Chapter 9

Case Study Methods

Robert K. Yin
Copyright American Psychological Association. Not for further distribution.

Introduction: What Is the Case individual data (Figure 9.1, Row 2), single-subject
Study Method and Why Use It? research calls for some formal manipulation, such as
a repeated trial type of pattern. Conversely, between
Case study research continues to be poorly under-
the two types of methods not involving any manipu-
stood. In psychology, as in sociology, anthropology,
lation (Figure 9.1, Column 2), case-control studies
political science, and epidemiology, the strengths
usually collect data from groups of individuals who
and weaknesses of case study researchmuch less
already have exhibited the condition of interest (e.g.,
how to practice it wellstill need clarification.
tobacco users). The studies then proceed to estimate
To start, case study as a research method differs
the differences between the groups mean and that of
from case studies as a teaching tool1 or from case
a retrospectively selected control group (e.g., nonto-
records maintained by service agencies.2 As a second
bacco users). Given Figure 9.1s two dimensions, case
broad distinction, especially pertinent to psychology,
study research focuses on individual-level data and is
case study research differs from at least two other types
limited by the inability or unwillingness to manipu-
of like-sounding research methods: (a) single-subject
late any intervention.
research, found both in neuropsychology (e.g., see
Having differentiated case study research in this
Chapter 33 of this volume) and in behavioral research
approximating manner, the following chapter reviews
more generally (e.g., see Kratochwill, 1984; Morgan &
the main aspects of case study researchits defini-
Morgan, 2009; Tawney & Gast, 1984; see also Chapter
tion, design, data collection procedures, and analytic
31 of this volume); and (b) case-control studies (e.g.,
techniques. The chapter serves readers who may want
see Schlesselman, 1982; see also Chapter 15 of this
to refresh their understanding of case study research,
volume). Figure 9.1 explains the main differences and
but the chapter also informs those who might want to
compares them to conventional experimental group
overcome their skepticism about the method.3
designs. The four choices also can overlap, hence
Figure 9.1 only depicts an ideal classification.
Figure 9.1 points to the two key dimensions in Case Studies: A Brief Definition
distinguishing among the four methods. For instance, All case study research starts from the same compel-
between the two types of methods emphasizing ling feature: the desire to derive a(n) (up)close or

The teaching tools are invaluable, but a teaching cases data can be manipulated for instructional purposes, and the cases are not part of the research
1

literature. In contrast, research cases must adhere strictly to methodological procedures, linking all findings to explicit evidence. For a broad dis-
cussion of teaching cases in business, law, and medicine, see Garvin (2003). For examples of teaching cases in psychology, see Dunbar (2005) and
Golden (2004).
Bromley (1986) noted that such records, although otherwise appearing to be case studies, can be influenced by expectations regarding accountability
2

rather than factual data (p. 69) and are therefore liable to a variety of accidental or deliberate omissions and distortions (p. 90).
For instance, even devoted supporters of gold standard research have found some benefit from doing their own published research using the case
3

study method (e.g., Cook & Foray, 2007).

DOI: 10.1037/13620-009
APA Handbook of Research Methods in Psychology: Vol. 2. Research Designs, H. Cooper (Editor-in-Chief)
141
Copyright 2012 by the American Psychological Association. All rights reserved.
 Robert K. Yin

Intervention(s) Manipulated by a Researcher

YES NO

Conventional Case-Control
GROUPED DATA
Experimental Designs Studies
INDIVIDUAL Single-Subject Case Study
DATA Research (single or multiple)

Figure 9.1. Case study research compared with three other kinds
of behavioral research.

otherwise in-depth understanding of a single or be relevant and that cannot be ignored. In this sense,
small number of cases, set in their real-world and regardless of the brevity of the time period,
Copyright American Psychological Association. Not for further distribution.

context (e.g., Bromley, 1986, p. 1). The closeness
aims to produce an invaluable but complex
understandingan insightful appreciation of the
casehopefully resulting in new learning about
real-world behavior.
In technical terms, the likely complexity trans-
lates into a broad array of variables. Assuming that
each case is a single data point, the situation then
leads to the following brief definition of the case
study as a research method: In case studies, the
number of variables of interest will far outstrip the
number of available data points (Yin, 2009, p. 18).
Three Conditions Leading to Large
Number of Variables of Interest in
a Case Study
Three conditions contribute to the large number of
variables: conditions over time, in-depth inquiry,
and contextual conditions.
Conditions over time. The first and most com-
mon condition comes from the fact that interest in a
case covers multiple conditions extending over time.
Analyzing the temporal pattern can be the explicit
subject of a case study, as in the unfolding of key
events that might explain some culminating eventor
as in a developmental case study that could track
human or animal behavior (e.g., Denenberg, 1982).
Even if a temporal pattern is not a direct topic of
inquiry or is fairly short (e.g., Bromley, 1986, p. 5),
it can create a continual flow of variables that may
case studies rarely serve as literal snapshotsas if
everything occurred at the same exact moment.
Important events, including the repetition of seem-
ingly but not precisely like behavior, occur at differ-
ent points in time and may become an essential part
of understanding a case.
In-depth inquiry of the case. Second, a case study
involves an in-depth inquiry into the case. The mul-
tiple features of a case translate into another large
number of variables.
In psychology, the case is likely to focus on some
individuals behavior. At an earlier time, such an indi-
vidual might have served as both the investigator and
the subject of study, producing the famous studies on
memory, perception, and learning by Ebbinghaus,
Stratton, and Galton, respectively (e.g., Garmezy,
1982) as well as the folklore created by the Phase I
safety trials in medicine, during which medical scien-
tists first commitment has been to test newly created
medical remedies on their own bodies. These kinds of
studies, in which the cases were either the researchers
or their friends and relatives, also appear to have been
an integral part of the tradition in doing case study
research in applied linguistics (Duff, 2008, p. 37).
In contemporary settings, the individuals of
interest can come from a wide range of situations,
including clinical cases, studies of individual devel-
opment or learning as in a Piagetian study of cogni-
tive development, and single animal preparations in
comparative psychology.4 One of the most notable

For instance, individual development is a common topic of inquiry in comparative psychology, where independent variables are deliberately manipu-
4

lated at different ages of a life cycle (Denenberg, 1982). The significant findings then often lie with the interactions among the independent variables,
producing yet more variables, challenging the assumed independence of the variables, and therefore also requiring a more complicated model than
causality as a framework for interpreting [the] findings (Denenberg, 1982, p. 22).

142

case studies in neurology, referenced by one analyst
as the most famous neurological case in the world
(Rolls, 2005, p. 51),5 involved the case of H. M.,
about whom more than 30 articles had been pub-
lished between 1957 and 1968 alone (Scoville &
Milner, 1957; Sidman, Soddard, & Mohr, 1968).
Alternatively, other psychology fields (e.g.,
social, educational, management, occupational,
environmental, and community psychology) as well
as related fields outside of psychology may focus on
organizations or other entities, rather than on indi-
viduals. The in-depth study of such entities also will
translate into a large number of variables. Research
Copyright American Psychological Association. Not for further distribution.
on collaborative care clinics, involving the coordina-
tion of medical and behavioral health services (e.g.,
Kessler & Stafford, 2008), would be an illustrative
example of such case studies.
Contextual conditions. A third set of conditions
comes from outside of the case. Thus, in addition to
investigating the case over time and in depth, a case
study will include the collection of data about the
contextual conditions surrounding the case. Indeed,
one of the strengths of case study research is its abil-
ity to examine contextual conditions to the fullest
extent that might appear relevant. For instance, if
the case is an individual, data about the individuals
family, work, and peer environments could be com-
mon components of a full case study. If the case is a
small group or an organization, data about cultural,
economic, social, and political conditions and trends
would be counterpart components.
Moreover, the boundary between a case and its
context may not be sharp because real-world affairs
do not readily fall within clear-cut categories. The
ability to appreciate any such blurring as part of a case
study is considered a strength of case study research.
The likely benefit will be an ensuing study that
enriches later understandings of the original case.
By comparison, other methods will likely treat
any blurring between the focus of study and its con-
text as, at best, an annoyance. In fact, most other
methods do not address contextual conditions with
great ease. For instance, other than a small number
of covariates, experiments minimize the role of
contextual conditions by controlling them out.
Rollss (2005) book consists of 16 chapters, each covering a famous case in psychology.
5
Case Study Methods
Similarly, surveys cannot include too many contex-
tual questions because of the limitations on the
degrees of freedom.
Summary of three conditions. These three condi-
tions help to explain why the number of variables of
interest in a case study is likely to be enormous. In
contrast, the number of data points, as represented
by the individual cases, is likely to be small. As a
practical matter, no single case study, even if consist-
ing of multiple cases, will be able to have the num-
ber of cases that would match, much less exceed in
any realistic multiple, the number of variables.
This situation has far-reaching implications for
case study design and analysis. The designs belong
to a family of their own and cannot be considered
part of some other family of designs, such as experi-
mental or quasi-experimental designs. Likewise, the
analytic methods cannot employ most of the statisti-
cal methods conventionally used with these other
types of methods because the case studys data
points will have little or no variance.
Motives for Using the Case
Study Method
Given the preceding constraints, case study research
might at first appear to have limited value. In fact,
however, case studies have been a common part of
research in psychology and related fields for a long
time. Why is this?
Exploration. A quick but overly narrow response
to this question calls attention to case studies in an
exploratory modethat is, to collect some data to
determine whether a topic is indeed worthy of fur-
ther investigation, and if so, the research questions
or hypotheses that might be most relevant in the
subsequent research. In this exploratory mode, case
study research appears only as a prelude to the use
of other methods, such as surveys and experiments.
However, such an outdated hierarchy of research
methods is surely incorrect (e.g., Bromley, 1986, p. 15).
Description and explanation. Among other
problems with the hierarchical view is the fact that
surveys and experiments also have exploratory
modes. Conversely, case study research can be used
143
 Robert K. Yin
in descriptive, explanatory, and evaluative modes,
in addition to its use in an exploratory mode.
Descriptive case studies can serve many purposes,
such as presenting a rarely encountered situation
or one not normally accessible to researchers. For
instance, a famous case study of a small group of
youths from a White, urban, and low-income neigh-
borhood focused on their interpersonal relationships
(Whyte, 1943/1955). Among other findings, the
study described how the youths ability (or inability)
to break away from their neighborhood ties helped
(or hindered) their likely job mobility. Although
such a revelation would strike us in the 21st century
Copyright American Psychological Association. Not for further distribution.
as a commonly understood (and possibility still
recurring) phenomenon, few researchers had pro-
duced such an intimate portrayal of specific youths
up to that time.
As for the explanatory mode of case studies, a
common example comes from the field of educa-
tional psychology and the complementary relation-
ships among different methods: The effectiveness of
a specific education curriculum might be deter-
mined by conducting an experiment, assessing stu-
dent outcomes under treatment and control
conditions. An explanation of how the learning took
place, however, would require a complementary
case study, focusing on implementation, classroom
observations, and interviews of students about their
learning strategies (Shavelson & Towne, 2002).
Many other descriptive and explanatory examples,
whether the subjects of study are individuals, small
groups, organizations, or more abstract cases such
as decisions, can be cited.
Evaluation. Evaluation may be considered a
fourth motive for doing case studies (Yin, 1994).
For instance, a case study of an academic or medical
program can describe the context, evolution, and
operations of the program. An expected component
of such a study includes evaluative data about how
well the program has been working. For one pro-
gram that had integrated mental health services into
primary care for more than 15 years, the data cov-
ered a variety of (quantitative) outcome measures
determined on the basis of scales that measured
patients functioning as well as their symptoms
(Kates, 2008).
144
In fact, in academic environments, such evalua-
tive case studies are commonly conducted, although
they are not formally organized or labeled as case
study research. These case studies take the form of
the assessments conducted by visiting committees
who periodically review individual academic depart-
ments. The visiting committee focuses on the well-
being and progress being made by a department and
collects a variety of evidence (observations, inter-
views, and reviews of pertinent documents such as
the departments publications) to arrive at both for-
mative and summative judgments.
The preceding illustrations show how using case
studies in any of these exploratory, descriptive,
explanatory, or evaluative modes highlight the
potential value of case studies as an important part
of a researchers full methodological repertoire.
Caveats and Concerns in Doing Case
Study Research
Despite its apparent applicability for studying many
relevant real-world situations and addressing impor-
tant research questions, case study research never-
theless has not achieved widespread recognition as a
method of choice. Some people actually think of it
as a method of last resort. Why is this?
Part of the methods notoriety comes from a lack
of trust in the credibility of a case study researchers
procedures, which do not seem to protect sufficiently
against such biases as a researcher seeming to find
what she or he had set out to find. Another factor
contributing to the methods reputation comes from
the use of qualitative data, which are presumed to be
based on less robust measures than those used to col-
lect quantitative data. Yet another factor comes from
the perceived inability to generalize the findings from
a case study to any broader level.
When case study research is done poorly, all of
these challenges can come together in a negative
way, potentially reinforcing the prejudices against
the method. In contrast, more systematic and careful
use of case study research can begin to overcome, if
not dissipate, the concerns. For instance, and as will
be shown later in this chapter, when relevant, some
case studies can be conducted entirely on the basis
of quantitative data. Many case studies will and
should rely on qualitative data, however, and
 Case Study Methods

procedures such as establishing a chain of evidence
or an audit trail will increase the reliability of
such data.
The preceding recommendation is just one
example of the ways in which case study research
practices can address the general concerns associ-
ated with the method. The remainder of this chapter
briefly reviews many other ways to address these
concerns. At the same time, the limited length of
this chapter precludes a full rendition of how to
deal with all of the challengessuch as addressing
concerns regarding construct validity, internal valid-
ity, external validity, and reliability in doing case
Copyright American Psychological Association. Not for further distribution.
its own way, although not necessarily with the effi-
ciency of a tightly controlled experiment. Thus, in
1984, Campbell (1984/2009) wrote: More and
more I have come to the conclusion that the core of
the scientific method is not experimentation per se
but rather the strategy connoted by the phrase plau-
sible rival hypotheses (p. vii).
Campbells fuller thinking and explanation was
spelled out in greater detail in an unfortunately
little-known article on degrees of freedom and the
case study (Campbell, 1975). Later, in the revised
edition of his work on quasi-experimental designs,
Campbell liberated the case study method from its

study research (for a fuller discussion, see Yin, 2009,
pp. 4045).
Case Study Research Designs
Doing case study research does not mean going
immediately into a field setting and collecting data.
Beyond the inevitable need to define ones own
research questions, researchers may first want to
consider certain research design choices as being
pertinent to case studies.6 Using these designs will
help to make the ensuing case study more methodic,
while still leaving room for appropriate discovery
and openness to unanticipated findings in the field.7
Regarding research designs, an initial misconcep-
tion, created years ago, was the idea that case study
research did not have a design of its own but simply
was one of many of the designs used in quasi-experi-
ments. Thus was born the idea of the one-shot
post-test-only case study and its seemingly defense-
less status as a design to be avoided at all costs (e.g.,
Campbell & Stanley, 1966).
Only gradually has this misconception been
overcome, mainly on the basis of a heightened
awareness that the seeking and testing of rival expla-
nations is an essential part of empirical research and
that case study research can pursue this objective in
earlier status. Although the original one-shot design
was still to be avoided as a quasi-experimental
design, he wrote that certainly the case study as
normally practiced should not be demeaned by iden-
tification with the one-group post-test-only design
(Cook & Campbell, 1979, p. 96).
Defining a Case
The case study methods own research designs begin
by identifying, even on a tentative basis, the case
that is to be the subject of study (Yin, 2009, pp. 2933,
46). The case serves as the main unit of analysis in a
case study, although case studies also can have
nested units within the main unit (see the section
Embedded Designs). A case is generally a bounded
entity (a person, organization, behavioral condition,
event, or other social phenomenon), but the distinc-
tion between the case and its contextual conditions
in both spatial and temporal dimensionsmay be
blurred, as previously discussed.
Single- Versus Multiple-Case Studies
Any specific case study can consist of a single case
or of multiple cases, leading to the first distinction
in case study designsthat between a single-
case study and a multiple-case study; the latter
sometimes is called an extended case study

Some qualitative research can rightfully value start-up procedures that deliberately avoid any initial research questions, much less research design,
6

because either might undesirably influence the interpretation of the real-world setting, behavior of interest, or the meanings thereof as accorded by
participants (e.g., Van Manen, 1990). Those who follow this sequence are likely to be highly experienced investigators, and those having little or no
qualitative research experience should only adopt such a sequence with great care.
For instance, a case study might have started with a certain design, only to find it either unworkable or less promising than originally thought, follow-
7

ing some initial data collection. As with laboratory experiments, the remedy would be to cease collecting data under the original design and to revise
it, then to restart data collection afresh. The common criticism of case studies, unfortunately, is that the investigator may not later have ignored the
original data but might have reused them, thereby creating an unwanted bias and flaw.

145
 Robert K. Yin
(see Bromley, 1986, p. 8; Burawoy, 1991). In single-
case studies, the selected case may be a rare;
critical;8 or, paradoxically, ordinary case. This last
variant is illustrated by a famous community case
study: Middletown was deliberately chosen as an
average U.S. small town in the Midwest during the
early 20th century (Lynd & Lynd, 1929). The case
study showed how the town transitioned from an
agricultural to an industrial economy and thereby
provided important information and insights about
a significant era in all of U.S. history.
Multiple-case studies provide additional options
in comparison to single-case studies. The multiple-
Copyright American Psychological Association. Not for further distribution.
case design is usually more difficult to implement
than a single-case design, but the ensuing data can
provide greater confidence in a studys findings. The
selection of the multiple cases might be considered
akin to the way that one might define a set of multi-
ple experimentseach case (or experiment) aiming
to examine a complementary facet of a larger
research question. A common multiple-case design
might call for two or more cases that deliberately try
to test the conditions under which the same findings
might be replicated. For instance, seven teachers, sep-
arately assigned to seven students with developmental
coordination disorder, were the subject of a multiple-
case study (Miyahara & Wafer, 2004). Each teacher
student pair was a case, and a between-pair
replication logic was used to determine the relation-
ship between systematically alternating teaching
strategies and a students performance assessed with
a variety of psychometric measures over time.
As an important note, the use of the term replica-
tion in relation to multiple-case designs deliberately
mimics the same principle as used in multiple
experiments (e.g., Hersen & Barlow, 1976). Thus,
the cases for a multiple-case study, as in the experi-
ments in a multiple-experiment study, might have
been selected to either predict similar results (direct
replications) or to predict contrasting results but for
anticipatable reasons (theoretical replications).
In neither situation would a tallying of the cases
(or the experiments) provide a feasible way to
This would be directly akin to a critical experiment, where the single case (or experiment) represents an opportunity to compare two directly compet-
8
ing or rival hypotheses.
Quantitative analysts readily recognize that statistically significant differences also might not equate with findings of any practical or clinical signifi-
9
cance. Thus, even in experimental research, the issue of the desired sample size entails discretionary judgments.
146
decide whether the group of cases (or experiments)
supported an initial proposition. Thus, some investi-
gators of multiple-case studies might think that a
cross-case analysis would largely consist of a simple
tally (e.g., five cases supported the proposition but
two did not) to arrive at a cross-case conclusion.
The numbers in any such tally, however, are likely
to be too small and undistinguished to support such
a conclusion with any confidence.
An adjunct of the replication parallelism is the
response to the age-old question of how many
cases should be included in a multiple-case
studyan issue that continues to plague the field to
this day (e.g., Small, 2009). Students and scholars
appear to assume the existence of a formulaic solu-
tion, as in conducting a power analysis (e.g., Lipsey,
1990), to determine the needed sample size in an
experiment or survey.9 For case studies (again, as
with multiple experiments) no such formula exists.
Instead, analogous to the parallel question of how
many experiments need to be conducted to arrive
at an unqualified result, the response is still a judg-
mental one: the more cases (experiments), the
greater confidence or certainty, and the fewer the
cases (experiments), the less confidence or
certainty.
Holistic Versus Embedded Case Studies
Either single- or multiple-case study designs can
have a secondary or embedded unit of analysis
nested within each case being studied. The possibil-
ity therefore leads to four main types of case study
designs. These, together with the dashed lines repre-
senting the blurred boundary between a case and its
context, are illustrated in Figure 9.2.
As an example, an embedded arrangement would
arise when the main case is a single organization,
and the organizations employees are a secondary
unit of analysis. Data about the main case might
come from largely qualitative methods, whereas data
about the employees might come from a sample sur-
vey (or the tallying and analysis of employee
records). The nested arrangement is relevant as long
 Case Study Methods
Copyright American Psychological Association. Not for further distribution.

Figure 9.2. Basic types of designs for case studies. From Case Study
Research: Design and Methods (p. 46), by R. K. Yin, 2009, Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage. Copyright 2009 by COSMOS Corporation. Reprinted with permission.

as the entire study and its main research questions
are still about the organization in its entirety (e.g.,
the employee survey data are used as a further cor-
roboration of the organizations overall condition).
If the findings about employee (but not organiza-
tion) characteristics become the main findings of the
entire study, however, the original data about the
organization as a whole would likely become merely
a contextual condition for what, in the end, would
be a piece of survey research about employee char-
acteristics and not a case study.
Among the four types of designs, the embedded,
multiple-case studies are the most complex. Such
studies would resemble the hypothetical study just
described but cover two or more organizations, with
survey data coming from the employees of each of
the organizations. In contrast, the holistic single-
case study appears to be the most straightforward of
the four types.
The Role of Theory
The role of theory in design work. A case study
that starts with some theoretical propositions will
be easier to implement than one having no initial
research questions, much less propositions. The
theoretical propositions should by no means be con-
sidered with the formality of grand theory in social
science but mainly need to suggest a simple set of
relationships such as a [hypothetical] story about
why acts, events, structures, and thoughts occur
(Sutton & Staw, 1995, p. 372). More elaborate theo-
ries will (desirably) point to a more intricate pattern
that will (paradoxically) add precision to the later
analysis, yielding a benefit similar to that of having
more complex theoretical propositions in quasi-
experimental research (Rosenbaum, 2002, pp. 56,
277279).
This desired role of theory serves as one point of
difference between case study research and related
qualitative methods such as ethnography (Van
Maanen, 1988; see also Chapter 10 of this volume)
and grounded theory (Corbin & Strauss, 2007; see
also Chapter 3 of this volume). These other qualita-
tive methods also can differ in other respects,
including their basic epistemological assumptions
(see Volume 1, Chapter 1, this handbook). For

147
 Robert K. Yin
instance, other qualitative research may not neces-
sarily focus on any case in the first place, may not be
concerned with any theoretical propositions, and
may not engage in formal design work.
The role of theory in generalizing from case
studies. For case study research, the availability of
theoretical propositions not only serves the design
function well but also helps to explain how one
might generalize from a completed case study. The
procedure even applies well to the holistic, single-
case study, which has been commonly criticized for
having no generalizability value.
Copyright American Psychological Association. Not for further distribution.
To understand the process requires distinguish-
ing between two types of generalizing: statistical
generalizations and analytic generalizations (Yin,
2009, pp. 3839). For case study research, the latter
generalization is appropriate.
Unfortunately, most scholars, including those
who do case study research, are imbued with the
former type of generalization. They think that each
case represents a sample of some known and larger
universe, and they do not understand how a small
set of cases can generalize to any larger universe.
The simple answer is that a single or small set of
cases cannot generalize in this manner, nor are they
intended to. Furthermore, the incorrect assumption
is that statistical generalizations, from samples to
universes, are the only way to generalize findings
from social science research.
In contrast, analytic generalizations depend on
using a studys theoretical framework to establish a
logic that might be applicable to other situations.
Again, an appealing parallel exists in experimental
science, in which generalizing about the findings
from a single or small set of experiments does not
usually follow any statistical path to a previously
defined universe of experiments.10 Rather, for both
case studies and experiments, the objective for gen-
eralizing the findings is the same two-step process.
The first step involves a conceptual claim whereby
investigators show how their studys findings have
informed a particular set of concepts, theoretical
Experimental psychology has had to overcome the fear that from a sampling standpoint, the main generalization from any experiment using college
10
sophomores as subjects could only be to the universe of college sophomores. However, the characteristics of the subjects in an experiment always will
lurk as a rival explanation.
To be noted is that statistical generalizations also do not achieve the status of proof in geometry but by definition are probabilistic statements. The
11
working hypotheses as analytic generalizations also are probabilistic statements, just not expressed in numerical terms.
148
constructs, or hypothesized sequence of events. The
second step involves applying the same theoretical
propositions to implicate other situations, outside of
the completed case study, for which similar con-
cepts might be relevant. For example, political sci-
ences best-selling work has been a single-case study
about the Cuban missile crisis of 1962 (Allison,
1971; Allison & Zelikow, 1999). The authors did
not generalize their findings and theoretical frame-
work to U.S.Cuban relations or to the use of mis-
siles. They used their theoretical propositions to
generalize their findings to the likely responses of
national governments that might be confronted by
other types of international crises.
As another example, Neustadt and Finebergs
(1983) single-case study of the epidemic that never
wasa swine flu vaccination program launched by
the federal government in 1976retrospectively
attracts continuing policy attention. Their case
study covered the early spread of an influenza, the
mass inoculation of people, and the subsequent
cancellation of the vaccine program. In the face of
threats by newer flu epidemics, such as the H1N1
strain of 20082010 in the United States and abroad,
the study has been of contemporary interest in the
search for clues about the quandaries of policy
actions in public health crises.
Making analytic generalizations requires care-
fully constructed claims (Kelly & Yin, 2007), again
whether for a case study or for an experiment. The
argument is not likely to achieve the status of proof
as in geometry,11 and the claims must be presented
soundly and be resistant to logical challenge. The
relevant theory may be no more than a series of
hypotheses or even a single hypothesis. Cronbach
(1975) further clarified that the sought-after gener-
alization is not that of a conclusion but rather more
like a working hypothesis (also see Lincoln &
Guba, 1985, pp. 122123). Confidence in such
hypotheses can then build as new case studies,
again as in the case of new experiments, continue to
produce findings related to the same theoretical
propositions. To the extent that any study concerns

itself with generalizing, case studies will tend to
generalize to other situations (on the basis of ana-
lytic claims), whereas surveys and other quantitative
methods tend to generalize to populations (on the
basis of statistical claims).
Case Study Data Collection
The complexity of any case study and its large num-
ber of variables also implicates the data-collection
process. The different variables are likely to come
from different sources of field-based evidence, and
case study researchers therefore need to know how
Copyright American Psychological Association. Not for further distribution.
to collect data from these multiple sources.
The space constraints of this chapter preclude
discussing field data (for additional information,
see Chapter 10 of this volume). However, four data-
collection procedures transcend all fieldwork: using
a protocol to guide data collection, preserving a chain
of evidence, triangulating data from different sources
of evidence, and appealing to rival explanations
throughout the data-collection process. All four pro-
cedures are essential parts of any data collection and
will markedly strengthen a case studys later findings
and claims. Brief descriptions follow.
Case Study Protocol
The protocol guides researchers in collecting all case
study data. The questions in the protocol are
directed at the researcher, not any field informant,
and in this sense a protocol differs entirely from any
instrument used in a conventional interview or sur-
vey. The protocols questions in effect serve as a
mental framework, not unlike similar frameworks
held by detectives when investigating crimes. In
those situations, the detectives may privately enter-
tain one or more lines of inquiry (including rival
hypotheses), but the specific questions posed to any
informant are tuned to each specific interview situa-
tion. The questions as actually verbalized in an
interview derived from the line of inquiry (i.e., men-
tal framework) but do not come from a verbatim
script (i.e., questionnaire).
Chain of Evidence
The principle underlying the use of a chain of evi-
dence comes directly from forensics, in which law
Case Study Methods
enforcement officials are careful to preserve evi-
dence in an untainted manner, from a distinct origin
at the crime scene to the final laboratory testing of
the evidence. In doing case studies, the parallel pro-
cess is more conceptual than physical. The principle
is to allow an external observerin this situation,
the reader of the case studyto follow the deriva-
tion of any evidence from initial research questions
to ultimate case study conclusions. As with crimino-
logical evidence, the process should be tight enough
that evidence presented in a case study is assuredly
the same evidence that was collected during data
collection. Conversely, no original evidence should
have been lost, through carelessness or bias, and
therefore fail to receive appropriate attention in the
case study analysis. Relevant evidence, likely to
assume a narrative rather than numeric nature,
might be displayed as a question-and-answer narra-
tive, directly aligning the original protocol questions
with the field evidence.
For instance, a multiple-case study of 40 neigh-
borhood organizations used a protocol with 49
questions. Each of the 40 case studies consisted of
responses to all 49 questions, with the field team
integrating and citing (with footnotes) the specific
observational, interview, and documentary (narra-
tive and numeric) evidence that had been collected
(for one of the case studies, see Yin, 2012, pp. 6987).
The organization of these 40 case studies actually
facilitated a readers own cross-case analysis because
the reader could turn to the same numbered ques-
tion in each case and judge the extent to which the
responses appeared to be parallel or contrasting.
Triangulation
The principle of triangulation comes from naviga-
tion, where the intersection of three different refer-
ence points is used to calculate the precise location
of an object (Yardley, 2009, p. 239). In research, the
principle pertains to the goal of seeking at least
three ways to verify or corroborate a particular
event, description, or fact being reported by a study.
Such corroboration is another way to strengthen the
validity of a study.
Triangulation can be applied throughout a study,
although the practice has tended to be associated
with a studys data collection phase. In collecting
149
 Robert K. Yin

data, the ideal triangulation would not only seek Case Study Analysis
confirmation from three sources but also would try
Case study analysis takes many forms, but none yet
to find three contrasting sources (e.g., seeing an
follow routine procedures as may exist with other
event with ones own eyes, a direct observation;
research methods. The absence of any cookbook for
recording the words of someone else who was there,
analyzing case study evidence has only partially
a verbal report; and citing a description in a report
been offset by the development of prepackaged soft-
written by yet a third person, a document).
ware to code large amounts of narrative text. The
software will follow an analysts instruction in cod-
Rival Explanations
ing and categorizing the words found in a text, as
Rival explanations are not merely alternative inter-
might have been collected from interviews or docu-
pretations. True rivals compete directly with each
ments. Unlike quantitative software, whereby an
other and cannot coexist. Research findings and
analyst provides input data and the computer uses
their interpretations may be likened to combatants
Copyright American Psychological Association. Not for further distribution.

an algorithm to estimate some model and produces

that can be challenged by one or more rivals. If one
the output data, there is no automated algorithm
of the rivals turns out to be more plausible than an
when doing qualitative analysis.
original interpretation, the original interpretation
Instead, the analyst must logically piece together
would have to be rejected, not just footnoted.
the coded evidence into broader themes and, in
Case study research demands the seeking of rival
essence, create a unique algorithm befitting the par-
explanations throughout the study process. Interest-
ticular case study. Thus, in case study research, the
ingly, the methodological literature offers little inkling
analytic course still depends on a marshaling of
of the substantive rivals that should be considered by
claims that use evidence in a logical fashion. Strong
researchers, either in doing case study or any other
case study claims will thoroughly cover all relevant
kinds of social science research (Rosenbaum, 2002;
evidence, combined with the explicit entertaining of
Yin, 2000). The only rivals to be found are method-
rival explanations.
ological but not substantive ones, such as those
Case study analysis can begin by systematically
involving the null hypothesis, experimenter effects, or
arraying qualitative data (narratives and words) into
other potential artifacts created by the research proce-
hierarchical relationships, matrixes, or other arrays
dures. In contrast, in detective work, a substantive
(e.g., Miles & Huberman, 1994). The logic underly-
rival would be an alternative explanation of how a
ing the arrays may not differ from that used in the
crime had occurred, compared with the explanation
arrays that might start a quantitative analysis, an
that might originally have been entertained.
observation also made by others (e.g., Bernard &
The desired rival thinking should draw from a
Ryan, 2010). For instance, quantitative analysis
continual sense of skepticism as a case study pro-
often starts with preliminary correlations or even
ceeds. During data collection, the skepticism should
chi-squares (both of which are arrays) before mov-
involve worrying about whether events and actions
ing to more complex modeling.
are as they appear to be and whether informants are
In case study analysis, a simple array might be a
giving candid responses. Having a truly skeptical
word table, organized by some rows and columns
attitude will result in collecting more data than if
of interest, that presents narrative data in the cells
rivals were not a concern. For instance, data collec-
of the table. Given this or other arrays, several dif-
tion should involve a deliberate and vigorous search
ferent analytic techniques can then be used, includ-
for discrepant evidence (Patton, 2002, p. 553), as
ing pattern matching, explanation building, and
if one were trying to establish the potency of the
time-series analysis. Multiple-case studies, in addi-
plausible rival rather than seeking to undermine it
tion to using these several techniques within each
(Rosenbaum, 2002, pp. 810). Finding no such evi-
single case, would then follow a replication logic.
dence despite diligent search again increases confi-
All these techniques are briefly discussed in the
dence about a case studys later descriptions,
next sections.
explanations, and interpretations.

150

Pattern Matching
A pattern-matching logic compares an empirically
based pattern with a predicted one. For instance,
analogous to a non-equivalent dependent variables
design (Cook & Campbell, 1979, p. 118), the prior
prediction in a community study might stipulate
that the patterns of outcomes in many different sec-
tors (e.g., retail sales, housing sales, unemployment,
and population turnover) will be adversely affected
by a key event (e.g., the closing of a military base in
a single-employer small townsee Bradshaw,
1999). The analysis then examines the data in each
sector, comparing prepost trends with those in
Copyright American Psychological Association. Not for further distribution.
other communities and statewide trends. The pat-
tern matching then includes a detailed explanation
of how and why the intervention had (or had not)
affected these trends. By also collecting data on and
then examining possible rival explanations (e.g.,
events co-occurring with the key event or other con-
textual conditions), support for the claimed results
is strengthened even further.
Explanation Building
A case study may not have started with any pre-
dicted patterns but in fact started with a rather
open-ended research question. For instance, a case
study might have been conducted after the outcome
of interest already had occurred (analogous to case-
control studies)in this case, the demise of a high-
tech firm that only a few years earlier had been a
Fortune 50 firm (see Schein, 2003). The purpose of
the Schein (2003) case study was to build an expla-
nation for the demise, again deliberately entertain-
ing rival explanations. The strength of the main
explanation was reflected by the depth, intensity,
and logic in assembling the case study data, which
in this illustration consumed an entire book.
Time-Series Analysis
This technique mimics the time-series analyses in
quantitative research (see Chapter 32 of this vol-
ume). In case study research, the simplest time-
series can consist of assembling key events into a
chronology. The resulting array (e.g., a word table
consisting of time and types of events as the rows
and columns) may not only produce an insightful
descriptive pattern but also may hint at possible
Case Study Methods
causal relationships because any presumed causal
condition must precede any presumed outcome con-
dition. Assuming again the availability of data on
rival hypotheses, such information would be
included as part of the chronological pattern and its
rejection would strengthen any claims considerably.
If the case study includes a major intervening
event in the midst of the chronological sequence,
the array could serve as a counterpart to an inter-
rupted time-series. For instance, imagine a case study
in which a new executive assumed leadership over
an organization. The case study might have tracked
sales, personnel, and other organizational character-
istics for multiple periods of time, both before and
after the executives ascendance. If all the trends
were in the appropriate upward direction, the case
study could begin to build a claim crediting the new
leader with these accomplishments. Again, attention
to rival conditions (such as the organizational foun-
dations that might have been put into place by the
new executives predecessor), and making them part
of the analysis, would further strengthen the claim.
When Sufficient Quantitative Data Are
Relevant and Available
These examples were deliberately limited to those
situations in which a case study did not attempt any
statistical analysis, mainly because of a lack of data
points other than some simple prepost comparison.
Each of the three techniques can assume a different
posture when more time intervals are relevant and
sufficient data are available. In education, a common
single-case design might focus on a school or school
district as a single organization of interest (e.g.,
Supovitz & Taylor, 2005; Yin & Davis, 2007).
Within the single case, considerable attention might
be devoted to the collection and analysis of highly
quantitative student achievement data.
For instance, a study of a single school district
tracked student performance over a 22-year period
(Teske, Schneider, Roch, & Marschall, 2000). The
start of the period coincided with a time when the
district was slowly implementing an educational
reform that was the main subject of the study.
Figure 9.3 shows that at the outset, students were
performing at about half the city average; however,
9 years later, they eventually approached the city
151
 Robert K. Yin
Copyright American Psychological Association. Not for further distribution.

Figure 9.3. Performance by students in one school district. From City

Schools: Lessons From New York (p. 322), by D. Ravitch and J. P. Viteritti
(Eds.), 2000, Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Copyright
2000 by Johns Hopkins University Press. Graphics redrawn with permission.

average. The available data permitted the study to
use ordinary least-squares models (in reading and in
mathematics) to test the correlation between reform
and performance and also accounted for important
covariates (each covariate representing a rival of
some sort). The analysis was but one of several com-
plementary and important quantitative and qualita-
tive analyses reported fully in the cited work,
including in-depth examination of the reform. All of
the evidence supported the conclusion that the dis-
tricts reform had led to the improved performance.
Quantitative data also may be relevant and avail-
able when a case study uses an embedded design.
Although the main conclusions will deal with the
case being studied, within a single organization,
employees might have been surveyed (e.g., Lipset,
Trow, & Coleman, 1956). Likewise, an evaluation
of a revitalization strategy in a single neighborhood
might have used regression models to analyze an
extensive data set on housing sales in the neighbor-
hood (e.g., Galster, Tatian, & Accordino, 2006).
Finally, an evaluation of a comprehensive childrens
mental health reform initiative can involve a highly
complex mix of qualitative and quantitative data
analyses (e.g., Bickman & Mulvaney, 2005).12
Replication Logic for Multiple-Case
Studies
This chapter has discussed the desire to apply a rep-
lication or corroboratory logic to interpret findings
across the cases in a multiple-case study. This logic
emulates that used to address whether the findings
from a set of multiple experimentstoo small in
number to be made part of any meta-analysis
support any broader pattern of conclusions.
The replication or corroboratory frameworks can
vary. In a direct replication, the single cases would
be predicted before the study started to arrive at
similar results. In a theoretical replication, each sin-
gle cases ultimate disposition also would have been
predicted beforehand, but they might have been
predicted to vary or even to contrast on the basis of

The authors of the neighborhood revitalization and childrens mental health studies did not label their studies as case studies. Nevertheless, the
12

main topic of both studies was a single entity (a neighborhood and an initiative), and in this sense the studies fit the definition of case studies used in
this chapter.

152
 Case Study Methods

preconceived propositions. Even more complex real-world experiences, attending to self-reflexivity,

could be the stipulation and emergence of a typol-
ogy of cases on the basis of the multiple-case study.
Additional Comments About the
Positioning of the Case Study
Method
Case Studies as a Partner to Qualitative
Research
The sections thus far have provided an overview of
case study research methods, but at least one more
topic needs to be addressed. This topic derives
Copyright American Psychological Association. Not for further distribution.
and integrating contextual conditions.
This partnership role suggests that the case study
method actually may not be a strand of qualitative
research, any more so than case studies are to be
regarded as one of the designs in quasi-experimental
research. Thus, even the use of the label qualitative
case study may be misleading, both by implying
that the case study method is itself a strand within
qualitative research13 and by inadvertently under-
playing the actual strand of qualitative research
(ethnography, life history, grounded theory, etc.)
within which the case study method is being used.

from the observation that this chapter is included in

Part I, Qualitative Research Methods, of this vol-
ume, suggesting that the case study method repre-
sents one of the strands within qualitative methods.
Why is this?
On the contrary, some people would counter-
claim that the present discussion of case study meth-
ods has largely assumed a postpositivist rather than
hermeneutic or otherwise qualitative orientation
largely because of the rationalistic approach to the
definition and design of case studies.
Complicating the debate, and as a reaction to the
counterclaim (i.e., to counter the counterclaim),
case studies are nevertheless found as part of several
if not most strands of qualitative research, such as
ethnographies (see Chapter 10 of this volume), life
histories, narrative analysis (see Chapter 6 of this
volume), and participatory action research (see
Chapter 11 of this volume). The case study method
may indeed serve well as an integral partner to each
of these strands of qualitative research. The partner-
ship mainly appears to be based on shared fieldwork
practices (such as the use of participant observation
to collect field data and the desire to triangulate
among sources of evidence). Case studies also can
be an accommodating partner for capturing other
highly valued concerns in qualitative research, such
as rendering participants meanings of their own
Case Studies as a Separate Research
Method
Rather than being another strand, case study
research may involve a separate research method. As
a separate method, it would embrace both qualita-
tive and quantitative research but not be a creature
of either. If so, this would serve as a significant real-
ization for research in psychology. The case studys
shared heritage includes the early work in psychol-
ogy previously cited, the studies by the Chicago
school of sociology in the early 20th century, and
anthropological studies also conducted in that era.
The case study method, within and outside of
psychology, seems to have its own design, data-
collection, and analytic procedures. They set case
study research apart from qualitative research. Nor
should case studies be confused with any of the
designs in quasi-experimental research. Freed from
these associations, the separate procedures for case
study research finally may have become easier to
develop and recognize.14
As an indicator of the separateness of the method,
contemporary students and scholars are now able to
start and complete their own case studies, using
qualitative or quantitative techniques as indicated
throughout this chapter. The possible existence of a
separate craft may be readily acknowledged every

One popular textbook on qualitative research indeed treats case studies as a separate strand within qualitative research, along with four other qualita-
13

tive strandsnarrative research, phenomenology, grounded theory, and ethnography (Creswell, 2007).
For instance, Platts (1992) review of case study research in sociology revealed a hiatus, from 1970 to 1979, when 18 of 30 methodological texts
14

did not mention much less describe the case study method at all, and of the remaining 12, five used the term in such a limited sense that one might
question whether it should have been counted (Platt, 1992, p. 18). Platt then went on to explain how case study research resurfaced after this period,
mainly on the basis of the articulation of distinct case study research designs and augmented data collection procedures. Since Platts article was pub-
lished, an even fuller methodological understanding of case study research, including its analysis procedures, has emerged and is still emerging.

153
 Robert K. Yin
time someone says she or he would like to do a case
study as the main method for a new studynot
unlike the alternative choices of saying one wants to
do an experiment, a survey, or an ethnography. At
the same time, the case study method is still evolv-
ing. New contributions are still needed to improve
the methods design, data-collection, and analytic
procedures. Such tasks pose the ongoing challenge
of doing case study research.
References
Allison, G. T. (1971). Essence of decision: Explaining the
Copyright American Psychological Association. Not for further distribution.
Cuban Missile Crisis. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.
Allison, G. T., & Zelikow, P. (1999). Essence of decision:
Explaining the Cuban missile crisis (2nd ed.). New
York, NY: Addison Wesley Longman.
Bernard, H. R., & Ryan, G. W. (2010). Analyzing qualita-
tive data: Systematic approaches. Los Angeles, CA:
Sage.
Bickman, L., & Mulvaney, S. (2005). Large scale evalu-
ations of childrens mental health services: The Ft.
Bragg and Stark County studies. In R. Steele & M.
Roberts (Eds.), Handbook of mental health services for
children, adolescents, and families (pp. 371386).
New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.
doi:10.1007/0-387-23864-6_24
Bradshaw, T. K. (1999). Communities not fazed: Why
military base closures may not be catastrophic.
Journal of the American Planning Association, 65,
193206. doi:10.1080/01944369908976047
Bromley, D. B. (1986). The case-study method in psychol-
ogy and related disciplines. Chichester, England:
Wiley.
Burawoy, M. (1991). The extended case method. In M.
Burawoy et al. (Eds.), Ethnography unbound: Power
and resistance in the modern metropolis (pp. 271287).
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Campbell, D. T. (1975). Degrees of freedom and the case
study. Comparative Political Studies, 8, 178193.
Campbell, D. T. (2009). Foreword. In R. K. Yin (Ed.),
Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.,
pp. vivii). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. (Original
work published 1984)
Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. (1966). Experimental and
quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago, IL:
Rand McNally.
Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-
experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field
settings. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
Cook, T. D., & Foray, D. (2007). Building the capacity to
experiment in schools: A case study of the Institute
154
of Educational Sciences in the U.S. Department
of Education. Economics of Innovation and New
Technology, 16, 385402. doi:10.1080/10438590
600982475
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2007). Basics of qualitative
research: Techniques and procedures for developing
grounded theory (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research
design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Cronbach, L. J. (1975). Beyond the two disciplines of
scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 30,
116127. doi:10.1037/h0076829
Denenberg, V. H. (1982). Comparative psychology and
single-subject research. In A. E. Kazdin & A. H.
Tuma (Eds.), Single-case research designs (No. 13,
pp. 1931). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Duff, P. A. (2008). Case study research in applied linguis-
tics. New York, NY: Routledge.
Dunbar, G. (2005). Evaluating research methods in
psychology: A case study approach. Malden, MA:
Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9780470776537
Galster, G., Tatian, P., & Accordino, J. (2006). Targeting
investments for neighborhood revitalization. Journal
of the American Planning Association, 72, 457474.
doi:10.1080/01944360608976766
Garmezy, N. (1982). The case for the single case in
research. In A. E. Kazdin & A. H. Tuma (Eds.),
Single-case research designs (No. 13, pp. 517).
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Garvin, D. A. (2003). Making the case: Professional edu-
cation for the world of practice. Harvard Magazine,
106, 56107.
Golden, L. B. (2004). Case studies in marriage and family
therapy. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Hersen, M., & Barlow, D. H. (1976). Single-case experi-
mental designs: Strategies for studying behavior. New
York, NY: Pergamon.
Kates, N. (2008). Integrating mental health services
into primary care: The Hamilton FHT mental
health program. In R. Kessler & D. Stafford (Eds.),
Collaborative medicine case studies: Evidence in
practice (pp. 7182). New York, NY: Springer.
doi:10.1007/978-0-387-76894-6_7
Kelly, E. A., & Yin, R. K. (2007). Strengthening
structured abstracts for education research:
The need for claim-based structured abstracts.
Educational Researcher, 36, 133138.
doi:10.3102/0013189X07300356
Kessler, R., & Stafford, D. (Eds.). (2008). Collaborative
medicine case studies: Evidence in practice. New York,
NY: Springer.

Kratochwill, T. R. (Ed.). (1984). Single subject research:
Strategies for evaluating change. New York, NY:
Academic Press.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lipset, S. M., Trow, M., & Coleman, J. (1956). Union
democracy: The inside politics of the International
Typographical Union. New York, NY: Free Press.
Lipsey, M. W. (1990). Design sensitivity: Statistical power
for experimental research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lynd, R. S., & Lynd, H. M. (1929). Middletown: A study in
modern American culture. New York, NY: Harcourt.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data
analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks,
Copyright American Psychological Association. Not for further distribution.
CA: Sage.
Miyahara, M., & Wafer, A. (2004). Clinical intervention
for children with developmental coordination disor-
der: A multiple case study. Adapted Physical Activity
Quarterly, 21, 281300.
Morgan, D. L., & Morgan, R. K. (2009). Single-case
research methods for the behavioral and health sciences.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Neustadt, R. E., & Fineberg, H. (1983). The epidemic that
never was: Policy-making and the swine flu affair. New
York, NY: Vintage.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Two decades of developments in
qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Social Work: Research
and Practice, 1, 261283. doi:10.1177/147332500
2001003636
Platt, J. (1992). Case study in American method-
ological thought. Current Sociology, 40, 1748.
doi:10.1177/001139292040001004
Rolls, G. (2005). Classic case studies in psychology.
Abingdon, England: Hodder Education.
Rosenbaum, P. (2002). Observational studies (2nd ed.).
New York, NY: Springer.
Schein, E. (2003). DEC is dead, long live DEC: Lessons
on innovation, technology, and the business gene. San
Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
Schlesselman, J. J. (1982). Case-control studies: Design,
conduct, analysis. New York, NY: Oxford University
Press.
Scoville, W. B., & Milner, B. (1957). Loss of recent
memory in bilateral hippocampal lesions. Journal of
Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 20, 1122.
doi:10.1136/jnnp.20.1.11
Shavelson, R. J., & Towne, L. (Eds.). (2002). Scientific
research in education. Washington, DC: National
Academies Press.
Case Study Methods
Sidman, M., Soddard, L. T., & Mohr, J. P. (1968).
Some additional quantitative observations of
immediate memory in a patient with bilateral hip-
pocampal lesions. Neuropsychologia, 6, 245254.
doi:10.1016/0028-3932(68)90023-7
Small, M. L. (2009). How many cases do I need?
On science and the logic of case selection in
field-based research. Ethnography, 10, 538.
doi:10.1177/1466138108099586
Supovitz, J. A., & Taylor, B. S. (2005). Systemic educa-
tion evaluation: Evaluating the impact of systemwide
reform in education. American Journal of Evaluation,
26, 204230. doi:10.1177/1098214005276286
Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. (1995). What theory is
not. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 371384.
doi:10.2307/2393788
Tawney, J. W., & Gast, D. L. (1984). Single subject
research in special education. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
Teske, P., Schneider, M., Roch, C., & Marschall, M.
(2000). Public school choice: A status report. In D.
Ravitch & J. P. Viteritti (Eds.), Lessons from New
York City schools (pp. 313338). Baltimore, MD:
Johns Hopkins University Press.
Van Maanen, J. (1988). Tales of the field: On writing eth-
nography. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience:
Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy.
Albany: State University of New York Press.
Whyte, W. F. (1955). Street corner society: The social
structure of an Italian slum. Chicago, IL: University of
Chicago Press. (Original work published 1943)
Yardley, L. (2009). Demonstrating validity in qualitative
psychology. In J. A. Smith (Ed.), Qualitative psychology:
A practical guide to research methods (pp. 235251). Los
Angeles, CA: Sage.
Yin, R. K. (1994). Discovering the future of the case study
method in evaluation research. Evaluation Practice,
15, 283290. doi:10.1016/0886-1633(94)90023-X
Yin, R. K. (2000). Rival explanations as an alternative
to reforms as experiments. In L. Bickman (Ed.),
Validity and social experimentation: Donald Campbells
Legacy (pp. 239266). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods
(4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Yin, R. K. (2012). Applications of case study research (3rd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Yin, R. K., & Davis, D. (2007). Adding new dimensions to
case study evaluations: The case of evaluating com-
prehensive reforms. New Directions for Evaluation,
113, 7593. doi:10.1002/ev.216
155