Jove
Visualize
Contact Us

Related Experiment Videos

In defense of the case study method

William McKinley Runyan1

  • 1School of Social Welfare.

The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry
|July 1, 1982
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

This review clarifies common criticisms of the case study method, highlighting conceptual confusions and inappropriate evaluation criteria. It proposes solutions for more rigorous case study research, improving its scientific validity.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same journal

How do Asian Americans interpret and respond to "everyday" interpersonal racism?

The American journal of orthopsychiatry·2026
Same journal

Governmental betrayal trauma: When failures of state protection undermine public trust and mental health.

The American journal of orthopsychiatry·2026
Same journal

Mental health in asylum-seeking parents: Dynamics of fragmentation, resilience, and empowerment.

The American journal of orthopsychiatry·2026
Same journal

Exploring the role of schools during prolonged crisis: Lessons learned from an armed conflict in Israel.

The American journal of orthopsychiatry·2026
Same journal

Exploring the role of critical consciousness on complex trauma for adopted adults.

The American journal of orthopsychiatry·2026
Same journal

"When I saw his face, I recognized him": Visibility, complexity, and therapeutic negotiation of LGBTQ+ identity disclosure in social work practice.

The American journal of orthopsychiatry·2026
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Area of Science:

  • Social Sciences
  • Qualitative Research Methods

Background:

  • The case study method faces frequent criticism regarding its scientific rigor.
  • Many critiques arise from misunderstandings of its fundamental principles.
  • Existing evaluation criteria are often borrowed inappropriately from experimental research paradigms.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To address and clarify common conceptual confusions underpinning criticisms of the case study method.
  • To identify and propose more suitable criteria for evaluating case study research.
  • To offer procedural recommendations for enhancing the rigor of case study applications.

Main Methods:

  • A critical review and conceptual analysis of existing literature on case study methodology.
  • Examination of common criticisms and their origins in methodological misunderstandings.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Development of a framework for appropriate evaluation of case study research.

    • Main Results:

    • Identified significant conceptual confusions as a primary source of criticism.
    • Demonstrated the inapplicability of experimental design criteria to case study evaluation.
    • Outlined specific criteria and procedures for strengthening case study rigor.

    Conclusions:

    • Many criticisms of the case study method are based on conceptual misunderstandings.
    • Appropriate evaluation requires distinct criteria tailored to qualitative research.
    • Implementing suggested procedures can significantly enhance the validity and rigor of case studies.