Our Recent Immigration Success Stories

There are multiple definitions of case studies, which may emphasize the number of observations (a small N), the method (qualitative), the thickness of the research (a comprehensive examination of a phenomenon and its context), and the naturalism (a “real-life context” is being examined) involved in the research.^[12] There is general agreement among scholars that a case study does not necessarily have to entail one observation (N=1), but can include many observations within a single case or across numerous cases.^[3][4][5][6] For example, a case study of the French Revolution would at the bare minimum be an observation of two observations: France before and after a revolution.^[13] John Gerring writes that the N=1 research design is so rare in practice that it amounts to a “myth”.^[13]

As with other social science methods, no single research design dominates case study research. Case studies can use at least four types of designs. First, there may be a “no theory first” type of case study design, which is closely connected to Kathleen M. Eisenhardt‘s methodological work.^[16][17] A second type of research design highlights the distinction between single- and multiple-case studies, following Robert K. Yin‘s guidelines and extensive examples.^[16][9] A third design deals with a “social construction of reality”, represented by the work of Robert E. Stake.^[16][18] Finally, the design rationale for a case study may be to identify “anomalies”. A representative scholar of this design is Michael Burawoy.^[16][19] Each of these four designs may lead to different applications, and understanding their sometimes unique ontological and epistemological assumptions becomes important. However, although the designs can have substantial methodological differences, the designs also can be used in explicitly acknowledged combinations with each other.

There are multiple definitions of case studies, which may emphasize the number of observations (a small N), the method (qualitative), the thickness of the research (a comprehensive examination of a phenomenon and its context), and the naturalism (a “real-life context” is being examined) involved in the research.^[12] There is general agreement among scholars that a case study does not necessarily have to entail one observation (N=1), but can include many observations within a single case or across numerous cases.^[3][4][5][6] For example, a case study of the French Revolution would at the bare minimum be an observation of two observations: France before and after a revolution.^[13] John Gerring writes that the N=1 research design is so rare in practice that it amounts to a “myth”.^[13]

As with other social science methods, no single research design dominates case study research. Case studies can use at least four types of designs. First, there may be a “no theory first” type of case study design, which is closely connected to Kathleen M. Eisenhardt‘s methodological work.[16][17] A second type of research design highlights the distinction between single- and multiple-case studies, following Robert K. Yin‘s guidelines and extensive examples.

[16][9] A third design deals with a “social construction of reality”, represented by the work of Robert E. Stake.[16][18] Finally, the design rationale for a case study may be to identify “anomalies”. A representative scholar of this design is Michael Burawoy.[16][19] Each of these four designs may lead to different applications, and understanding their sometimes unique ontological and epistemological assumptions becomes important. However, although the designs can have substantial methodological differences, the designs also can be used in explicitly acknowledged combinations with each other.

There are multiple definitions of case studies, which may emphasize the number of observations (a small N), the method (qualitative), the thickness of the research (a comprehensive examination of a phenomenon and its context), and the naturalism (a “real-life context” is being examined) involved in the research.^[12] There is general agreement among scholars that a case study does not necessarily have to entail one observation (N=1), but can include many observations within a single case or across numerous cases.^[3][4][5][6] For example, a case study of the French Revolution would at the bare minimum be an observation of two observations: France before and after a revolution.^[13] John Gerring writes that the N=1 research design is so rare in practice that it amounts to a “myth”.^[13]