainable Public Transit Routes: Case Study of Amman City, Jordan. Infrastructures . 2024; 9(9):147. https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures9090147

Al Tamseh, Amani, Ahmed Osama, Mona Hussain, and Alsayed Alsobky. 2024. "Methodology for Selection of Sustainable Public Transit Routes: Case Study of Amman City, Jordan" Infrastructures 9, no. 9: 147. https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures9090147

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals